| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | 5th Proz.com Translation Contest Qualification Round has just started Thread poster: RominaZ
|
|---|
Rachel Fell 
United Kingdom
Local time: 12:20
French to English
+ ...
| Thanks, agree | Dec 1, 2007 |
patyjs wrote: I found this from Goodwords in the forum from the last contest. I didn't see it then but the idea is SO good... ... This is brilliant, Goodwords! ... The final round would have to be a little different to consider overall readability etc. Definitely worth thinking about, IMO.  Paty [Edited at 2007-11-30 15:43]
Thanks, Patyjs, I remember seeing (but not reading in full detail then) this good forum comment by GoodWords re the last contest, but came across this thread first today. I do think the whole voting/qualification system needs re-addressing, for various reasons, some of which have been mentioned here.
| | | | LoyalTrans
Local time: 19:20
English to Chinese
+ ...
| about the qualifying round | Dec 3, 2007 |
What if a language pair only has one "qualified" entry? Will this one automatically be the winner or what?
| | | | | I am with you | Dec 3, 2007 |
Alexander Onishko wrote:
1. I did not vote against it because it was "a strong competitor".
2. On the contrary, it wasn't.
3. And I had strong reasons to vote against it. And I can explain them.
4. Still, the entry was severely criticized by other members after the contest was completed and this possibly also proves that the entry was by far not the best one. They even mentioned grammar errors in this translation!!!
[Edited at 2007-11-29 16:44]
The 'winner' had a TERRIBLE translation. It has been criticized with errors thoroughly explained. And some of the errors were really basic, literacy-type errors. My 12-year-old son said after seeing that the 'winner' had 8 mistakes (in fact, there were more), 'Oh, I may become a translator. They give me a bad grade for just 5 mistakes, and here she has more in a couple of paragraphs.'
I don't know about clones, but in the last competition it was more than obvious that not the best translation came out as the winner. There was no doubt as to that within the En-Ru community (at least, among the people I communicate with and who have a long record of literary translation experience.)
Thus, I share Alexander's opinion and logic in every point.
[Edited at 2007-12-03 12:01]
[Edited at 2007-12-04 07:47]
| | | | Deolindo
Angola
English to Portuguese
+ ...
I agree
[Edited at 2007-12-03 13:14]
| | |
|
|
|
RominaZ
Argentina
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | No clone profiles | Dec 3, 2007 |
The current voting system relies on the judgment of the majority of voters. We have scrutinized the profiles voting for the English - Russian winning entry at the 4th ProZ.com Translation Contests and they are real.
Regards,
Romina
| | | | | My fault, Romina | Dec 3, 2007 |
RominaZ wrote:
Dear All,
Please accept my apologies. Rule 12 is to be implemented in this contest, but considering the negative votes cast for winning entries of only the 4th Contest and not previous contests, as this rule was announced during the 4th contest.
I'd like to apologize to Susie, Angioletta and Marian. You should be able to see the vote button now. Please contact me if you have further problems.
Thanks for taking the blame, Romina, but this was my error. Folks, Romina is new to the contest and I did not pass along this information to her. My apologies to those affected!
| | | |
ICL wrote:
You would need to assign a duly qualified committee/panel of judges who would make the initial filtering of all submitted entries based on the points system.
I have been saying for several months now that only a 'duly qualified committee' can save the idea of the contest, at least, in En-Ru pair as there it comes to absurdity — entries with obvious spelling, punctuation, grammar and other errors often qualify to the final stage the first and get to the top of the list. That creates shocks and not fun when obvious lack of professionalism and word-for-word translations get crowned. Tastes differ, I know, and have nothing against that, but there needs to be 'literacy qualification' for allowing people to judge which translation is best. Otherwise, it looks like an utter undermining of all the professional standards ProZ aims to confirm and maintain.
[Edited at 2007-12-03 14:55]
| | | | | 'absurdity' - really? | Dec 3, 2007 |
Yuri Smirnov wrote:
... in En-Ru pair as there it comes to absurdity...
Voting was tight, but in the end, the winner drew votes from a good array of members, some new and some old, with no signs of irregularity and no apparent pattern of bias. I am trying to reconcile that fact with the statements made against the winning entry in this thread.
I don't speak Russian, but I can't help but wonder whether the word "absurdity" represents an exaggeration. At least, some of the voters would seem not to agree--looking at the voting patterns, I would think that the winning entry is worthy of admiration. After all, it won fair and square.
If we are misled, please clarify!
| | |
|
|
|
| Let's move forward, shall we? | Dec 4, 2007 |
Henry D wrote:
After all, it won fair and square.
Exactly. The outcome was determined by the majority of votes and the voters were real people, not clones or robots of any kind. End of story. Period. Isn't it about time to get over it and move along?
| | | | | OK. Clarifying | Dec 4, 2007 |
[quote]Henry D wrote:
Yuri Smirnov wrote:
I don't speak Russian, but I can't help but wonder whether the word "absurdity" represents an exaggeration...
If we are misled, please clarify!
You don't seem to believe me and ALexander. That's OK.
Here are extracts from the comments of two colleagues to the 'winning' translation (one of them a ProZ moderator in En-Ru pair with many books translated):
1) Eight mistakes for 250 words. Congratulations, excellent work!
2) My congratulations to the winner: the quality is wonderful. My congratulations to the voters: those votes also witness something. It's regrettable.
It's not the style even that is commented here, just gross mistakes.
And you think my 'absurdity' sentence is an exaggeration. OK. Not trying to make you change your mind, but just to explain what I mean. A translation contest on a website that has proved its highest professional credentials presupposes a competition of professional translations. When the declared goal of the contest is to choose the BEST translation, 'best' grammatically is the superlative degree of 'good'. It's a grammatical absurdity to me when something that doesn't attain the level of a positive degree even (not being 'good') can be of a superlative degree ('best'). That's what I mean. I share ICL's coviction there needs to be 'literacy qualification'. Just people who know basic grammar rules sort out illliterate translations.
And what concerns fairness... OK. Let me say that not everyone is convinced fair play rules have always been observed. I don't believe in clones, I again share what ICL had said before.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
(Shakespeare. Sonnet CXVI)
OK. And what concerns the tone, the intonation of my remarks.
They are completely quiet, only meant to make this contest, at least in my languages pairs, to reach at least a positive degree. So far, my opinion (based on observations of 4 contests already) and not only mine is that this is a level still to be reached. But I don't see any insurmountable obstacles to that.
[Edited at 2007-12-04 07:25]
| | | |
Larissa B wrote:
Exactly. The outcome was determined by the majority of votes and the voters were real people, not clones or robots of any kind. End of story. Period. Isn't it about time to get over it and move along?
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it
Studying history is necessary to avoid repeating past mistakes. This saying comes from the writings of George Santayana, a Spanish-born American author of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
http://www.bartleby.com/59/3/thosewhocann.html
| | | | | Thanks, Yuri! | Dec 4, 2007 |
Yuri Smirnov wrote:
And you think my 'absurdity' sentence is an exaggeration. OK. Not trying to make you change your mind, but just to explain what I mean. A translation contest on a website that has proved its highest professional credentials presupposes a competition of professional translations. When the declared goal of the contest is to choose the BEST translation, 'best' grammatically is the superlative degree of 'good'. It's a grammatical absurdity to me when something that doesn't attain the level of a positive degree even (not being 'good') can be of a superlative degree ('best'). That's what I mean.
Thank you for clarifying. I understand now that you are applying a high standard.
OK. And what concerns the tone, the intonation of my remarks.
They are completely quiet, only meant to make this contest, at least in my languages pairs, to reach at least a positive degree. So far, my opinion (based on observations of 4 contests already) and not only mine is that this is a level still to be reached. But I don't see any insurmountable obstacles to that.
Excellent! Thanks for posting, it has provided insight into the situation, at least for me.
| | |
|
|
|
Deolindo
Angola
English to Portuguese
+ ...
| A tricky thing | Dec 5, 2007 |
Assessing a translation can be a very thorny task. What would you do if you were asked to choose from two translations: one with spelling and grammar mistakes, but fairly conveying the letter and the spirit of the original text, and the other written in impeccable style, without a single spelling or grammar error but misleading the target reader about the message of the source script?
The contest tries to find the "best" translation as compared to other entries. Not the "perfect" on... See more Assessing a translation can be a very thorny task. What would you do if you were asked to choose from two translations: one with spelling and grammar mistakes, but fairly conveying the letter and the spirit of the original text, and the other written in impeccable style, without a single spelling or grammar error but misleading the target reader about the message of the source script?
The contest tries to find the "best" translation as compared to other entries. Not the "perfect" one. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | That's science fiction | Dec 5, 2007 |
Deolindo wrote:
What would you do if you were asked to choose from two translations: one with spelling and grammar mistakes, but fairly conveying the letter and the spirit of the original text, and the other written in impeccable style, without a single spelling or grammar error but misleading the target reader about the message of the source script?
That's science fiction. Reality is different:
Translations with spelling and grammar mistakes NEVER 'fairly convey the letter and the spirit of the original text'. That just doesn't happen. Those who can convey the letter and the spirit don't find it difficult to know the basic spelling and grammar rules taught in high school.
[Edited at 2007-12-05 17:00]
| | | |
Deolindo wrote:
Assessing a translation can be a very thorny task. What would you do if you were asked to choose from two translations: one with spelling and grammar mistakes, but fairly conveying the letter and the spirit of the original text, and the other written in impeccable style, without a single spelling or grammar error but misleading the target reader about the message of the source script?
The contest tries to find the "best" translation as compared to other entries. Not the "perfect" one.
Not too long ago, there was a poll ( http://www.proz.com/topic/90922 ) about what things (grammar, spelling, etc.) we as translators/linguists "let slide" when we write in general. The result was that more than 60% of us *try* to write correctly (without grammar, spelling, etc.) mistakes.
So I would say that if we are talking about a contest, the least you can expect is some *correctness* (not the same as "perfection") when it comes to grammar, spelling, etc.
I do agree that, as you commented, you can have an impeccable translation in terms of grammar, spelling, etc., but it may have other kind of errors: misinterpretation of the source text, omission of source text words, etc. This would be another reason to disqualify an entry.
In short, a contest for a website that is supposedly for "proZ" (professionalZ) should aim at getting the most correct (in all senses) translation, not the most "approximate" one or let sloppiness slide in the process.
That is why I suggested a system based on points to be deducted for each kind of error made (either spelling, grammar, etc. AND source text omissions, misinterpretations, etc.), so that in the end you get the really "best" ones as finalists.
Regards,
Ivette
[Edited at 2007-12-06 18:28]
| | | | | 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 » 5th Proz.com Translation Contest Qualification Round has just started | 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 » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
