A little disgusted with Immersion
First let me say I'm sorry about griping. It's just that it seems as if I'm doing the heavy lifting in the 'Immersion' articles I work on, then someone follows behind and changes the most minor detail. Please, at least give an upvote to the people doing the translating. Here's an example: I translated: ...although Time Warner now has the rights to the film. Followed by someone who shall remain anonymous: ...although Time Warner now has the rights 'of' the film. Of course this isn't the first, or the last, time this has happened. I'm just wondering if anyone else feels my pain.
I've stayed away from it myself because of all I heard about it here and crap that happened when I did just begin to try it out. But the best advice I see people offer about the troubles there is to just let it be. Appreciate what you have learned, do it for the learning not the upvotes. Breathe and move on. But I hear ya, that does suck, especially because your version was correct.
Oh, and maybe instead of translating you'd have fun just writing your own sentences on a site like Lang-8. :)
Looking into Lang-8 now. It seems like a logical feature for Duo to include! Thanks for sharing.
Or one can go back and revert the sentence and give a reasonable justification for doing so. I think the best course of action would be to discuss in order to determine the best way of translating the sentence. The goal of this should be to learn and become better at the language we are learning; it should not be a competition.
I have experienced the same types of thing. However, I had heard it earlier and have now been experiencing it myself- the higher your translation tier, the less this happens. I'm now half way through tier 4 and silly rewrites like that rarely happen to me now. Not sure what the reasoning behind this is but I encourage you to grit your teeth through tier one because it will get better. (Also, for me anyway, tier one took the longest time to move up through, partly because of things like that preventing up votes.)
And, adding an explanation of why he is changing it back would also help others see his reasoning for doing so.
When I wanted to do that for something I was reverting, I had to put it in the discussion for the article as a whole. Unless I missed something obvious, there's no other way to comment on a reversion.
Apologies - for a reversion. Yes you're right! However, you can simply drop a note in someone's stream to acknowledge why you made the reversion. Some useful discussions have emerged for me in the past in doing things this way.
I agree with gritting your teeth... eventually, you will find an article that resonates with you, you will transate paragraph after paragraph very well, and somebody else will come behind and upvote (almost) every one of them. Probably 75% of my upvotes can be attributed to just 3 articles..
Also, a lot of the frustration stems from the feeling that you're spending more effort practicing English Composition than Spanish Comprehension, and then being nit-picked in your own language. Try going to the reverse tree and doing Immersion there. It's a lot harder, but so far seems pretty worthwhile. I don't have enough experience to say whether they do or don't do the same minor corrections there, but if they do, then at least you're learning different ways to say things in Spanish, and not English.
I agree with you, tj1983: a lot of the edits people make seem to be focused on trying to correct a badly written article, rather than a badly translated one. If I translate a passage accurately, and someone comes along and edits it to improve the English (style, etc.), that doesn't seem fair. Yes, I know how to edit English text, but that's not what I'm being asked to do in Immersion. Rather, the task is to translate a passage into English. I can't help it if the original text is badly written (which is often the case with Wikipedia articles, for example).
This is a good point. But consider this. A TV translator is more like an interpreter at times. Ca veut dire... it is sometimes not a mirror translation of what is being said. Rather it's the best interpretation of the meaning.
This is the approach I choose to take with immersion. The guide suggests we don't get hung up on literal translations. Especially when we are constrained by the original text being idiomatic, poorly written, without direct comparison, out of context
In other words, I choose to use immersion as a middle ground of sorts between translating as close as possible to the original text but ensuring that it is the meaning which takes preference in the final outcome.
If the translated English which comes out the other side sounds odd or clunky, I'll use some creative license to deliver a better meaning. If others choose to do the same with my edits, frankly, I have no problem with this. But I always try to leave a note & appreciate when others do the same. Also, uv good translations, even if I edit.
In the end, you have the ability to choose what you want immersion to be for you. The guides are just that. Not fixed rules. Which is the beauty of it.
It's possible it was an honest mistake by a non-native English speaker. Non-native English speakers take the English-to-Spanish course because they want to learn Spanish but don't have a course starting from their native language.
I always uv/sc when possible. The problem is that everyone has their own translation of something.
What do you mean by "uv/sc"? I've seen that in some of the articles. Are you referencing something?
"uv" is short for "upvote", and "sc" is short for "shared credit". "uv/sc" means you upvoted someone's translation and shared credit with them before you submit the correction. This is considered polite.
I haven't done a ton of immersion, but I do the same. It seems only proper to just share the credit and upvote a translation, because unless you have entirely done it yourself, then there is no reason that you shouldn't be sharing credit on a minor correction. Minor corrections are usually just stylistic or orthographic in nature and still rely on the original translation as a whole. Explanations are also helpful in a team translation like on duo.
Anyone can use Duolingo: young and callow, old and senile, Middle-aged and ugly minded, and so on. Just because you are young, handsome and sane, does not mean the rest of us are.
Translating your above comment into the target language will at least give a potential wider audience and float the idea that a professional and quality translation is the objective and not some sort of video game tit for tat funhouse party.
If you are actually learning the language that is good. No need to worry about the other clowns floating along in this big sea of ignorance called immersion. Ignore them.
I thought you were going to say, "...the other clowns floating along the sewage canal, in that big sea of floaters..." (just joking)
When it's an honest correction to someone's mistake, then I can understand the reason to overwrite the sentence. It is bothersome though when people rewrite correct sentences for the sake of getting experience points.
Your translation is better. It is not good English to say "has rights OF the film". "Rights TO the film" is correct.
There is an option to share the credit, which basically means when they get an upvote you do too, and most people do share the credit because it is automatically checked off.
I, too, get annoyed with translations. I am a native English speaker and I favour a meaningful translation over a literal one. When I do this I also add an explanation as to why I chose that way of translating. Even with all of that, someone will come along and make all kinds of changes that make the English awkward and that looses the original meaning. This is very frustrating!
I have often wondered if there was anyone out there to override a really bad edit on a translation.
You can revert it to the original translation if you feel that your version is correct. I have used it sparingly, usually only with people doing just as you are describing.
I find myself going through different phases with Immersion. When I first got into it, I would translate just about any article for the sake of practicing the art. Of course, some goofs were made along the way, concern was raised when it seemed nobody was reviewing my translations, but then I received encouragement from some very kind people along the way. I've reached a point now, however, where I am only interested in translating articles on subjects that truly appeal to me. (I'll generally pass on the One Direction/Iggy Azalea articles. Yes, I am old ;^) ) And, consequently, the desire for validation has abated somewhat. Don't get me wrong; it's always nice to move up a translation tier but I find the process is more enjoyable if I don't stress too much about votes (up or down) or the edits to my humble efforts.
The debate over literal translation versus desire to convey the true meaning of a sentence/paragraph is an interesting one and attempts to find a middle ground are a challenge to this student. For some translation inspiration there is a wonderful article in the June 4th issue of the New York Review of Books about the great translator C.K. Scott Moncrieff (famed for his monumental translation of Proust's A la recherche du temps perdu). The article is A Hero of Translation by Walter Kaiser and discusses a new biography of Mr. Moncrieff entitled Chasing Lost Time: The Life of C.K. Scott Moncrieff: Soldier, Spy, and Translator written by Jean Findlay.
The desire to progress through the translation tiers in order to validate your language achievement is incredibly seductive and can be affirming, but it shouldn't be the focus of the immersion exercises. Previously when I've been solely determined on tier progression, I've noticed I hardly ever gain much expressive knowledge. I do feel your pain, but I think the less stress you put on it, translation will become a more enriching experience for you. Keep on with the heaving lifting, brother! After all, those who you gripe about are really only doing a disservice to themselves.
what about "an erritor (error + editor) ==> a person who makes even more mistakes when editing (erriting?) someone else's work"?
Actually, your translation sounds better IN ANY EVENT! (In other words, the other translation sounds rather awkward.) But, I certainly see where you are coming from. The BEST thing for someone to do, if they are going to "tweak" your translation, somehow, is to write, in the comment section (as well as put a check mark in the box), the following words:
I WANT TO SHARE CREDIT
That way, if there is a "thumbs-up vote", both will get credit.
It is really the "polite way" of "making a correction" when such a correction is really just a personal choice of words. (But, the truth be known, I, myself, would "up vote" yours and not the other person's, because his/hers sounds "stilted", in English.)
Sometimes I do the immersion just for the variety. But I am with you 100%.
In your example, the person's "correction" was wrong.
heh, I've had a similar experience. A few of mine were corrected because of an extra space? It was very silly.
The most annoying thing to me is when people change my translation to translate a sentence word-for-word from French or Spanish to English