| 주제 내 페이지: < [1 2 3 4] > | Vlaams en Nederlands in Proz 스레드 게시자: Macià Planas
|
|---|
| Flemish-Dutch dictionary | Jan 21, 2008 |
Margreet Logmans wrote:
I can easily give a list of words and expressions that are very different in the language spoken and written by Belgians or Dutch people. When reading a text, I can usually tell pretty soon whether the writer was from Belgium or the Netherlands.
Although we officially speak the same Dutch language in the Netherlands and in Belgium, there are so many differences that there even exists a Flemish-Dutch dictionary: Vlaams-Nederlands woordenboek (Standaard Uitgeverij/Het Spectrum; 2003).
[Edited at 2008-01-21 13:06]
| | | | | And a Québécois-Français dictionary | Jan 21, 2008 |
Hester Eymers wrote:
Although we officially speak the same Dutch language in the Netherlands and in Belgium, there are so many differences that there even exists a Flemish-Dutch dictionary: Vlaams-Nederlands woordenboek (Standaard Uitgeverij/Het Spectrum; 2003).
[Edited at 2008-01-21 13:06]
There is also a Québécois - French dictionary, and French does not appear with two names in Proz.
I think the point here is not whether Dutch and Flemish are different (which they are), but whether they should be separated in Proz or not.
| | | | | As if we don't know | Jan 21, 2008 |
Hester Eymers wrote:
Margreet Logmans wrote:
I can easily give a list of words and expressions that are very different in the language spoken and written by Belgians or Dutch people. When reading a text, I can usually tell pretty soon whether the writer was from Belgium or the Netherlands.
Although we officially speak the same Dutch language in the Netherlands and in Belgium, there are so many differences that there even exists a Flemish-Dutch dictionary: Vlaams-Nederlands woordenboek (Standaard Uitgeverij/Het Spectrum; 2003).
[Edited at 2008-01-21 13:06]
Please, this is not the point here, we all know there are differences...
The point is that 'Nederlands' is our common language and that "Flemish" ('Vlaams') is incorrect when pointing at the language spoken, written and read in Belgium.
In English it should be - at best - Dutch (B) or Dutch (NL), and not Flemish and Dutch.
Just as much as English or French or German is not being named differently when referring to the languages spoken in England, America, Australia, France, Belgium, Germany, Austria, etc.
| | | | Saifa (X)
Local time: 22:45
독일어에서 프랑스어
+ ...
| Best solution | Jan 21, 2008 |
Evert DELOOF-SYS wrote:
In English it should be - at best - Dutch (B) or Dutch (NL), and not Flemish and Dutch.
Just as much as English or French or German is not being named differently when referring to the languages spoken in England, America, Australia, France, Belgium, Germany, Austria, etc.
This would be indeed the best solution.
| | |
|
|
|
Margreet Logmans (X) 
네델란드
Local time: 22:45
영어에서 네덜란드어
+ ...
I think the point here is not whether Dutch and Flemish are different (which they are), but whether they should be separated in ProZ.com or not.
As long as there are outsourcers asking me to translate into Dutch, only to indicate halfway through the negotiations that '...oh, yeah, it's for the Belgian market, that's not a problem, is it?', I think separation is useful. But it does not necessarily have to be called 'Flemish', as indeed, we do not call Belgian French 'Walloon' on ProZ either.
A little client education might do the trick as well.
| | | | NMR (X)
프랑스
Local time: 22:45
프랑스어에서 네덜란드어
+ ...
Margreet Logmans wrote:
I think the point here is not whether Dutch and Flemish are different (which they are), but whether they should be separated in ProZ.com or not.
As long as there are outsourcers asking me to translate into Dutch, only to indicate halfway through the negotiations that '...oh, yeah, it's for the Belgian market, that's not a problem, is it?', I think separation is useful. But it does not necessarily have to be called 'Flemish', as indeed, we do not call Belgian French 'Walloon' on ProZ either.
A little client education might do the trick as well.
How about outsourcers who think Flemish is the common language for Belgium AND for the Netherlands
And those who sent you German, thinking Dutch is another word for Deutsch !
[Bijgewerkt op 2008-01-21 14:23]
| | | | Buck
네델란드
Local time: 22:45
네덜란드어에서 영어
| Notable difference | Jan 21, 2008 |
A seasoned translator will immediately know whether a text he has received for translation was written in Flemish or Dutch. Legal texts are a good example. I speak fluent Dutch, but I often have to reach for the Dikke van Dale when translating a Flemish text. Idioms are often quite different as is legal terminology (with Flemish often borrowing from French or using words a Dutch native would not ordinarily use). Belgian friends also tell me the same is true of the French spoken in Belgium, not t... See more A seasoned translator will immediately know whether a text he has received for translation was written in Flemish or Dutch. Legal texts are a good example. I speak fluent Dutch, but I often have to reach for the Dikke van Dale when translating a Flemish text. Idioms are often quite different as is legal terminology (with Flemish often borrowing from French or using words a Dutch native would not ordinarily use). Belgian friends also tell me the same is true of the French spoken in Belgium, not to mention French spoken in other countries besides France. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | If it's a mistake in Dutch, it's a mistake in Flemish as well! | Jan 21, 2008 |
Margreet Logmans wrote:
I can easily give a list of words and expressions that are very different in the language spoken and written by Belgians or Dutch people. When reading a text, I can usually tell pretty soon whether the writer was from Belgium or the Netherlands. That doesn't make them separate languages. Regional differences in the use of words do not create a different language, IMHO! Every language has regional influences...
Margreet Logmans wrote:
The Taalunie-argument does not impress me as long as dictionaries add notes to indicate that some words and usages of words are 'Belgian' or 'Dutch'. The indication "in Belgium" means that it is not standard Dutch, hence not correct. That is what I have always learned... And that is exactly what I meant when I was talking about *professional* translators: they should be able to avoid that kind of words and expressions! Although I know that that is not always the case...
Still, I would like to add this note: I am not against a distinction between "Dutch (NL)/Dutch (BE)" or "Dutch/Flemish". When a reader reads a text, it's better to address him in his own language as much as possible. (The impression "hey, this was written by a Dutch/Flemish writer" harms the perceived quality of a text.) But I don't agree that they are different languages. British and American Englishes are not different languages either.
[Bijgewerkt op 2008-01-21 15:43]
| | |
|
|
|
| What should we do? | Jan 21, 2008 |
So:
Should we propose to Proz to change Dutch/Flemish into Dutch (Netherlands) / Dutch (Belgium,
...or should we propose a unified denomination (Dutch)?
In my opinion, for what I have read in this forum, a unified denomination would be the best choice because:
- It is more simple, and it avoids multiple names for one same language.
- It is what English, French, Spanish, German and Portuguese do, and it perfectly work... See more So:
Should we propose to Proz to change Dutch/Flemish into Dutch (Netherlands) / Dutch (Belgium,
...or should we propose a unified denomination (Dutch)?
In my opinion, for what I have read in this forum, a unified denomination would be the best choice because:
- It is more simple, and it avoids multiple names for one same language.
- It is what English, French, Spanish, German and Portuguese do, and it perfectly works for them. ▲ Collapse
| | | | NMR (X)
프랑스
Local time: 22:45
프랑스어에서 네덜란드어
+ ...
| Who is "we" ? | Jan 21, 2008 |
Macià Falgàs and Joaquim Palau wrote:
So:
Should we propose to Proz to change Dutch/Flemish into Dutch (Netherlands) / Dutch (Belgium,
...or should we propose a unified denomination (Dutch)?
In my opinion, for what I have read in this forum, a unified denomination would be the best choice because:
- It is more simple, and it avoids multiple names for one same language.
- It is what English, French, Spanish, German and Portuguese do, and it perfectly works for them.
Nobody here asks for separating Dutch (B) and Dutch (NL). It is perfect as it is. The grammar is the same, vocabulary is the same (we do recognize the differences), and the target group is already rather small, why divide?
| | | | | My suggestion | Jan 21, 2008 |
Macià Falgàs and Joaquim Palau wrote:
Should we propose to Proz to change Dutch/Flemish into Dutch (Netherlands) / Dutch (Belgium,
...or should we propose a unified denomination (Dutch)?
IMHO, the most adequate solution would be:
Source languages: only "Dutch"
Target: "Dutch", "Dutch (BE)" and "Dutch (NL)"
I regularly get requests for translations to be published in both Belgium and the Netherlands, so I don't think we can really rule out "Dutch" as such.
| | | | | Technically possible? | Jan 21, 2008 |
Joeri Van Liefferinge (King Darling Communications) wrote:
Macià Falgàs and Joaquim Palau wrote:
Should we propose to Proz to change Dutch/Flemish into Dutch (Netherlands) / Dutch (Belgium,
...or should we propose a unified denomination (Dutch)?
IMHO, the most adequate solution would be:
Source languages: only "Dutch"
Target: "Dutch", "Dutch (BE)" and "Dutch (NL)"
I regularly get requests for translations to be published in both Belgium and the Netherlands, so I don't think we can really rule out "Dutch" as such.
I don't know if this differences whether target or source would be technically possible.
| | |
|
|
|
| Do not misunderstand | Jan 21, 2008 |
NMR wrote:
Nobody here asks for separating Dutch (B) and Dutch (NL). It is perfect as it is. The grammar is the same, vocabulary is the same (we do recognize the differences), and the target group is already rather small, why divide?
The point is that Proz divides the language in two (Dutch and Flemish), so we should agree to propose to Proz to change this and find a more unified denomination. My previous question assumes this. "We" means everybody who translates from/into Dutch and who wants to give an opinion in this thread.
| | | | | Stay on topic please | Jan 21, 2008 |
Buck wrote:
A seasoned translator will immediately know whether a text he has received for translation was written in Flemish or Dutch. Legal texts are a good example. I speak fluent Dutch, but I often have to reach for the Dikke van Dale when translating a Flemish text. Idioms are often quite different as is legal terminology (with Flemish often borrowing from French or using words a Dutch native would not ordinarily use). Belgian friends also tell me the same is true of the French spoken in Belgium, not to mention French spoken in other countries besides France.
As already mentioned before, we are all aware of the differences, but the fact remains that our AN/Algemeen Nederlands/Common Dutch/Standard Dutch is the official language for both the Netherlands and Belgium (Flanders), and I resent the denomination 'Flemish' in this context, which is why I'm in favour/favor of Dutch (B)/Dutch(NL).
But if ProZ.com, or anyone else for that matter, wishes to stick to a divide, then it should also be done for a bunch of other languages.
| | | | Margreet Logmans (X)
네델란드
Local time: 22:45
영어에서 네덜란드어
+ ...
| Agreement and clarification | Jan 21, 2008 |
I think Joeri's suggestion is already practised this way, without the need for official change. Unless you want to have 'Flemish' removed as a language option - do I understand this correctly?
I also agree with Evert's last posting. And no, I don't need to stick to a divide, as long as outsoucers understand it may make a difference whether their text is intended for the Belgian or the NL market. Like, indeed, for French, Portuguese, Spanish, to name but a few.
With rega... See more I think Joeri's suggestion is already practised this way, without the need for official change. Unless you want to have 'Flemish' removed as a language option - do I understand this correctly?
I also agree with Evert's last posting. And no, I don't need to stick to a divide, as long as outsoucers understand it may make a difference whether their text is intended for the Belgian or the NL market. Like, indeed, for French, Portuguese, Spanish, to name but a few.
With regard to correctness: I've never had the idea that the indication 'in Belgium' is meant to say 'incorrect', as Joeri seems to suggest. It's just different.
While reading this thread from the beginning once again, I realised I should have said 'Dutch NL' in stead of simply 'Dutch' in my very first posting. That would have made matters more clear, and would have been more respectful to those that work with Dutch (B). Sorry! ▲ Collapse
| | | | | 주제 내 페이지: < [1 2 3 4] > | 이 포럼에 구체적으로 배정된 관리자가 없습니다. 사이트 규칙 위반을 신고하거나 도움을 받으시려면 사이트 스태프 »에게 문의 Vlaams en Nederlands in Proz | 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 » |
| | Pastey | Your smart companion app
Pastey is an innovative desktop application that bridges the gap between human expertise and artificial intelligence. With intuitive keyboard shortcuts, Pastey transforms your source text into AI-powered draft translations.
Find out more » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
