| A témához tartozó oldalak: < [1 2 3] > | A translator you know to be good in "IT" says they are also good in "legal". Is it probably true? Téma indítója: Henry Dotterer
|
|---|
mariealpilles 
Franciaország
Local time: 06:35
angol - francia
+ ...
| Legal translations | Jun 1, 2018 |
I am shocked to read such comments regarding lawyers who are not good at legal translations! From professional translators that should not be so. A lawyer is trained in law and legal texts, NOT in translations. A legal translator - I have been working as such for 30+ years - is first and foremost a translator, with all the skills to translate, and has been given a secondary training not in legal texts, but in the application and interpretation of the law. A legal translator does not only concent... See more I am shocked to read such comments regarding lawyers who are not good at legal translations! From professional translators that should not be so. A lawyer is trained in law and legal texts, NOT in translations. A legal translator - I have been working as such for 30+ years - is first and foremost a translator, with all the skills to translate, and has been given a secondary training not in legal texts, but in the application and interpretation of the law. A legal translator does not only concentrate on judgements, etc... and can have other skills as well, according to the age of the translator of course. Those one should be careful about are those who are proficient in 5 languages or more and in absolutely all the fields! ▲ Collapse
| | | |
My experience has been that a person who is known to be a very good translator in a given field of expertise will never say that he/she is also qualified in other field if he/she isn’t. A very good translator has a reputation to maintain and being honest is part of professionalism, isn’t it?
| | | | ahartje
Portugália
Local time: 05:35
Tag (2006 óta)
német - portugál
+ ...
|
Teresa Borges wrote:
My experience has been that a person who is known to be a very good translator in a given field of expertise will never say that he/she is also qualified in other field if he/she isn’t. A very good translator has a reputation to maintain and being honest is part of professionalism, isn’t it?
+1
| | |
|
|
|
| Possible? – yes. Probable? – Errrr... | Jun 1, 2018 |
Given that the question is asked in the context of how translators and interpreters should be ranked in directory searches, I think we need to look at this from an “information processing” standpoint, not “professional ethics” as many colleagues have done so far.
The only honest answer any self-respecting translator/interpreter/agency/client – or, indeed, any worthwhile “find me a good professional” algorithm (aka “Find”) – can offer is: “Insufficient (relia... See more Given that the question is asked in the context of how translators and interpreters should be ranked in directory searches, I think we need to look at this from an “information processing” standpoint, not “professional ethics” as many colleagues have done so far.
The only honest answer any self-respecting translator/interpreter/agency/client – or, indeed, any worthwhile “find me a good professional” algorithm (aka “Find”) – can offer is: “Insufficient (reliable) Data!”
The vast majority of profile data held by Proz is generated by the members/users who are being ranked. Some of the data is true, some is out of date, some is inaccurate, some is ambiguous, some is deliberately skewed – and some is no doubt downright false. Likewise, Kudoz points are unreliable, being awarded by askers in an often ignorant, arbitrary if not actually biased manner.
As Andrejs Gorbunovs wrote, there are “too many variables” – buried, worse still, in that mass of unreliable data.
Before attempting to rank Proz members/users on the basis of that data, and risking having an adverse impact on their livelihoods, Henry would do well to ask himself this question: Would you be happy to sit as a passenger in a “self-driving” car doing 100km/h in thick fog – under the control of algorithms driven by Proz data?
If you would not, then I suggest that the only valid answer you can give to your own question - “Is it probably true?” - is: “It’s (subjectively) possible. But the (approximation to objective) probability may lie anywhere in the range from 0% to 100%.”
RL ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Thank you, everyone! | Jun 1, 2018 |
Thanks for the useful input, folks!
I see a degree of consensus around the idea that a top professional is unlikely to falsely claim to be capable in a given field.
Tom in London: "such a professional person would be honest"
Kay Denney: "Speaking as a former PM...I would trust them"
Teresa Borges: "A very good translator has a reputation to maintain"
Josephine Cassar: "that person will not jeopardise his/her reputation"
Lian Pang: "code of pro... See more Thanks for the useful input, folks!
I see a degree of consensus around the idea that a top professional is unlikely to falsely claim to be capable in a given field.
Tom in London: "such a professional person would be honest"
Kay Denney: "Speaking as a former PM...I would trust them"
Teresa Borges: "A very good translator has a reputation to maintain"
Josephine Cassar: "that person will not jeopardise his/her reputation"
Lian Pang: "code of professional conducts... represent our qualifications... honestly and to always work within them"
Samuel Murray: "More likely than not."
There were also some qualifiers:
Thomas Frost: " I would ...trust... [while] knowing there is no such thing as absolute certainty in this business"
Michael Wetzel: "different clients have very different needs in this respect"
Daryo: "Probabilites are not of much use" (and also "the capacity to acquire new knowledge")
Andrejs Gorbunovs: "Too many variables"
Robin Levey: "Possible? – yes. Probable? – Errrr..."
And this good point:
mariealpilles: "one should be careful about are those who are proficient in 5 languages or more and in absolutely all the fields!"
The above statements are useful in considering an approach to the directory sort that blends demonstrated capabilities with own claims of specialization.
Thanks to the above posters, and also to Lincoln, The Misha, jyuan_us and the others who posted. Others are of course free to add input if you would like.
By the way, I think I generally like the effect of the "inclusive" format used here. (Thanks for the feedback on that, Daniel Frisano and others.) For some reason, when this format was built, we decided to leave out display of poster details. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I'll post separately on that topic. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Daryo
Egyesült Királyság
Local time: 05:35
szerb - angol
+ ...
| on the more general topic of directory ranking | Jun 1, 2018 |
one indicator that should be included in some way is the proportion between the number of Kudoz points and the number of questions answered, IOW the average number of Kudoz points per question answered.
Namely if the ranking it to reflect real capabilities someone who needs to answers 300 questions to get to 100 Kudoz points shouldn't be ranked anywhere near to someone who has tendency to get it right far more often and gets 100 Kudoz points after answering about say 100 questions.... See more one indicator that should be included in some way is the proportion between the number of Kudoz points and the number of questions answered, IOW the average number of Kudoz points per question answered.
Namely if the ranking it to reflect real capabilities someone who needs to answers 300 questions to get to 100 Kudoz points shouldn't be ranked anywhere near to someone who has tendency to get it right far more often and gets 100 Kudoz points after answering about say 100 questions.
Agreed, Kudoz points on individual questions are a rather haphazard affair (Clueless Asker, silly playground games played between Asker and other members, and many other imperfections) but in the long run Kudoz points are not too bad as indicator of the translator's capacity - especially when put in proportion to the number of questions answered.
Besides the purely numerical aspect, any potential client can have a fairly good sample of the translator's methods and ways of thinking by reading just few answered questions at random - more telling/reliable that any self proclaimed "expertise". ▲ Collapse
| | | | Michele Fauble
Egyesült Államok
Local time: 21:35
Tag (2006 óta)
norvég - angol
+ ...
| Specialization | Jun 1, 2018 |
I tend to be sceptical of the actual expertise of translators who claim to "specialize" in a number of unrelated fields. Medical, biology, nutrition? Yes. Medical, legal, engineering, art? Works in, maybe, but not specializes in.
| | |
|
|
|
DZiW (X)
Ukrajna
angol - orosz
+ ...
| Could one name a couple of absolutely unrelated fields, please? | Jun 1, 2018 |
No, a real decent specialist will not proclaim himself an expert as self-proclaimed half-educated 'gurus' do, because he knows the sky is the only limit, and it's very colleagues and clients who decide how good he is.
| | | | Mirko Mainardi
Olaszország
Local time: 06:35
ProZ.com-tag
angol - olasz
Daryo wrote:
one indicator that should be included in some way is the proportion between the number of Kudoz points and the number of questions answered, IOW the average number of Kudoz points per question answered.
Namely if the ranking it to reflect real capabilities someone who needs to answers 300 questions to get to 100 Kudoz points shouldn't be ranked anywhere near to someone who has tendency to get it right far more often and gets 100 Kudoz points after answering about say 100 questions.
Agreed, Kudoz points on individual questions are a rather haphazard affair (Clueless Asker, silly playground games played between Asker and other members, and many other imperfections) but in the long run Kudoz points are not too bad as indicator of the translator's capacity - especially when put in proportion to the number of questions answered.
Besides the purely numerical aspect, any potential client can have a fairly good sample of the translator's methods and ways of thinking by reading just few answered questions at random - more telling/reliable that any self proclaimed "expertise".
IMO this merits a separate thread (and BTW, I more or less agree with the above).
As for this thread: "A translator you know to be good in "IT" says they are also good in "legal". Is it probably true?" - Uhm, how can something like that be even taken into consideration for directory ranking? «"A translator you know to be good in "IT"» is good in IT (according to your own opinion), the rest is pure speculation...
On a side note, has proz entered a state of perpetual change, where every week or so you discover something is being altered, modified, added or removed (either announced or unannounced)? Because that's what it looks like... and "change" is not synonymous with "good".
[Edited at 2018-06-01 17:17 GMT]
| | | |
Daryo wrote:
one indicator that should be included in some way is the proportion between the number of Kudoz points and the number of questions answered, IOW the average number of Kudoz points per question answered.
Namely if the ranking it to reflect real capabilities someone who needs to answers 300 questions to get to 100 Kudoz points shouldn't be ranked anywhere near to someone who has tendency to get it right far more often and gets 100 Kudoz points after answering about say 100 questions.
Agreed, Kudoz points on individual questions are a rather haphazard affair (Clueless Asker, silly playground games played between Asker and other members, and many other imperfections) but in the long run Kudoz points are not too bad as indicator of the translator's capacity - especially when put in proportion to the number of questions answered.
Besides the purely numerical aspect, any potential client can have a fairly good sample of the translator's methods and ways of thinking by reading just few answered questions at random - more telling/reliable that any self proclaimed "expertise".
| | | | Germaine
Kanada
Local time: 00:35
angol - francia
+ ...
| As a matter of principle... | Jun 1, 2018 |
...I will not assume that people, especially people I know, are potential liars (as suggested by such a question). Having been around here for 18 years, though, I had to realize that competence and skills assessment, just like beauty, sometimes are "in the eye of the beholder". A diploma doesn't warrant competence; no algorithm "knows you to be good" in whatever you say you are. In fact, Proz Find should warn users not to place undue reliance on Kudoz points or LWW and WWA scores.
[Edited... See more ...I will not assume that people, especially people I know, are potential liars (as suggested by such a question). Having been around here for 18 years, though, I had to realize that competence and skills assessment, just like beauty, sometimes are "in the eye of the beholder". A diploma doesn't warrant competence; no algorithm "knows you to be good" in whatever you say you are. In fact, Proz Find should warn users not to place undue reliance on Kudoz points or LWW and WWA scores.
[Edited at 2018-06-01 23:19 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Gerard de Noord
Franciaország
Local time: 06:35
Tag (2003 óta)
angol - holland
+ ...
| The number of postings in inclusive and focus postings is limited | Jun 1, 2018 |
People, think twice, the number of postings will be limited to whenever staff gets tired of us. Tonight Jared (or an algorithm) got tired of me within seconds after posting my support for Teresa Borges, a distinguished member of this site.
Let's not give Proz staff any more power than they have already.
Cheers,
Gerard
[Edited at 2018-06-01 23:46 GMT]
| | | | | Consultation is a 2-way street | Jun 2, 2018 |
@Henry
Did you ask yourself the question I asked you?
Would you be happy to sit as a passenger in a “self-driving” car doing 100km/h in thick fog – under the control of algorithms driven by Proz data?
Note that, metaphorically speaking, “100km/h” is an allusion to the speed with which a client or agency often needs to find a “good” translator. “thick fog” refers to the arbitrariness superimposed on that client’s or agency’s dir... See more @Henry
Did you ask yourself the question I asked you?
Would you be happy to sit as a passenger in a “self-driving” car doing 100km/h in thick fog – under the control of algorithms driven by Proz data?
Note that, metaphorically speaking, “100km/h” is an allusion to the speed with which a client or agency often needs to find a “good” translator. “thick fog” refers to the arbitrariness superimposed on that client’s or agency’s directory search by a supposedly “intelligent” algorithm.
If you did answer (even under your breath), what was your answer?
And if you did not, why not?
RL ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Proz.com's site | Jun 2, 2018 |
May I suggest that if you want to help people choose their areas of specialisation, you change Proz.com's layout? I think there should be just one list and a member should be allowed just 1 or 2 speciality fields and X for working fields and Y for interest fields. As it is at the moment, it is confusing and does not help. Besides there are fields that are not included: (e.g. EU/ EU affairs) and limiting: e.g. I wanted to choose business as speciality but it is not there so I had to choose econom... See more May I suggest that if you want to help people choose their areas of specialisation, you change Proz.com's layout? I think there should be just one list and a member should be allowed just 1 or 2 speciality fields and X for working fields and Y for interest fields. As it is at the moment, it is confusing and does not help. Besides there are fields that are not included: (e.g. EU/ EU affairs) and limiting: e.g. I wanted to choose business as speciality but it is not there so I had to choose economics which is not what I wanted. Here is how it looks at the moment (the subjects chosen are just an example for illustration of my point):
[Edited at 2018-06-02 06:08 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | A témához tartozó oldalak: < [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 » A translator you know to be good in "IT" says they are also good in "legal". Is it probably true? | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
| | 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! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
