@Lena E wrote:
We wanted to have a label that focused only on the language proficiency itself, rather than causing any potential confusion as users tied it to country of origin....
Lena, clients still can search for freelancers with native language knowledge of English? Which freelancers will be found by this research?
I still would like to have a response to my question why there are profiles (mine as well) that cannot be found by a research for Entry, Intermediate or Expert level and are not related to any level. Therefore those freelancer may be regarded to be "mediocre". Moreover the chances to be found are very low.
@Lena E wrote:
To clarify on the change in language levels from Native to Masterful, we found the “Native” labeling may have discouraged some users with a complete command of English from selecting this option. We wanted to have a label that focused only on the language proficiency itself, rather than causing any potential confusion as users tied it to country of origin.
But that's what a Native language filter is usually used for? It should discourage non-natives with complete command of English from using it because it doesn't describe their relationship with the language accurately? Also, nothing guarantees that a native speaker will be a masterful one (I honestly cringed writing that). More often than not, clients looking for native speakers don't need to hire Hemingway, they just have a project that they need to explain quickly and efficiently to the freelancer without a language barrier.
Come on, Upwork, if you're not going to do better with the changes, do better with the explanations.
Apart from Stephen's excellent suggestions, why does Upwork feel it can remove a word that is accepted and used as a language standard by millions of Internet users and replace it with a meaningless label? I also question the correct use of the word in this context, and that "masterly" would have been a better choice - not that either is acceptable as a replacement for "native".
This is how Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed.) defines the two words (admittedly in relation to a person rather than language):
"masterful;masterly. Masterful describes a person who is dominating and imperious. Masterly describes a person who has mastered a craft, trade, or profession . . ."
If you Google the two words - "native" comes up with over 509,000,000 results, against 12,500,000 for "masterful".
It would be nice. What would be really nice is if they would take the whole thing as is and not to try and mess it around and impose a new version of it with a few select tweaks. But hey, it's their site...
If anyone changed their status back to fluent, as I did, you will be judged at less than a level four (whatever that means - I suppose on tests) for English. I thought I would apply for a very quick proofreading job requiring British English.
I get two little warning signs (!) :
Location: North America English (!)
Level: Native - Has complete command of this language with no discernible accent (!)"
On the proposal page is this:
"You do not meet all the client's preferred qualifications
You may still submit a proposal, but the client will see that the proposal does not meet the following criteria:
I'm not going to go into lengthy explanations in a proposal for a $20 gig. So there is nothing for it but to stop being an 'expert native' and regressing to 'masterful'.
I just saw this change on my profile. Kind of strange how native is removed when so many assessments as a standard. It's pretty much understood that one doesn't have be a native to reach that proficiency with enough effort. What do you all think? Is this a push to get natives to buy into verifying themselves with the Dualingo testing?
Masterful - self assessed. Thank you devs for making my profile look sketchy o_o ... I'm still not buying the test. Sell one in Japanese and Spanish and I'll be all over it