This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
You have obviously not read my last discussion post properly, or have not understood it. For example, in my own CV or on my certificate we would put "Lara Barnett" and underneath state my hard-earned qualifications: "Post Graduate Diploma in Translation & BA Hons French & Italian". BUT, although I have extensive qualifications and 6 years experience, we would not write "qualified translator" as it would be evident from the nature of the document and the qualifications I have written that I am indeed "qualified". If I was writing a description of myself, then I would say "I am a qualified translator, my qualifications are....."
Sorry, but right now I do not have time to look for more Certificates. Funny you should mention qualified translators. If I look around I see far more non qualified translators than qualified ones!
There is no denying the existence of the word qualified, but for a job title , we would not use it in this way. Yes, we can say "I am a qualified....teacher/fireman/nurse/nanny". This is so of all languages. However, for a job title you would need to call it "Fireman - manager/officer etc" or "Teacher - grade 2" or "nurse - level 4" etc. This is partly because it is naturally assumed that if you have a job title you are qualified to do it, and partly because the CV or Certificate (or whatever the document is) implies that you are qualified. Therefore, in UK this is a redundant word when we assign ourselves an OFFICIAL job title. To further clarify "I am a qualified translator" is correct, but on my CV or certificate, I would just put "translator", and the nature of the document suggests that I am qualified.
Furthermore, I know that I am correct in the usage of my own language and it does seem that you trying to prove a point that is not there, in a language in which you are not native - although with every respect, I am sure that you are more than fluent.
It makes no difference whether it is a CV or a qualification. The rank or level would need to be stated "qualified" means nothing in this context on its own in the UK job market or in the certification field - you need to specify HOW the person is qualified.
But even if it is a certificate, you would not put "qualified fireman" . You would put the name of the qualification and the grade. This would imply that the fireman had either qualified or failed.
Yes, but in an English Cv you would not put the word "qualified" on its own as you might do in other languages. In an English CV you would put the professional job title ("qualified" is not part of a job title). Then, any qualifications gained would be placed under "Education" section, or if gained at work, they could be placed there. "Qualified" before a job title is redundant in English as we would normally expect the qualifications or training to have been carried out prior to taking up the job. You could specify rank structure, eg. "fireman grade 1/2/or 3" etc or "Teacher level 3"... But "qualified" is so general here (in UK English) it falls into the area of redundancy.
Can you explain how this is formatted in terms of this phrase?
Is this an entry of the candidates job title? If it is I would not use "qualified" to describe the title. English CVs reserve the official title for the job entry, and then if there is a qualification this is normally described in the job description.
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.