Daniel is right.  Most full service companies have offices in many countries 
and the actual localization work is done there.  There is a good reason for 
this.  Standard practice is to use a linguist who is a native speaker in the 
target language and who has near-native fluency in the source language to do 
the work.  And as discussed earlier, the linguist must also be technical.  Most 
full service vendors, BTW, test their linguists before hiring them.

However, not all translation is done overseas.  Some vendors have local offices 
where linguists from other countries come and work.  But the linguists almost 
always visit their home country on a regular basis so that they don't lose the 
language and can keep up on anything new.  For example, new words are being 
invented in the high tech industry on a regular basis.  Widget.  Gizmo.  
Thingamabob.  Watchamacallit.  etc.  :-)  

BTW, there are several books on L10N out there that that explain all of this 
and more, including the one I wrote and those by a few of the larger vendors.

Diane


-----Original Message-----
>From: Daniel Doornbos <danield at promise.com>
>Sent: Jan 4, 2007 4:03 PM
>To: mathieu jacquet <bobitch at hotmail.com>, srickaby at 
>wordmongers.demon.co.uk
>Cc: framers at FrameUsers.com
>Subject: RE: OT : RE: Translators and Word vs FM
>
>Mathieu brings up an important issue about in-country translation by
>native speakers of the target language. Having been forced to use
>material translated by machine or by so-called translators with minimal
>skill in the target language, I agree that "in-country native" is the
>way to go.
>
>However, the fact that you might use a full-service translation firm
>does not mean that the translation work is done at one location. I have
>used US and European translation companies. In both cases, the actual
>work was done in-country by native translators contracting for the
>company.
>
>In my case, as a lone writer, I do not have the time or resources to
>coordinate translation projects with 9 different people in 9 separate
>countries, then take their work and assemble it into a single volume for
>printing and distribution. A full-service company, who manages the
>project and the individual translators, and gives me a single PDF built
>to specification, is the only reasonable solution.
>
>As Diane noted in a separate string, "Check with the vendor and make
>sure that they have the right combination of linguistic and technical
>experience to do the work you need."
> 
>Daniel
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: mathieu jacquet [mailto:bobitch at hotmail.com] 
>Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 2:04 PM
>To: srickaby at wordmongers.demon.co.uk; Daniel Doornbos
>Cc: framers at FrameUsers.com
>Subject: OT : RE: Translators and Word vs FM
>
>
>I totally agree with you Steve. I'm hired half time in France by an
>American 
>company based in Everett (WA), and we hold call conference on a daily
>basis, 
>there's absolutely no problem with that. We're just asked to wake up
>later. 
>It is no big deal to me. :o))
>
>When you work in the translation business, the first rule is to get your
>
>documents preferably translated by native speakers living in their own 
>country (not "corrupt" by the language of the country they live in). You
>
>have to contact people living in Japan, Russia, Norway, Brazil, etc. The
>Web 
>is the best way to do it. A translator who does not reply straight away
>is a 
>translator out of the database...
>
>Mathieu
>
>
>>From: Steve Rickaby <srickaby at wordmongers.demon.co.uk>
>>To: "Daniel Doornbos" <danield at promise.com>
>>CC: framers at FrameUsers.com
>>Subject: RE: Translators and Word vs FM
>>Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 18:01:33 +0000
>>
>>At 09:37 -0800 4/1/07, Daniel Doornbos wrote:
>>
>> >I agree with Mathieu that translators in Europe tend to be 
>> >substantially
>>less expensive. But if you live in the US, it's hard to get them on the
>>phone when you want to discuss an issue. And many want payment in
>Euros, 
>>which, for my accounting department, is a major problem.
>>
>>We're not translators, but I feel I should stick up for the European 
>>end of
>>things:
>>
>>. Any European company that is interested in working for US clients 
>>should
>>be able to quote in US dollars. If they can't or won't, don't work with
>
>>them. We can, and do.
>>
>>. If the phone doesn't work for you, use e-mail: it's a useful tool for
>>crossing time zones. If a contractor doesn't respond to e-mail as
>quickly 
>>as you'd like, stop using them.
>>
>>. The difference in tome-zones can be made to work to your advantage: 
>>we
>>come on-stream half a working day before the East seaboard and a whole 
>>working day before the West seaboard and we're working away while
>you're 
>>asleep. This constitutes a sort of double-shift system ;-)
>>
>>Our US clients are happy, and we're happy working for them. The 
>>Internet
>>shrinks the world: everyone benefits.
>>
>>--
>>Steve Rickaby
>>WordMongers Ltd
>http://www.wordmongers.com
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>You are currently subscribed to Framers as bobitch at hotmail.com.
>>
>>Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
>>
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
>>framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
>>or visit
>>http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/bobitch%40hotmail.c
>om
>>
>>Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit 
>>http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Personnalisez votre Messenger avec Live.com 
>http://www.windowslive.fr/livecom/
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>You are currently subscribed to Framers as dgcaller at earthlink.net.
>
>Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
>
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
>or visit 
>http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dgcaller%40earthlink.net
>
>Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
>http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.


Reply via email to