Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4] >
Is C1 level enough for a source language?
Thread poster: Robin Joensuu
Sheila Wilson
Sheila Wilson  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 06:58
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
Not only that Jun 3, 2015

Robin Joensuu wrote:
that would exclude roughly 90 % of the people working as translators (and interpreters), wouldn't it? I think you are right that you need a very high knowledge of both languages to become very good at this job, but all of us have to start somewhere. And we learn by doing.

It would also give carte blanche to every person who claims 'native-level proficiency' in two languages to translate texts about every conceivable subject, and in both directions. After all, everyone else would be barred from quoting, regardless of ability.

What makes you think that such people will know every word in general dictionaries, Balasubramaniam, let alone in specialist terminology ones? Does anyone have that knowledge in even one language? I certainly don't.


 
Balasubramaniam L.
Balasubramaniam L.  Identity Verified
India
Local time: 12:28
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER
Your misconception Jun 3, 2015

Sheila Wilson wrote:

It would also give carte blanche to every person who claims 'native-level proficiency' in two languages to translate texts about every conceivable subject, and in both directions. After all, everyone else would be barred from quoting, regardless of ability.

What makes you think that such people will know every word in general dictionaries, Balasubramaniam, let alone in specialist terminology ones? Does anyone have that knowledge in even one language? I certainly don't.


Giving carte blanche to a person having native-level knowledge of source and target language to do any type of translation would be the safest bet that anyone can place in the realm of translation. If such a person can't produce a satisfactory translation, it would be safe to conclude that that text is untranslatable (for example, poetry).

And, knowing any language at native-level proficiency does not certainly mean that you know every word in the dictionary of the language (and you should be knowing this best of all, having been in the translation profession all these years). It has more to do with having a native feel for the language, which tells you when you go wrong in your usage of the language. Once a person has this feel, he normally would not commit any linguistic errors in his translation. He may run into trouble with specialized terminology or with specialized areas of translation (such as legal), but on the whole he will acquit himself well in most translation situations.

By diluting the requirement of translators (allowing people with insufficient command over source language to translate is just that), you [I don't mean specifically you, but people in general who hold similar views] are lowering the entry level bar for the profession, and contributing to a general decline in the standards of the profession.


 
Robin Joensuu
Robin Joensuu  Identity Verified
Sweden
Local time: 07:58
Member
English to Swedish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
True for the target language Jun 3, 2015

It has more to do with having a native feel for the language, which tells you when you go wrong in your usage of the language. Once a person has this feel, he normally would not commit any linguistic errors in his translation.


I agree with you that this has to be the case with the target language. We have all seen what can happen otherwise. But for the source language? As long as you have "sufficient" knowledge and good dictionaries, you can produce very good texts. It is after all the target text that a reader meets.

Personally, I have by no means a near lative level of English, but good enough to know that I am good at this job.


 
Balasubramaniam L.
Balasubramaniam L.  Identity Verified
India
Local time: 12:28
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER
This is a very common misconception Jun 3, 2015

Robin Joensuu wrote:
I agree with you that this has to be the case with the target language. We have all seen what can happen otherwise. But for the source language? As long as you have "sufficient" knowledge and good dictionaries, you can produce very good texts. It is after all the target text that a reader meets.


If translations could be done by deploying a good set of dictionaries, we would have had perfect MTs long ago.

Translation is much more than picking out the correct words from a dictionary. There are idioms to tackle, implied meanings, innuendos, and cultural contexts to pick up. Unless you know the source language at native-level, you won't be able to do all this.

With second language level of knowledge of source, you can at best do a second rate translation. Of course, in many situations, such a translation is often sufficient, but if you want to aim higher and excel in your chosen field, there is no alternative to acquiring native level proficiency even in your source, even if you don't intend to translate into your source language.


 
Robin Joensuu
Robin Joensuu  Identity Verified
Sweden
Local time: 07:58
Member
English to Swedish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Not in all texts Jun 3, 2015

There are idioms to tackle, implied meanings, innuendos, and cultural contexts to pick up. Unless you know the source language at native-level, you won't be able to do all this.


This is the case with many texts, of course, but far from all. Take technical manuals or other help documentation, for instance, or a desktop application. Idoms are rare in those.


 
Balasubramaniam L.
Balasubramaniam L.  Identity Verified
India
Local time: 12:28
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER
These are all half truths Jun 3, 2015

Robin Joensuu wrote:

There are idioms to tackle, implied meanings, innuendos, and cultural contexts to pick up. Unless you know the source language at native-level, you won't be able to do all this.


This is the case with many texts, of course, but far from all. Take technical manuals or other help documentation, for instance, or a desktop application. Idoms are rare in those.



Yes, you can say that technical and scientific writings are generally devoid of literary type of formulations, but these can crop up even in the most scientific type of translations. After all science does not exist in a vacuum, and scientists are also human and many of them have a literary bent of mind. Same is true of help manuals, there could be portions in them which do use implied meanings which require high level of source language knowledge to figure out.

If you enter into the translation field on the assumption that you will translate only such type of text that will have absolutely no literary type of formulations, you will be unpleasantly surprised very soon into your career, when you encounter the very kind of texts for which you are least prepared in the translations you take up.

Most professional translators, due to various reasons (and most pressingly for practical reasons) do varied type of translations, even when they may have specializations.

So taking up translations without full preparation (read native level knowledge of source) is like going into battle without protective gear. You will most likely come out of it badly scarred very soon.

But as you say, everyone has to make a beginning and would learn on the job. However, it would be feeding complacency to assume that insufficient (or to use your terminology "sufficient") knowledge of source is adequate to become a professional translator. You would be on much safer grounds if you quickly manage to progress from this initial condition to full level of proficiency in both your languages.

[Edited at 2015-06-03 16:36 GMT]


 
Nadja Balogh
Nadja Balogh  Identity Verified
Germany
Local time: 07:58
Member (2007)
Japanese to German
+ ...
Depends on the source text's quality Jun 4, 2015

I think what you should also consider is that many source texts (technical or not) are not very well written to begin with, making it that much harder to figure out what the author is trying to say. I'm not so sure that C1 would be sufficient to circumnavigate problems of this kind easily.

 
Nele Van den Broeck
Nele Van den Broeck  Identity Verified
Belgium
Local time: 07:58
French to Dutch
+ ...
Please keep in mind that passive knowledge is usually a lot higher than active knowledge... Jun 5, 2015

Although I'm still very young and just taking my first steps as a professional into "the art of translation" (after a preparation to get to be one for five years at university), I don't entirely agree with Balasubramaniam's point of view.

I think it's very strange that I haven't read anything about the difference between active and passive knowledge of a language (or the difference between being able to understand it, and being able to produce it on a high livel quality).
I de
... See more
Although I'm still very young and just taking my first steps as a professional into "the art of translation" (after a preparation to get to be one for five years at university), I don't entirely agree with Balasubramaniam's point of view.

I think it's very strange that I haven't read anything about the difference between active and passive knowledge of a language (or the difference between being able to understand it, and being able to produce it on a high livel quality).
I definitely believe one should write his/her target language perfectly in order to be a good translator, but I don't think that the same applies to the source language. According to me, for a source language the most important thing would be your passive knowledge of a language: the ability to understand it perfectly, and reproduce the same meaning in your target language. For the target language though, you would need active knowledge...

When I consider the difference between both types of knowledge in my case, I can definitely tell that my passive knowledge in my source languages is far higher than my active knowledge, and that's ok for me.
When you take classes and try to obtain C1 level (or whatever level you would like to obtain), both types of knowledge are tested. Last year I passed my DELE C1 (Spanish) with 87/100 for what I would call "passive knowledge" but "only" 74/100 for the "active knowledge" (you need 60 in order to pass), my weakest part being the oral exam. However, I'm pretty sure that my client won't mind in my Dutch translation that I sometimes hesitate a bit when speaking Spanish, as long as my translation captures the exact meaning of the source text and is well written...
Collapse


 
Ivan Sokil (X)
Ivan Sokil (X)
Portugal
Local time: 06:58
German to Portuguese
+ ...
Enough. May 21, 2017

I think that a C1 level is enough to be able to translate, since you're already an independent user of the language. On the other hand, when you're studying at a C1 level you've most likely covered all the grammar points of a language and you're simply focusing on expanding your vocabulary. Of course, you will have to do your research on some more difficult terms but that's just part of being a translator.

[Edited at 2017-05-21 15:54 GMT]


 
Mario Chavez (X)
Mario Chavez (X)  Identity Verified
Local time: 02:58
English to Spanish
+ ...
Let's focus on writing skills May 21, 2017

I wonder if C1 or any of those language levels keep in mind writing skills and at what level. Even native speakers of American English can turn in college-level papers of poor quality.

Translators work with texts. How often do we have to say that? Just as technical and scientific texts don't exist in a vacuum (many use literary or popular expressions), the same could be said about specialized terminology.

And you can't learn specialized terminology from a dictionary alo
... See more
I wonder if C1 or any of those language levels keep in mind writing skills and at what level. Even native speakers of American English can turn in college-level papers of poor quality.

Translators work with texts. How often do we have to say that? Just as technical and scientific texts don't exist in a vacuum (many use literary or popular expressions), the same could be said about specialized terminology.

And you can't learn specialized terminology from a dictionary alone. You need to read and write specialized texts. A lot. Then you can translate.
Collapse


 
Mirko Mainardi
Mirko Mainardi  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 07:58
Member
English to Italian
Several aspects May 21, 2017

Mario Chavez wrote:

I wonder if C1 or any of those language levels keep in mind writing skills and at what level. Even native speakers of American English can turn in college-level papers of poor quality.


Those levels take into account understanding (listening and reading), speaking and writing.
Writing for C1:

"OVERALL WRITTEN PRODUCTION
Can write clear, well-structured texts of complex subjects, underlining the relevant salient issues,
expanding and supporting points of view at some length with subsidiary points, reasons and relevant
examples, and rounding off with an appropriate conclusion.

CREATIVE WRITING
Can write clear, detailed, well-structured and developed descriptions and imaginative texts in an
assured, personal, natural style appropriate to the reader in mind.

REPORTS AND ESSAYS
Can write clear, well-structured expositions of complex subjects, underlining the relevant salient issues.
Can expand and support points of view at some length with subsidiary points, reasons and relevant
examples."
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_en.pdf#page=70

However, that doesn't really seem important here, as the OP was referring to C1 for a source language, so reading comprehension is what really matters. That is (for C1):

"OVERALL READING COMPREHENSION
Can understand in detail lengthy, complex texts, whether or not they relate to his/her own area of
specialty, provided he/she can reread difficult sections.

READING CORRESPONDENCE
Can understand any correspondence given the occasional use of a dictionary.

READING FOR ORIENTATION
Can scan quickly through long and complex texts, locating relevant details.
Can quickly identify the content and relevance of news items, articles and reports on a wide range of
professional topics, deciding whether closer study is worthwhile.

READING FOR INFORMATION AND ARGUMENT
Can understand in detail a wide range of lengthy, complex texts likely to be encountered in social,
professional or academic life, identifying finer points of detail including attitudes and implied as well as
stated opinions.

READING INSTRUCTIONS
Can understand in detail lengthy, complex instructions on a new machine or procedure, whether or not
the instructions relate to his/her own area of speciality, provided he/she can reread difficult sections."
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_en.pdf#page=78


 
Mario Chavez (X)
Mario Chavez (X)  Identity Verified
Local time: 02:58
English to Spanish
+ ...
Incorrect May 22, 2017

No, for source language reading comprehension is not the only thing that really matters, Mirko. That is a misconception.

One needs to produce (write) actively in both working languages (two or more) to call what he or she does a proper translation. Those COE standards to which you refer focus on language learning, not translation. It's the XXI century and we're still making the same confused argument about languages and translation.


 
Mario Chavez (X)
Mario Chavez (X)  Identity Verified
Local time: 02:58
English to Spanish
+ ...
If we were to use the quality of the source text in that way... May 22, 2017

Nadja Balogh wrote:

I think what you should also consider is that many source texts (technical or not) are not very well written to begin with, making it that much harder to figure out what the author is trying to say. I'm not so sure that C1 would be sufficient to circumnavigate problems of this kind easily.


...we might as well stop getting advanced degrees or studying translation to improve our skills, since many texts are written by non-writers. In my experience with English as source text, health care and technical documents are sad examples of mediocre writing. It's cheaper to tell a sales employee to write something for the company than to hire a specific technical writer to do the job.


 
Mirko Mainardi
Mirko Mainardi  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 07:58
Member
English to Italian
Read the OP May 22, 2017

Mario Chavez wrote:

No, for source language reading comprehension is not the only thing that really matters, Mirko. That is a misconception.

One needs to produce (write) actively in both working languages (two or more) to call what he or she does a proper translation.


Well, color me "misconcepted" then...


Those COE standards to which you refer focus on language learning, not translation. It's the XXI century and we're still making the same confused argument about languages and translation.


I'm not making any argument, and I'm not the one who was referring to that standard. The OP did. As it seemed you were not aware of it, I just quoted that as a simple and factual reply to your "I wonder if C1 or any of those language levels keep in mind writing skills and at what level". The fact it does not concern translation is completely irrelevant here.

But if I do have to make an argument, then yes, I'll stand by my "misconception" and say that I do believe that having (or acquiring) very good reading comprehension capabilities of a source language (as C1 implies) would be a sufficient prerequisite in enabling a translator (as this is the OP's case and what this thread was about) to potentially produce a "proper translation" in their native language, even without being able to write as proficiently in that source language.


 
Sheila Wilson
Sheila Wilson  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 06:58
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
99.9% of us are sufferers May 22, 2017

It seems that just about all professional translators suffer from Mario's misconception. Doesn't that make the opposite more likely to be true?

I use French as the sole language of communication with my two main clients, even though I mainly work as a monolingual English proofreader for one of them. They're clearly happy with my level of French for that purpose but they don't ask me to translate into French, and if they did I would refuse. Does that mean I have no right to translate
... See more
It seems that just about all professional translators suffer from Mario's misconception. Doesn't that make the opposite more likely to be true?

I use French as the sole language of communication with my two main clients, even though I mainly work as a monolingual English proofreader for one of them. They're clearly happy with my level of French for that purpose but they don't ask me to translate into French, and if they did I would refuse. Does that mean I have no right to translate from it? I can't see why.
Collapse


 
Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4] >


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Is C1 level enough for a source language?






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! »
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! »