| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Defining "passive" Thread poster: transparx
|
|---|
Angela Dickson (X) 
United Kingdom
Local time: 02:28
French to English
+ ...
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote: Chinese Concept wrote:
If you can do all of these things into a language, be it native/non-native/active/passive then you don't need the approval from an official body or a certificate from wherever or the opinions of your peers, you should just do it.......for you are truly gifted:) yes, because you are bilingual...  G
No, because you are both bilingual and a good translator...
I'm glad the terminology has been clarified (and we need to get away from the term 'passive' here because it is very misleading).
The ITI in the UK has a clause in its code of conduct:
"4.1.1 Subject to 4.4 and 4.5 below [which concern sub-contracting], members shall
translate only into a language which is either (i) their
mother tongue or language of habitual use, or (ii) one
in which they have satisfied the Institute that they
have equal competence. They shall translate only
from those languages in which they can demonstrate
they have the requisite skills."
i.e. the ITI recognises that non-native speakers of language X may become competent translators into language X.
I'd be prepared to bet that we get at least one contribution to this discussion (as there has been to most previous such discussions) that reads something like "my dustman is a native speaker of English, should he then make translations into English? Surely as we can read foreign-language newspapers and travel abroad on Ryanair, the native language concept is irrelevant now? Lots of people have a very restricted language as their 'native language', doesn't that mean that 'native language' is an irrelevant concept now?"
Before anyone makes such arguments, I'd like to make the very obvious point that they are not relevant to the discussion at hand, which is whether there exist good translators into language X who are not native speakers of language X. The answer is, of course, 'yes', and I reckon the ITI's framework is one way of acknowledging this within a professional context.
| | | |
Angela Dickson wrote:
The ITI in the UK has a clause in its code of conduct:
"4.1.1 Subject to 4.4 and 4.5 below [which concern sub-contracting], members shall
translate only into a language which is either (i) their
mother tongue or language of habitual use, or (ii) one
in which they have satisfied the Institute that they
have equal competence. They shall translate only
from those languages in which they can demonstrate
they have the requisite skills."
i.e. the ITI recognises that non-native speakers of language X may become competent translators into language X.
As an ITI member I'm very aware of this. It's a very clever way of resolving the matter, i.e., you take the test and we judge. Fine. The problem is that it's a very grey area. You talk about fallacies, but they are not. It's something difficult to quantify and therefore, as a general rule, I would say: only translate into your mother tongue. Unless you've been certified.
G
| | | | Jande
Australia
Local time: 11:28
Danish to English
+ ...
| turn passive into active | Jan 30, 2007 |
For me a passive language is one you have learnt and understand but do not use.
One way of turning such a passive language into an active language is by translating it.
So for me translating to a passive means it immediately becomes active according to the definitions of passive and active in this thread.
| | | | transparx
United States
Local time: 21:28
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | thank you for sharing this! | Jan 30, 2007 |
Angela Dickson wrote:
The ITI in the UK has a clause in its code of conduct:
"4.1.1 Subject to 4.4 and 4.5 below [which concern sub-contracting], members shall
translate only into a language which is either (i) their
mother tongue or language of habitual use, or (ii) one
in which they have satisfied the Institute that they
have equal competence. They shall translate only
from those languages in which they can demonstrate
they have the requisite skills."
I wasn't aware of it. It certainly makes a lot of sense.
| | |
|
|
|
transparx
United States
Local time: 21:28
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | what makes you think so? | Jan 30, 2007 |
Chinese Concept wrote:
This whole issue comes up so often. It's always asked and probed to death by people who translate into a language that isn't their mother tongue and it's like they're seeking approval that it's ok for them to do it.
I don’t know about others, but I am certainly not looking for approval. I am keenly interested in finding out –if possible- why so many people think that translating into a language other than one’s native language is a no-no, as Giovanni put it. I am not judging anyone –everyone has the right to uphold his or her own beliefs. I am just trying to understand.
A similar debate raged over whether a language teacher should teach only his or her native language. And for a long time, the answer was, “Yes, of course.” Now, at least in the States, people are not as opposed to this idea as they were before, and many schools have begun hiring non-native teachers as well.
Additional examples could be drawn from fields other than applied linguistics. They would all show that theories and beliefs based on mere assumptions are hard to justify.
| | | | Giles Watson
Italy
Local time: 03:28
Italian to English
In memoriam | Start from the text, not the translator | Jan 30, 2007 |
transparx wrote:
I don’t know about others, but I am certainly not looking for approval. I am keenly interested in finding out –if possible- why so many people think that translating into a language other than one’s native language is a no-no, as Giovanni put it. I am not judging anyone –everyone has the right to uphold his or her own beliefs. I am just trying to understand.
If we look at it from the point of view of the product, then the ITI approach is sensible, at least for technical texts whose discourse is structured by format and formulaic technical language, not the writer/translator.
But when the discourse needs to be structured by the writer, and to some extent restructured by the translator, problems for non-native speakers will inevitably crop up. The tools of expression - grammar, syntax and rhetoric - may be comparable in both languages but stylistic expectations rarely overlap. This can induce the non-native translator to impose onto the target text source-language forms that appear unusual or emphatic to native readers when they are unmarked in the source text.
I'm not just talking about calquing the source text, something that all translators have to watch out for; I'm also talking about reformulating the source notions into structures that are not appropriate in the target language.
There may be other culture-related expectations that interfere with accuracy but style problems are more insidious, mainly because not all translators consciously compare the expectations of their source and target contexts.
Cheers,
Giles
| | | | Michele Fauble
United States
Local time: 18:28
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
| Underlying assumptions and simple reasoning | Jan 30, 2007 |
transparx wrote:
I don’t know about others, but I am certainly not looking for approval. I am keenly interested in finding out –if possible- why so many people think that translating into a language other than one’s native language is a no-no, as Giovanni put it. I am not judging anyone –everyone has the right to uphold his or her own beliefs. I am just trying to understand.
I would say that the reasoning is based on two underlying assumptions.
1) A translated text should read as if it had been written by a native speaker of the target language.
2) A non-native speaker cannot produce a text that reads as if it had been written by a native speaker of the language.
| | | | Giles Watson
Italy
Local time: 03:28
Italian to English
In memoriam | I'd add an adverb and a couple of extra points | Jan 30, 2007 |
Michele Fauble wrote:
I would say that the reasoning is based on two underlying assumptions.
1) A translated text should read as if it had been written by a native speaker of the target language.
2) A non-native speaker cannot produce a text that reads as if it had been written by a native speaker of the language.
I agree with the first point.
Regarding the second point, I would add "always" after "cannot" (in many sectors, particularly technical ones, some non-native translators can do an excellent job).
I would add a third point to say that not all native speakers are capable of producing a target text that might have been written by a native-speaker wholly familiar with a specific sector, whether technical or literary.
And I would also add a a fourth point to the effect that nearly all translators, and particularly non-native speakers eager to obtain work, tend to over-estimate their own abilities when presenting themselves to prospective clients.
In the end, Sallust's advice "caveat emptor" is as valid in the translation market as it is in any other.
Cheers,
Giles
[Edited at 2007-01-30 21:14]
| | |
|
|
|
Malik Beytek (X)
Local time: 04:28
| Is there not a better way than screaming fraud? | Jan 30, 2007 |
Giles Watson wrote:
"....And I would also add a a fourth point to the effect that nearly all translators, and particularly non-native speakers eager to obtain work, tend to over-estimate their own abilities when presenting themselves to prospective clients...."
Perhaps this is the basis for screams of fraud?
Screams of fraud, however, do not seem to do much in deterring misrepresentation of one's abilities to prospective clients. They do a lot irritating me.
There has got to be a better way, e.g., systematically influence the process of buying translation.
And I sure appreciate a few answers / confirmations, that I find here in this thread.
P.S.: I made two other attempts to express opinion; they both turned out to be too long and not related to linguistics -- as I am not linguist; I decided not to post them.
[Edited at 2007-01-30 22:34]
| | | | transparx
United States
Local time: 21:28
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | I cannot disagree... | Jan 31, 2007 |
Giles Watson wrote:
If we look at it from the point of view of the product, then the ITI approach is sensible, at least for technical texts whose discourse is structured by format and formulaic technical language, not the writer/translator.
But when the discourse needs to be structured by the writer, and to some extent restructured by the translator, problems for non-native speakers will inevitably crop up. The tools of expression - grammar, syntax and rhetoric - may be comparable in both languages but stylistic expectations rarely overlap. This can induce the non-native translator to impose onto the target text source-language forms that appear unusual or emphatic to native readers when they are unmarked in the source text.
I'm not just talking about calquing the source text, something that all translators have to watch out for; I'm also talking about reformulating the source notions into structures that are not appropriate in the target language.
There may be other culture-related expectations that interfere with accuracy but style problems are more insidious, mainly because not all translators consciously compare the expectations of their source and target contexts.
Cheers,
Giles
…but then you are talking about being a skilled a writer, which, I admit, I am not.
As for your very first point, most of the jobs that make it to this site seem to be technical in nature. One would think, then, that assigning them to people who are more than equipped to handle them should not be a sin. Whether they are native or non-native speakers should be irrelevant.
| | | | transparx
United States
Local time: 21:28
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Did something go wrong here? | Jan 31, 2007 |
Giles Watson wrote: Michele Fauble wrote:
I would say that the reasoning is based on two underlying assumptions.
1) A translated text should read as if it had been written by a native speaker of the target language.
2) A non-native speaker cannot produce a text that reads as if it had been written by a native speaker of the language.
I agree with the first point. Regarding the second point, I would add "always" after "cannot" (in many sectors, particularly technical ones, some non-native translators can do an excellent job). I would add a third point to say that not all native speakers are capable of producing a target text that might have been written by a native-speaker wholly familiar with a specific sector, whether technical or literary. And I would also add a a fourth point to the effect that nearly all translators, and particularly non-native speakers eager to obtain work, tend to over-estimate their own abilities when presenting themselves to prospective clients.
My understanding was that Michele was simply highlighting the assumptions underlying a common misconception --not endorsing them. Perhaps I misunderstood.
| | | | Giles Watson
Italy
Local time: 03:28
Italian to English
In memoriam | What is a translator if not a writer with special skills? | Jan 31, 2007 |
transparx wrote:
…but then you are talking about being a skilled a writer, which, I admit, I am not.
If you are not, there is nothing to stop you becoming one.
As for your very first point, most of the jobs that make it to this site seem to be technical in nature.
True, but I don't get much of my work through ProZ.
One would think, then, that assigning them to people who are more than equipped to handle them should not be a sin. Whether they are native or non-native speakers should be irrelevant.
I am sure many outsourcers share your view, particularly when they are in a hurry or on a tight budget
Joking aside, though, basic technical documents (user manuals and the like) are likely to be the first to be generated by machines, just as soon as the programmers cobble together terminology databases and translation memories with an algorithm to mimic the reasoning of a competent translator.
The translators who will survive MT, many of whom are earning relatively high fees already, are creative writers with a well-defined market profile, as well as linguists.
As for the assumptions Michele perceives, the first seems to me to be a good guiding principle, certainly in creative translations, but the second is an assertion that is not absolutely true. There may be cost or end-use parameters that make a native-speaker translation inappropriate. It's something for the translation purchaser to decide.
Cheers,
Giles
For Malik:
The assumption Michele perceives is that the text should read "as if it had been written by a native speaker", not that it "should be written by a native speaker". And the "native speaker it should read as if it had been written by" will of course vary from genre to genre, and even from text to text.
Giles
[Edited at 2007-01-31 09:48]
| | |
|
|
|
Malik Beytek (X)
Local time: 04:28
| I don't understand why a translated text SHOULD read "as if it had been written by a native speaker" | Jan 31, 2007 |
Michele Fauble wrote:
"... two underlying assumptions.
1) A translated text should read as if it had been written by a native speaker of the target language.
......"
What is the basis for that assertion? Linguistics? Law? Ethics? Aesthetics? Tradition or custom?
It is one thing to say translated text should be of reasonable quality in terms of accuracy and style.
It is a completely different thing to say something that amounts to saying that a translated text cannot have any agreable quality unless it is written by a native speaker.
The latter is like saying that a personal computer cannot be of acceptable quality unless it is manufactured by a manufacturer domestic to the country where the computer is to be used.
And that would imply other, very different, not so altruistic motivations underlying screams of fraud re. people translating into a language that is not their native language.
But I should stop here because, again, that is not related to linguistics.
| | | | Malik Beytek (X)
Local time: 04:28
| There, a concept: Translator as a writer with special skills, but... | Jan 31, 2007 |
... again, who says one can write only in his or her native language?
Is there a scientific, or legal, or ethical / aesthetic basis to that assertion?
And lets not forget the special status of English language: There is a huge English speaking audience around the world members of which are not native spakers of English.
Further:
Giles Watson wrote:
As for the assumptions Michele perceives, the first seems to me to be a good guiding principle,...."
"Guiding principle" is one thing; rigid, categoric rejections, to the extent of calling people fraud, is another.
| | | | Fan Gao
Australia
Local time: 11:28
English to Chinese
+ ...
| Good news for bad translators | Jan 31, 2007 |
Malik wrote:
I don't understand why a translated text SHOULD read "as if it had been written by a native speaker"
So you'd be prepared to pay top rates to translators who couldn't turn out a translated text that read like it had been written by a native speaker?
Bad translators would love to have you as their client:)
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Defining "passive" | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
| | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
