| Pages in topic: [1 2 3 4] > | Clearing up PRO/non-PRO confusion Thread poster: Neil Coffey
|
|---|
Neil Coffey 
United Kingdom
Local time: 05:53
French to English
+ ...
There seems to be widespread confusion about the purpose of the "PRO" / "non-PRO" classification. As I understand from the FAQ, "non-PRO" questions are intended to be essentially for words/terms that 'any bilingual person' can answer 'without a dicitionary'.
But I've seen a spate of terms (including a couple that I have posted), where mutliple members have voted as non-PRO terms which (a) blatantly don't fit the description above, and (b) for which as testimony to this, various (pre... See more There seems to be widespread confusion about the purpose of the "PRO" / "non-PRO" classification. As I understand from the FAQ, "non-PRO" questions are intended to be essentially for words/terms that 'any bilingual person' can answer 'without a dicitionary'.
But I've seen a spate of terms (including a couple that I have posted), where mutliple members have voted as non-PRO terms which (a) blatantly don't fit the description above, and (b) for which as testimony to this, various (presumably) professional translators have suggested different translators. And in some cases, members voting the question as non-PRO have themselves suggested an answer that turns out to be wrong or at least recieve a large number of disagrees from other members.
Just to pick an example that's come up in the last few minutes, "procédure de codification informatique" has received four votes for non-PRO. This might be "easy for an IT translator to translate", but how in a million years is this a term that any bilingual can translate without a dictionary?? Another example (one which I posted) was "rapport de synthèse" in a specific context of criminology. Five different translations were suggested, with various answers feeling the need to justify their answers with references, and some discussion ensuing among commentators on the answers. Yet despite this, three people apparently deemed the term translatable by any bilingual person without a dictionary...
It seems that members are interpreting the notion of "PRO"/"non-PRO" willy-nilly rather than actually voting according to its intended definition. So I wonder if the definition needs to be re-iterated alongside the reclassification button? ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Definition of non-pro KudoZ questions | Jan 19, 2010 |
I see your point Neil, but I think we need to change the definition of "non-pro." In addition to "a term any bilingual person can answer 'without a dictionary" we should add: a term that is readily found in most dictionaries.
[Edited at 2010-01-19 20:01 GMT]
| | | | | Internet too | Jan 19, 2010 |
Kim Metzger wrote:
I see your point Neil, but I think we need to change the definition of "non-pro." In addition to "a term any bilingual person can answer 'without a dictionary" we should add: a term that is readily found in most dictionaries.
[Edited at 2010-01-19 20:01 GMT]
I agree with Kim, but as well as most dictionaries, I would add ' or on the internet'. I am surprised by the number of questions that can readily be answered by a simple Google query. Personally, I wouldn't dream of asking a question until I'd exhausted all the online possibilities.
Of course, that would mean that at least 30% of questions would be classed as non-PRO, but what does that tell us?
| | | | Henry Hinds
United States
Local time: 22:53
English to Spanish
+ ...
In memoriam | Eliminate PRO/non-PRO | Jan 20, 2010 |
My opinion is that PRO/non-PRO should just be eliminated; it appears to have little significance. How many others agree?
| | |
|
|
|
| definition is important | Jan 20, 2010 |
I think Henry has a point - proz should examine what the value of labeling a term 'pro' is.
If the distinction is going to be maintained, then I would change 'pro' to 'specialized term' or something similar, as 'pro' is kind of meaningless on its own.
Martin Hazelwood
| | | | Steffen Walter
Germany
Local time: 06:53
Member (2002)
English to German
+ ...
| Fair enough, Kim, but... | Jan 20, 2010 |
Kim Metzger wrote:
I see your point Neil, but I think we need to change the definition of "non-pro." In addition to "a term any bilingual person can answer 'without a dictionary" we should add: a term that is readily found in most dictionaries.
... Neil's examples cited in the initial post do not fit your proposal at all - they are "110%" Pro! What's the use if these terms are "readily found in most dictionaries" if they have very specific meanings in different contexts? I'm afraid I can't agree with your proposed extension of the definition.
Steffen
| | | |
Henry Hinds wrote:
My opinion is that PRO/non-PRO should just be eliminated; it appears to have little significance. How many others agree?
Once in a while, this same old question comes up. I too think that classification of Pro/Non-pro should be abolished. For example, if somebody is asking a medical term, but s/he doesn't have any knowledge about medicine and asks the question as Pro, and three people vote it as Non-pro (these three people are physicians, doctor of medicine or a specialist in that field), then to these people, the term asked might be a kindergarten level question, but to the asker who has no or less knowledge would consider it to be Pro.
I know that some people would complain that "then why did you take this job in the first place where you have no medical knowledge?" but I wouldn't go further into that issue right now.
And what happens if the asker doesn't have a medical dictionary?
| | | | AnneMarieG
France
Local time: 06:53
German to French
+ ...
| Abolish pro/non pro | Jan 20, 2010 |
"My opinion is that PRO/non-PRO should just be eliminated; it appears to have little significance. How many others agree? " Henry H.
Hi,
this is indeed a very good idea: abolish the pro and non-pro button.
Instead the asker (the moderator) should have the posibility to show that s/he knows it is a 'basic' question by classifying the question as 'general vocabulary'.
This way we could avoid unnecessary exchanges in the 'linguistic discussion' part...... See more "My opinion is that PRO/non-PRO should just be eliminated; it appears to have little significance. How many others agree? " Henry H.
Hi,
this is indeed a very good idea: abolish the pro and non-pro button.
Instead the asker (the moderator) should have the posibility to show that s/he knows it is a 'basic' question by classifying the question as 'general vocabulary'.
This way we could avoid unnecessary exchanges in the 'linguistic discussion' part...
And, yes, as soon as the context is specific, a 'basic vocabulary' term becomes very specific.
Have a nice day!
Anne-Marie ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Mihai Badea (X)
Luxembourg
English to Romanian
+ ...
| I would keep the distinction Pro/non-Pro | Jan 20, 2010 |
As you know, Pro KudoZ points are used for the ranking in the directory. Currently, only Pro questions are taken into account. If the distinction was eliminated, terms such as “thermos”, “How are you”, “I love you” etc. would have the same weight as “memorandum of association”, “profit and loss statement” or “acoustic aphasia”. I think that would not be fair.
| | | | hazmatgerman (X)
Local time: 06:53
English to German
the underlying definition is subject only to the site management's discretion arguing the merits here is moot. Most of these questionable classifications would be easy for any translator qualified in his working fields in the real world.
| | | | | Definition of PRO and non-PRO | Jan 20, 2010 |
Neil Coffey wrote:
There seems to be widespread confusion about the purpose of the "PRO" / "non-PRO" classification. As I understand from the FAQ, "non-PRO" questions are intended to be essentially for words/terms that 'any bilingual person' can answer 'without a dicitionary'.
Thanks Neil,
The meaning of PRO and non-PRO is defined in this FAQ that I copy below:
While there may be no way to draw a clear-cut line, the following definitions have been adopted for the two types of question:
PRO questions are those that are suitable for professional translators.
Non-PRO questions are those that can be answered by any bilingual person without the aid of a dictionary.
When applying the above definitions, detach yourself from your own background/specialisation and think of a - hypothetical - randomly selected bilingual person. Is it likely that this person would be able to produce a good translation of the term or phrase in question (and in the particular context shown) from the top of his/her head? If not, it is a PRO question.
There is also an article by Henry further clarifying this issue.
In this article Henry includes as example of non-PRO questions:
- I love you
- Welcome to Panama
- Since when?
- thermos
- mmm, yummy
- boo!
It seems that members are interpreting the notion of "PRO"/"non-PRO" willy-nilly rather than actually voting according to its intended definition. So I wonder if the definition needs to be re-iterated alongside the reclassification button?
In fact when users vote for making a question non-PRO, the following confirmation label is shown to them:
Are you sure that this question could be answered by any bilingual person without the aid of a dictionary?
Regards,
Enrique
| | | | Andrea Hauer
Germany
Local time: 06:53
English to German
+ ...
| Abolish it, yes! | Jan 20, 2010 |
I think it is an unnecessary option - I have seen so much questions voted non-pro that have received more than four different answers what shows that a simple look in the dictionnaries wouldn't work ...
[Edited at 2010-01-20 14:08 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| Sometimes the askers are utterly wrong with their classifications | Jan 20, 2010 |
Some askers are sometimes utterly wrong with their classifications.
On the other hand sometimes the non-pro questions prove to be more than tricky in the end.
Andrea is right: non-pro questions with 4-5 different answers? This makes me think! Especially in the legal section!
On the other hand: the classification might make some of the askers think whether they might find their own solution with a little bit of research.
More important in my opinion: teach the askers that ... See more Some askers are sometimes utterly wrong with their classifications.
On the other hand sometimes the non-pro questions prove to be more than tricky in the end.
Andrea is right: non-pro questions with 4-5 different answers? This makes me think! Especially in the legal section!
On the other hand: the classification might make some of the askers think whether they might find their own solution with a little bit of research.
More important in my opinion: teach the askers that they give more context, ask for one single term to be translated and specify their real needs and problems!
Some weeks ago a lady asked little by little for the whole translation of her CV.
A very easy one, admitted, but this is not what the answers are for! ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Imo, easy questions often attract more answers | Jan 20, 2010 |
Andrea Hauer wrote:
I think it is an unnecessary option - I have seen so much questions voted non-pro that have received more than four different answers what shows that a simple look in the dictionnaries wouldn't work ...
[Edited at 2010-01-20 14:08 GMT]
In general, easy questions seem get more answers because lots of people feel they are in with a chance. That's been my observation in 3 language pairs since 2002. Although in 2002, there were far fewer easy questions because translators complained to Askers when their time was being wasted looking up terms found in any dictionary.
| | | | Andrea Hauer
Germany
Local time: 06:53
English to German
+ ...
[...]
Some weeks ago a lady asked little by little for the whole translation of her CV.
A very easy one, admitted, but this is not what the answers are for! [/quote] .
But this is not a matter of pro and not-pro ...
| | | | | 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 » Clearing up PRO/non-PRO confusion | 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 
