| Páginas no tópico: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] > | 什么是母语？ Tópico cartaz: Phil Hand
|
|---|
Alan Wang 
China
Local time: 12:11
inglês para chinês
+ ...
No argument with that, unless someone is determined to dispute with your definition of “near-native”. If he does, he also has good reasons, for who has not had the experience of regularly catching some supposedly language experts making functionally not so correct and even semantically asinine remarks in their native tongue? I don’t have this luxury if you ask me.
On the other hand, I am very doubtful of the merit and success of always finding the “field” expert to transl... See more No argument with that, unless someone is determined to dispute with your definition of “near-native”. If he does, he also has good reasons, for who has not had the experience of regularly catching some supposedly language experts making functionally not so correct and even semantically asinine remarks in their native tongue? I don’t have this luxury if you ask me.
On the other hand, I am very doubtful of the merit and success of always finding the “field” expert to translate the material of that particular field. If the success is guaranteed, then the merit could be very much in dispute. Someone who is or claims to be knowledgeable in a particular field would more often than not prove to be inadequate in language and translation capability. Field expert? Come on, can one truly believe the chances of a field expert with decent language skills dallying in the translation business? At least you can not find many in the C/E direction.
Phil Hand wrote:
My feeling is that your idea of near-native is not right. Near-native to me means functionally native - i.e. a casual reader would never realise that you're not native. Your language use is the same as a native; but you weren't raised in that language, so you can't claim actual native status. That's not true of you.
ysun:
视角问题
你提出的英美人没看懂原文的问题是实在的，而且我觉得你可能看多了，因为正是译文有问题的时候客户才来找你。反过来，我看了很多中国人生产的问题译文，往往有两种问题比较突出：一、英文写得不通顺，这个问题好解决，但占少部分；2、绝大部分的问题属于原文没看懂或没动脑子去分析，可惜的是，部分中国翻译有『我是中国人我当然看得懂中文文件』的误会。
所以我很赞成你这个说法：
“翻译社应该让化工专业人员来翻译，甭管他是不是native English speaker，”
一般来说我不太主张“中译外校对“的翻译模式，唯一成功的经验是在做医学文件时，译者都是中国医生，翻得非常到位，核对一下修理表达问题即可。 ▲ Collapse
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 12:11
chinês para inglês
CRIADOR(A) DO TÓPICO
Alan Wang wrote:
Field expert? Come on, can one truly believe the chances of a field expert with decent language skills dallying in the translation business? At least you can not find many in the C/E direction.
Yeah, that's true.
And actually, I don't think that a good translator would have to be a "field expert". They should be someone who has some experience in this field - translation experience or otherwise. And they should be 专业 in the sense of professional - with (a) sufficient professional skills to be able to tell what they know and what they do not know and (b) sufficient integrity to tell the client what they do not know.
This is really just the bare minimum that I'd expect from a translator, but I think it needs to be restated and adapted to the realities of the Chinese-English (presumably Chinese-any other language) market.
| | | | ysun
Estados Unidos
Local time: 23:11
inglês para chinês
+ ...
| Target-native translators with necessary backgrounds | Jul 7, 2012 |
Phil Hand wrote:
ysun:
视角问题
你提出的英美人没看懂原文的问题是实在的，而且我觉得你可能看多了，因为正是译文有问题的时候客户才来找你。反过来，我看了很多中国人生产的问题译文，往往有两种问题比较突出：一、英文写得不通顺，这个问题好解决，但占少部分；2、绝大部分的问题属于原文没看懂或没动脑子去分析，可惜的是，部分中国翻译有『我是中国人我当然看得懂中文文件』的误会。
所以我很赞成你这个说法：
“翻译社应该让化工专业人员来翻译，甭管他是不是native English speaker，”
一般来说我不太主张“中译外校对“的翻译模式，唯一成功的经验是在做医学文件时，译者都是中国医生，翻得非常到位，核对一下修理表达问题即可。
Phil Hand wrote:
"only use target-native translators"; "only use translators with medical backgrounds for medical texts")
Phil,
我同意你所说的这些准则。欧美的很多翻译社也确实都是这样做的。不这样做，他们就难以通过各种各样的认证，事业就难以进一步发展。但是，在许多领域的中译英方面，"only use target-native translators" 这一准则往往难以实施。就以 medical translation 为例，翻译 medical texts，不但要求译者的中英文都达到相当高的水平，他还必须具有 medical background。但问题就在于中英文水平都相当高的 native speaker of English，却又不一定具有 medical background。而具有 medical background 的 native speaker of English 也许根本就不懂中文、或者他的中文水平尚未达到可以担任翻译的标准。在这种情况下，许多翻译社就不得不聘用具有 medical background 的 native speaker of Chinese。这些人翻的文件，如果翻得好的话，往往只要由一位 native speaker of English 大致审阅修饰一下即可。你说的那些由中国医生翻译的医学文件，应该就属于这种情况。有时，那 proofreader 甚至不需要对照原文、甚至根本就不需要懂中文。
有的人明明不是 native speakers of English，为什么却还要标榜自己是 native speakers of English 呢？缺乏 integrity 当然是根本原因，但另一个原因则是生活所迫。他为了生存就不得不去竭力争取哪怕只有一丝希望的项目。
有的人为了这一丝希望，往往不管什么项目都去投标，都去参加免费试译。从 Acrobatics 到 Zoology，似乎从 A 到 Z 一切领域的项目他都能干，结果却很令人失望。退一步讲，这种人即使把那些他连看都看不懂的项目拿到手，对他来说也将是一种 torture。不过，最终最倒霉的还是客户。
[Edited at 2012-07-08 05:41 GMT]
| | | | ysun
Estados Unidos
Local time: 23:11
inglês para chinês
+ ...
|
|
|
Phil Hand
China
Local time: 12:11
chinês para inglês
CRIADOR(A) DO TÓPICO | 怎么说，还是翻译的素质重要 | Jul 8, 2012 |
ysun wrote:
这些人翻的文件，如果翻得好的话，往往只要由一位 native speaker of English 大致审阅修饰一下即可。你说的那些由中国医生翻译的医学文件，应该就属于这种情况。有时，那 proofreader 甚至不需要对照原文、甚至根本就不需要懂中文。
也不能完全这么说，我提的项目，我发现译者有一些常见的语法毛病，其中部分可以单语言校对（比如冠词错误），部分一定要看原文，如时态错误。那个项目的题材是病历，其中 "某某人suffered from 某某病" 和 “某某人has suffered from某某病” 差别很大，而且往往看译文不一定能分清楚。
身为医生的译者很关心专业用词，目标语的专业术语也用得很熟练，但忽略了语法问题。单单关心语法的单语言校对者不一定能明白原意。其实，缺乏的是一个有中英翻译素质的人（不一定是英语为母语），他要了解中英翻译的难点在哪里，懂得撇开用词问题而注重意思的清晰表达。
有的人明明不是 native speakers of English，为什么却还要标榜自己是 native speakers of English 呢？缺乏 integrity 当然是根本原因，但另一个原因则是生活所迫。
这样说应该是对的。在另外一个帖子中，Samuel跟我说，你该去问人家为什么表示自己是英语母语者，我就回答，这个问题怎么问？不是特别明显吗？但这样翻译社可以继续避开现实，可以假装中英项目有足够的英美人来承担，可以节省创造更现实的把关手段的工作。
感觉我自己推论到自己糊涂掉了。素质、母语、专业。。。做平衡不简单！
| | | | nigerose
China
Local time: 12:11
chinês para inglês
+ ...
| jyuan_us
Estados Unidos
Local time: 00:11
Membro (2005)
inglês para chinês
+ ...
也可能是被竞标系统给逼的。有时看到一个中到英的项目，知道自己明明能做好， 却因为母语为汉语而不能竞标。在PROFILE的母语栏添加英语就能投标
系统逼人不诚实。
| | | | wherestip
Estados Unidos
Local time: 23:11
chinês para inglês
+ ...
| Not that I condone dishonesty | Jul 8, 2012 |
jyuan_us wrote:
也可能是被竞标系统给逼的。有时看到一个中到英的项目，知道自己明明能做好， 却因为母语为汉语而不能竞标。在PROFILE的母语栏添加英语就能投标
系统逼人不诚实。
But if that's what this is all about, I say go right ahead and list English as your native language. IMO it's pretty much meaningless anyway. Let the end market decide.
| | |
|
|
|
wherestip
Estados Unidos
Local time: 23:11
chinês para inglês
+ ...
I'm sure some would say: it's easy for you to say; you don't have a vested interest in this.
But I think there needs to be a level playing field when it comes to bidding for jobs. If you exclude otherwise entirely qualified people just because of their birthplace or their native language, it's another form of discrimination - somewhat in disguise of course.
IMO, the site admin is taking the right steps to make it easier for those who truly have the proficiency in Engli... See more I'm sure some would say: it's easy for you to say; you don't have a vested interest in this.
But I think there needs to be a level playing field when it comes to bidding for jobs. If you exclude otherwise entirely qualified people just because of their birthplace or their native language, it's another form of discrimination - somewhat in disguise of course.
IMO, the site admin is taking the right steps to make it easier for those who truly have the proficiency in English to stand out, i.e., verification by charging a fee. Actually, I think the cost to some extent should be borne by some of the outsourcers, because they are the ones who are making the language nativeness a prerequisite, the necessity of which IMO is dubious. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 12:11
chinês para inglês
CRIADOR(A) DO TÓPICO | Not discrimination | Jul 8, 2012 |
No, Steve, I wouldn't accept that argument at all.
IMO it's pretty much meaningless anyway. Let the end market decide.
I think both parts of that are wrong.
1) It's not meaningless. All the world's major translator organisations - ATA, IOL, etc. - have accepted that translation into the mother language is a standard. Caveat: no-one thinks this means that no-one can do competent translation into L2. But it's best practice, and it is not irrelevant. And it's not discrimination. Discrimination is excluding people for reasons like race, because race is irrelevant to translation. Native language is not irrelevant.
2) Two problems. a) The end market *has* decided. Those clients post their jobs on Proz knowing what they want. But then b) translators who fill in their profiles falsely *deny the right of the clients* to get what they want.
You and I both know that asking for native English translators in our pair is often unrealistic. But you can't deny that that is what the market is asking for. I agree that the market should be asking for something different, but there has to be some honesty and clarity before that change happens.
@nigerose
希望这个考证制度可以起到作用，不过我觉得可能性不大，国内的资格考试往往没有太大的实际意义。问题在于太多所谓的资深翻译水平低，又不愿意承认自己的缺点，也不参考国外的经验，搞得资格考试内容很片面。
我还是得说，jyuan的”知道自己明明能做好“的人中，Steve所谓的 “entirely qualified people"占少数：绝大部分的中文为母语的译者远远高估了自己的英文水平，以为自己翻得好的东西实际上有非常明显的问题。这也是中英市场要面对的一个实际问题，虽然我同意仅用母语者不太现实，但我们不能忽略非母语者的普遍不专业水平。
| | | | wherestip
Estados Unidos
Local time: 23:11
chinês para inglês
+ ...
| Qualified Translators | Jul 8, 2012 |
Phil,
I agree with everything you said, provided I assume the viewpoint of someone with an idealistic view of the translation industry. But reality is not that simple. For example, like you mentioned before, even the translation agencies that farm out their work to freelancers have plenty of incompetent people who are just there to collect a paycheck. The easiest thing for them to do is just ask for the moon, and cover their ass in case something goes wrong.
I actual... See more Phil,
I agree with everything you said, provided I assume the viewpoint of someone with an idealistic view of the translation industry. But reality is not that simple. For example, like you mentioned before, even the translation agencies that farm out their work to freelancers have plenty of incompetent people who are just there to collect a paycheck. The easiest thing for them to do is just ask for the moon, and cover their ass in case something goes wrong.
I actually haltingly waded through that main thread where you were participating in the discussion. There were lots of posts where I agree with both sides of the argument (Incidentally, one of Jen Rouse's posts really stood out for me).
It's true that the bar for what I meant by "entirely qualified people" would be set pretty high. But these people do exist. Many of those whom I think fall into this category are no longer active in this forum. But over the years, I observed that some of the native Chinese speakers have very good written English. Yet the majority of them adhere to academic honesty and list only Chinese as their native language. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 12:11
chinês para inglês
CRIADOR(A) DO TÓPICO | That's actually part of what was motivating me | Jul 8, 2012 |
In the big thread, I observed the same thing as this:
Yet the majority of them adhere to academic honesty and list only Chinese as their native language.
Many of the people contributing to that thread were not native speakers of English, but they wrote in absolutely flawless English; some did so and do not even claim English as a working language! (It really put me to shame - those are some seriously talented linguists.) And the vast majority of these people (with one exception, I think) did not put English N on their profiles. But a lot of people who do put English N on their profile have conspicuously poor English. We seem to have ended up with a system that is 防君子不防小人, and I find that irritating.
| | |
|
|
|
wherestip
Estados Unidos
Local time: 23:11
chinês para inglês
+ ...
Phil Hand wrote: In the big thread, I observed the same thing as this: Yet the majority of them adhere to academic honesty and list only Chinese as their native language. Many of the people contributing to that thread were not native speakers of English, but they wrote in absolutely flawless English; some did so and do not even claim English as a working language! (It really put me to shame - those are some seriously talented linguists.) And the vast majority of these people (with one exception, I think) did not put English N on their profiles. But a lot of people who do put English N on their profile have conspicuously poor English. We seem to have ended up with a system that is 防君子不防小人, and I find that irritating.
Yes, I could tell. You were serious about finding a solution.
| | | | Alan Wang
China
Local time: 12:11
inglês para chinês
+ ...
Phil Hand wrote:
绝大部分的中文为母语的译者远远高估了自己的英文水平，以为自己翻得好的东西实际上有非常明显的问题。这也是中英市场要面对的一个实际问题，虽然我同意仅用母语者不太现实，但我们不能忽略非母语者的普遍不专业水平。
I agree with this analysis fully.
I hope I am not one of those "who have highly exaggerated their English level and are oblivious to the obvious errors in their C/E translations". But, I admit this may be at times a wishful thinking.
| | | | ysun
Estados Unidos
Local time: 23:11
inglês para chinês
+ ...
某些声称 “I can produce near-native quality C/E translations” 的 "technical translator" 是否远远高估了自己的 technical background？
如果过高地估计了自己的 technical background，那么翻译出来的自以为是 “near-native quality C/E translations” 就很可能是 far away from 原文的意思。
[Edited at 2012-07-08 19:53 GMT]
| | | | | Páginas no tópico: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » 什么是母语？ | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
