Maxi:

I understand about the answer chosen by the asker being slotted somewhere. I am talking about BEFORE there is a choice by the asker. Of course, I don't know what the programming issues are. It was just a suggestion which I thought could KEEP the discussion and the answer that might come to the answerer at a later time. Which is how translation actually works. You often get to the end of a text, and say, oh yes, such and such a term is X. It would be nice to have a system that reflects that. If it is too difficult or too time consuming, let's just FORGET it. Sorry to have "bothered" everyone.

Maxi: I am not talking about establishing the validity or competence of people. I am talking about PEOPLE stating their Own Level. And It Can Be Optional. People can OPT IN or OPT OUT of Self-Classification. Believe me, not too many will OPT IN to saying they are master translators, when they are not. That, of course, might be an optimistic view. Cheers.

Nothing good will come of this, and there is no purpose to it.  The actual professionals will not care to do anything about it - why should they?  They know what they are capable of.  Those who want to play games, or are insecure, or see "marketing value" will play with it.

I am interested in what people have to say, and whether they know anything soon comes across through what they say, and how they say it.  Clarity of presentation is also a thing in and of itself, evidencing precise thinking, attitude, and a host of things.  I like to judge the wine by the wine.

Maxi

Yes, me too. But we aren't allowed to do that, now are we?

The wine is what has been written.  Tasting =

"Are you able to clarify your suggestion?  When you say that this is the only correct term, what is your source."

Answer: "Every time the cleaning lady stubs her toe, she uses this, and no other word.  So it has to be the correct one."

Wine has been tasted, bottle label doesn't matter.  Next!

Maxi

Patrick,

Your thoughts are wise. I, for one, do use the disagree function at times. And I will tell you why. There are times, though not in the Fr<>Eng so much, when there are a spate of answers completely off the mark, and the answerers are encouraging each other down the wrong path. So, at times, it can be useful. Also, I recently goofed an answer into French. It was very useful to have a disagree. It made me think about it even more. Mostly, I was too quick off the draw as I usually just know the answer. Obviously, this at times is not good.

Second, I agree with your red-flag notion. However, there is a difference between arguing a point linguistically, and not. Using dictionaries is not providing an argument. I attempt to argue linguistically on the basis of my knowledge of a language. And not by saying, this is how someone else has said this. So, it's too bad that disagrees set people off. They should do as I do. When they are wrong, they should admit it.

 I think language is all about the personal experience. Even dictionaries are a subsequent compilation of lived experiences. What I dislike is NOT the rule that says one can't make personal comments about others, such as, you are an ass. Yes, that is a GOOD RULE. But interpreting that as the answerer not being able to Comment on his/her own feelings and experience re some answer, I feel is a BAD RULE. I think one's own personal experiences are the whole point, as it were, in translation.

Now about your yatching argument. Yes, a person with specific field knowledge may know the term better than someone who does not have specific field knowledge. What I find is that the issue is usually not specific field knowledge, the issue is vey often Advanced Knowledge of Source Language intricacies. It's easier to go and learn concepts if you know a target language, than if you don't. Also, yes, a French yatchman may know how to say "yaw" in English better than an English speaker who doesn't sail. But the point is the yatchman is not a translator. And when things are really dicey, I will pick  up the phone and call the sailor who speaks the target language I am working into [for me, only English], and describe my problem, and usually get a good answer.

Because it's better to ask knowledgeable people in the field who are not translators than to ask a non-knowledgeable person who is a translator...I have seen instances where "technical" translators get it wrong because they simply don't know the "rest" of the language. Best to check with an expert...in the target language.

Also, I think it would be a good idea for their to be a bit of humility. Now that might sound funny coming from me....but in fact it isn't. Many times in TC terms I have acknowledged misreadings and mistakes. There was a recent case in point in Spanish. Over night, I realized my answer had been wrong, and then corrected it. I also stated that my answer was incorrect so everyone could see it. People who know me well, know I have done this before. Newcomers who don't know me sometimes attack me because they are unaware of this...No one can be right 100% of the time. In anything. Except pilots. They better be right 100% of the time...

That brings me to my last point. Often, the answer comes to one, later, or in the aftermath, it floats up from the unconscious, I would say. That's a fact. How many times does one finish a translation, leaving this or that term in brackets, and suddenly one realizes the answer?