I don’t have a very high opinion on these translation certification exams because they don’t let me have access to the tools I use in my translation work, such as electronic dictionaries and the Internet, so they don’t actually test me on the way I do my work. Plus they tend to be mainland oriented.
NAATIs actually an Australian one, but I think you’re right in that you can’t use a dictionary.
There’s a Japanese one (JP>ENG or ENG>JP) which is actually conducted online, so you can use whatever you like. I think you might get higher marks if you use Japlish though @.@; which sort of defeats the purpose…
ironlady, cool So my scorn was warranted XD
Even the august (?) American Translators’ Association has a certification examination system riddled with problems. In addition to only recently having begun to allow candidates to write using a computer (as opposed to longhand, with a pen or pencil!! who translates that way?), of course there is the matter of reference materials and Internet access. I use paper dictionaries so rarely as to be almost negligible these days, but I wouldn’t be able to access the Internet for an ATA exam, so I feel that the results would not reflect my actual professional practice.
Of course, the ATA hasn’t been able to get the native and non-native speaking camps to agree about the ZH>EN exam anyway (two attempts have failed in the past). There are enough native speakers yelling against allowing Chinglish papers to pass that nothing has happened yet with an exam.
Sometimes I wish I taught math. At least there’s a right answer that (at least for the basic forms of math) people can agree upon, and tests are much easier to grade.
NAATIs actually an Australian one,[/quote]
What I mean is that the source language tested on tends to be mainland-style Mandarin (simplified characters, mainland phrasing and terminology, etc.) rather than the Taiwan-style Mandarin I work 99% of the time with.