| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183] > | Should “native language” claims be verified? Thread poster: XXXphxxx (X)
|
|---|
| Turf protection | Sep 13, 2012 |
It's not about turf protection, I can just see why it wouldn't make business sense to an outsourcer to go off screening non-natives for native proficiency (alongside all the other stuff you need to screen your translators for) if there are plenty of competent natives to choose from. I know if I needed someone to translate my birth certificate or sales pitch, I'd go straight to a native (translator, that is) if I could get one. Who wouldn't?
Edit: I lie; of course I translated my own... See more It's not about turf protection, I can just see why it wouldn't make business sense to an outsourcer to go off screening non-natives for native proficiency (alongside all the other stuff you need to screen your translators for) if there are plenty of competent natives to choose from. I know if I needed someone to translate my birth certificate or sales pitch, I'd go straight to a native (translator, that is) if I could get one. Who wouldn't?
Edit: I lie; of course I translated my own birth certificate. OK the sales pitch then.
[Edited at 2012-09-13 14:07 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Clarifying... | Sep 13, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote: José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
My point is that as long as proficiency in translation can be adequately ascertained, "native speakerness" is completely irrelevant. It's just a label. Even when competency is assured, I'm not sure the translator's native language is ever completely irrelevant. It's impossible to get away from the fact we work with language, therefore native language will always be there, whether as a barely-significant speck of dust, a major concern, an afterthought, etc. My point is I think it always has some significance, even if it's minimal significance. Also, let's not tar all outsourcers with the same brush just because one or two are being sloppy with filling out fields properly...as is the case I read today of an English-Russian translation requiring a German native speaker. Now, the person responsible for that was either very tired, very distracted or very misinformed....but we can't use that as an example that all outsourcers are misinformed about the linguistic issues and don't know their own minds.
A competent outsourcer will never bluntly rule out translators because of their native language. One such competent outsourcer has been using my services in a team of two (viz. translator/proofreader), now and then exchanging roles, for EN > PTBR, and my partner's native language is FR! This has been going on for years and, if you'll pardon my lacking modesty, results have been excellent.
| | | | | Bluntly ruling out translators because of their native language | Sep 13, 2012 |
Clearly this will result in them missing out on some excellent translators, but I wonder if the benefits weigh up against the costs of fishing out the good ones (especially when the barrel is big).
| | | | | define native language! | Sep 13, 2012 |
http://www.proz.com/forum/prozcom_suggestions/227485-should_“native_language”_claims_be_verified-page16.html#1968769
Page 16 of this thread:
Jared wrote:
Means of further verifying native language or level of proficiency in a language, and of allowing members to show this, are currently being studied. The matter is under internal evaluation at this point, and no estimate for a finished implementation has been made yet. Improvements in this area, when ready, will be released to the Certified PRO Network. Note that while verification of a native language may be an indicator that a person does indeed have X as a native language, it is not a substitute for thorough screening of a language professional's experience and qualifications before a work relation or other collaboration begins.
If you suspect fraud or any other violation of site rules, as always, please submit the details to site staff using the online support system so that they can be looked into and acted on if need be.
Jared
Regarding: "further verifying":
Problem is native languages are currently not "verified", there is no system in place.
Anybody can claim anything, even if you just "declare" one native language instead of two. You do verify "identity" and it's required to get the yellow "reasonably certain to be accurate" native speaker badge but that is not "verification" of native languages.
Some could suggest that until there is a system in place (be it a questionnaire or whatever), we need to at least change the name of the "unverified' and even the yellow badge to "declare" native language with a disclaimer that this does not mean the person is a native speaker.
And we should do away with the "unverified" category.
But I know that's not going to happen because the "native speaker" criterion is indeed an important one for clients choosing a translator. And it should be. And I don't see it as an improvement to let all of us simply display "declared" native languages because everyone will still be able to claim it's true and your system will have to include them in "native speaker" search results. It would actually be worse than it is now where at least quite a few of the "reasonably certain to be accurate" single-native speaker translators are probably indeed native speakers. And, as I mentioned before, because I am certain I am really a German native speaker, I don't want to suddenly become just a "declared" and "less likely" native speaker.
Just verify my language and let me keep the yellow P.
It's not acceptable that people whose native language is not the one they claim can advertise next to the true native speakers. That is bad for anybody's business.
If you want to verify it, you must define it.
The definition is certainly not:
I am "proficient" in that language, "I translate into that language", "I am almost as good as a native speaker", "I live in a country that speaks that language", "I 'identify' with a certain ethnic group", "my parents spoke it with me (all those years ago)", "my wife/husband/partner/friend/boss/bartender are all native speakers", I am certified by a governmental authority of a language X-speaking country to translate into language Y", "I believe I am an expert translator", "I am an expert translator", "I want to be a native speaker of that language", "I want to appear to be a native speaker because it's cool and it bolsters my resume", "my clients say they trust me with translations into that language and that's why I think I have the right to say I am a native speaker", "I just love that language", "I am able to bid on jobs that require a native speaker into that language because I declared this language my native language", "I'm certainly near-'native' so there you go","Proz.com doesn't prevent me from declaring a native language and participating in native speaker advertising or bidding on jobs, ergo "declaring" a native language makes me a native speaker", "I just think native language can't be defined anyway so who does it hurt if I say I am a native speaker", "I never had a native language but I am a translator - what do you want me to say/do?" "I lost my native language but I once spoke it really well", "I don't give a hoot about what real native speakers have to say about what native language means, it's all relative anyway", "I mean whose gonna check" ...
You continue the list.
BTW, Henry's profile still shows Chinese as his "reasonably certain to be accurate" native language. But I don't believe Henry's native language is Chinese. That is not a good example and certainly doesn't bolster my case or the credential's value. Add-on: But it's not a valid credential anyway even though it seems to be. End of add-on.
Just saying...
Definitions for native language, please!
B
[Edited at 2012-09-13 15:04 GMT]
N.B. regarding Henry's profile: As has been pointed out to me, staff profiles are regularly used for testing purposes, and that data is constantly in flux as part of that work.
[Edited at 2012-09-13 15:46 GMT]
[Edited at 2012-09-13 21:27 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray 
Netherlands
Local time: 09:18
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| @Robin, random thoughts | Sep 13, 2012 |
Robin wrote:
No-one whose cultural, linguistic, social, family, ... and educational upbringing has been conducted ... principally in accordance with [that of] a country ... which, itself, does not have English as its/a ... native language ... can justify any claim to have English as his/her native language.
[Practically] no one ... brought up in the African continent ... can possibly have English as his/her native language, simply because English is not the/a native language of that country, ... [unless] the family has gone to extreme lengths to provide a specific native-language development [environment].
That is one opinion, yes. I understand the opinion and I admit that it makes a lot of sense, and you can see a lot of it back in my "degrees of nativeness" thread from long ago. At the same time, your opinion above is a very extreme point of view whose one conclusion is that not only a few users but large numbers of users have no native language whatsoever.
I ask myself whether what you say here is compatible with the mental development linguistic theories about native language. Do all these other issues (cultural, social, family, and educational) have a significant influence on language development in the brain? These issues may well influence the person's behaviour and aid in his understanding of cultural norms, values and behaviour, but do they truly affect the person's mental development?
I reject the ... [idea that] one can “lose one’s native language”, [e.g. by emigration].
Yes, but that rejection is based on your specific definition of the term "native language". Those of us who toyed with those ideas have definitions of "native language" that are compatible with or tolerant of such ideas.
Knowing that Samuel has recently moved from his native South Africa to The Netherlands, I wonder how he will feel if ... a band of self-proclaimed ‘false’ native speakers of Afrikaans decides one day to deprive him of his birthright as a native speaker of his native language...
Well, knowing that at the time when I lived in South Africa I felt pretty much the same about other Afrikaans translators from outside South Africa and in particular from the Netherlands, I would feel sadness but I would acknowledge the inevitable.
I have seen too many translations from otherwise quite professional non-South African historically native Afrikaans translators to contend differently. I personally take active steps to ensure that my level of nativeness remains high even though I'm no longer in the native environment (and specifically in a dangerously false friendly environment), and I hope to be able to delay for many months or years the day that I finally slip from "native" to "previously native".
[Only a] minority of registrants are actively looking for and applying for jobs through the site. It is really only that category of user who needs to be native language verified; it is far less important in most other areas of the site (the forum, Kudoz, etc.) where jobs are not at stake...
Actually, I think correct nativeness identification in KudoZ is fairly important. When I post a KudoZ question and I ask for native speakers, then I expect to get native speakers, and I don't always have sufficient information to determine if any answerers are possibly non-native.
I support, at least in general terms, the idea of a random multi-choice questionnaire designed to detect obvious false native-speakers, [and] I suggest that any such questionnaire need only be used on those site users who are actively applying for a job where the outsourcer has [asked for] ... a native speaker.
In previous posts on my "test" suggestion I spoke against ad hoc testing, partly because it seems a bit silly to have a whole test simply to test for one aspect of the job post. But you got me thinking -- a test that tests for multiple aspects of the job post may be a good idea (though something to be suggested in a separate thread). I'm thinking especially about CAT tools -- if a client had asked for Trados, the test can include some elementary questions about Trados. What do you think?
Samuel
[Edited at 2012-09-13 14:54 GMT]
| | | | | Competent outsourcers | Sep 13, 2012 |
As for "A competent outsourcer will never bluntly rule out translators because of their native language", this implies that 99% of the agencies registered on ProZ and offering my language pair are incompetent. Again, I fear they're simply saving time and effort, for which you can't blame them.
| | | | | degrees of nativeness | Sep 13, 2012 |
Samuel Murray wrote: Robin wrote:
No-one whose cultural, linguistic, social, family, ... and educational upbringing has been conducted ... principally in accordance with [that of] a country ... which, itself, does not have English as its/a ... native language ... can justify any claim to have English as his/her native language.
[Practically] no one ... brought up in the African continent ... can possibly have English as his/her native language, simply because English is not the/a native language of that country, ... [unless] the family has gone to extreme lengths to provide a specific native-language development [environment]. That is one opinion, yes. I understand the opinion and I admit that it makes a lot of sense, and you can see a lot of it back in my "degrees of nativeness" thread from long ago. At the same time, your opinion above is a very extreme point of view whose one conclusion is that not only a few users but large numbers of users have no native language whatsoever.
I don't agree with Robin that you can't be/become a native English speaker when you stem from Africa or South Africa.
But even Robin admits:
[unless] the family has gone to extreme lengths to provide a specific native-language development [environment]
The thing I have a problem with is the "degrees of nativeness". If I want to go there at all, I would only allow degrees within the "native" speaker box/category, not from outside, say for a "near-native speaker". That just opens the door to anyone claiming he/she is a native speaker.
But what are those degrees of nativeness???
Doesn't that mean one is more "native" than another? I mean strictly speaking about "native language", not translations skills (which, I always contended, has nothing to do with the definition of native language).
For whom would you shut the door, Samuel, and not let them into the "native" speaker group? Where do you draw the line between a true native speaker (or 4 degrees of native speaker) and the non-native?
Samuel Murray wrote:
I ask myself whether what you say here is compatible with the mental development linguistic theories about native language. Do all these other issues (cultural, social, family, and educational) have a significant influence on language development in the brain? These issues may well influence the person's behaviour and aid in his understanding of cultural norms, values and behaviour, but do they truly affect the person's mental development?
There are probably lots of social factors involved, one being the acquisition during one's "early" life.
Robin wrote:
I reject the ... [idea that] one can “lose one’s native language”, [e.g. by emigration].
I don't.
Samuel Murray wrote:
I have seen too many translations from otherwise quite professional non-South African historically native Afrikaans translators to contend differently. I personally take active steps to ensure that my level of nativeness remains high even though I'm no longer in the native environment (and specifically in a dangerously false friendly environment), and I hope to be able to delay for many months or years the day that I finally slip from "native" to "previously native".
Robin wrote:
Only a minority of registrants are actively looking for and applying for jobs through the site. It is really only that category of user who needs to be native language verified; it is far less important in most other areas of the site (the forum, Kudoz, etc.) where jobs are not at stake...
Samuel Murray wrote:
Actually, I think correct nativeness identification in KudoZ is fairly important. When I post a KudoZ question and I ask for native speakers, then I expect to get native speakers, and I don't always have sufficient information to determine if any answerers are possibly non-native.
Fully agree. And again, the thing about lying ....
Robin wrote:
I support, at least in general terms, the idea of a random multi-choice questionnaire designed to detect obvious false native-speakers, [and] I suggest that any such questionnaire need only be used on those site users who are actively applying for a job where the outsourcer has [asked for] ... a native speaker.
As I argued before, for that we need to define "native language".
B
[Edited at 2012-09-13 15:42 GMT]
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 12:48
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | No, this is what I am saying... | Sep 13, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote: Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
So, in the light of the conclusions of the recent discussion, I propose that we suggest to proz.com to discontinue job and translator selection based on native language. That is, end the native language filter that is currently available to outsourcers. It should be replaced by a proficiency-based filter Apart from your roping in and invocation of people who don't really agree with you, this is not what some of our colleagues are saying at all.
You are right here. This is what I am proposing, not someone else.
[2012-09-13 16:00 GMT पर संपादन हुआ]
| | |
|
|
|
Michael Beijer
United Kingdom
Local time: 08:18
Member (2009)
Dutch to English
+ ...
| a message from the Dutch Dunglish Brigade | Sep 13, 2012 |
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Definitions for native language, please!
B
Hi Bernhard,
I actually answered the question you addressed to me back on page 133, on page 134. I'm pretty sure you missed it as this thread has become quite unwieldy in its present gargantuan mutant form, so I will repeat it here, for posterity:
------------------------------*
••• 'Michael Beijer wrote: I am a native English speaker, whether you like the way I write or not.' [from a post of mine on p. 133 that was removed by site staff; 'you' does not refer to Bernhard, but to a certain individual here on Proz who insists that I am not a native English speaker, but actually a member of the much-hated (and feared) Dutch Dunglish Brigade]
••• 'Bernhard Sulzer wrote: How do you know, Michael, I mean for sure? What definition are you using for native speaker? Just wondering. B' (p. 133)
••• 'Hi Bernard,
I know because I know. Just kidding.
I know for sure because I have spoken English to my family all my life. My English might not be perfect, and may occasionally contain traces of Dutch, but this is to be expected as I am bilingual.
I don't have a bullet-proof definition, but if I had to come up with one, I think I might say something like: 'the language you grew up speaking at home, for the first 10 years of your life', which, in my case was English, and to a lesser extent, Dutch.
I spent the first 6 or 7 years of my life in Orange County, CA, speaking English at home to my American mother, Dutch father, and brother. We then moved to Switzerland, where we spent one year. Then we moved to Holland, where my brother and I learned Dutch at a Dutch school. For a few years, we switched to speaking Dutch at home, because my parents wanted to help us learn Dutch for at school. However, after that, we switched back to English, and I have spoken English to my family and friends ever since. (With the exception of one Dutch girlfriend years ago, with whom I started speaking Dutch, moved on to a mixture of Dutch and English, and ended up speaking only English.)
Incidentally, I already tried to explain all of this somewhere else in this gargantuan thread, but don't have the time to go back and look for it
I hope this answers your question Bernhard.
Michael
PS: I am organising a Proz powwow in Brighton on Saturday the 13th of October. For those of you who still do not believe that I am a native English speaker, please come along and I can show you;) http://www.proz.com/powwow/4420' (p. 134)
------------------------------*
Michael
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 12:48
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | Here are some... | Sep 13, 2012 |
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Definitions for native language, please!
B
[Edited at 2012-09-13 15:04 GMT]
Here are some
http://www.proz.com/post/2008913#2008913
1.
The language spoken in your family/by your parents.
2.
The language spoken in your neighbourhood during your childhood (childhood not clearly defined; and language spoken by parents/family can be different.)
3.
The language spoken in your neighbourhood during your childhood, that is, up to 5 years (parental language can be different).
4.
The language spoken in your neighbourhood during your childhood, that is up to 15 years (parental language can be different).
5.
The language of your schooling (the language of your parents and the language of your neighbour hood can be different).
6.
The language spoken by your parents which is the same as the language of your schooling (the language of the neighbourhood can be different).
7.
The language spoken by your parents which is the same as the language of your schooling which is the same as the neighbourhood language.
8.
Definition 7 + the language of your higher education.
9.
Definition 8 + the language of your professional activity (but does not include continued residence in an area of your native language).
10.
Definition 9 + continued residence in an area of your native language.
The definitions are in the order of increasing rigourousness.
Few posters of this thread would qualify as native language speakers if we apply Definition 10. But if our aim is translation quality, there is no reason why we should not be applying this definition.
This diversity of definitions is the reason why this topic has generated so much heat, because almost anyone can be excluded or included by carefully choosing one of the above definitions. Hence the accusation of restricting competition using the stick of native language.
And this is the reason why the site has very wisely left it to each member how s/he defines native language.
Since the site has not defined native language itself and has left it to members to define it themselves, it is really disingenuous to accuse other members of dishonesty in the matter of declaring native language. They might simply have used a definition from the above set which is different from the definition that the accuser has in mind.
Or, s/he might have had an altogether different definition in his/her mind, like this one:
11.
The language in which you are professionally trained to translate.
Or a grey one like this:
12.
That language from among the languages a person knows that has more promise of producing work.
[2012-09-13 15:59 GMT पर संपादन हुआ]
| | | | rjlChile (X)
Local time: 04:18
I think you spend too much time talking to Bala - his ability to extrapolate when drawing conclusions seems to be contagious!
Samuel Murray wrote:
(...), your opinion above is a very extreme point of view whose one conclusion is that not only a few users but large numbers of users have no native language whatsoever.
Why does the mere fact that there are few true native English speakers in Africa imply anything at all about the number of folk with no native language at all? Does the fact that you, Samuel, are from an African country, and that you are not a native English speaker, mean that you have no native language? Of course not! - your native language is Afrikaans. Likewise millions of others living south of the Mediterranean whose native language is Arabic, Zulu, or whatever. Those are just as much 'native languages' for those who possess them as are your Afrikaans and my English.
Robin
[Edited at 2012-09-13 16:07 GMT]
| | | | | Or alternatively... | Sep 13, 2012 |
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Definitions for native language, please!
Before we get too carried away:
a) decide on the actual desired function of the field currently labelled "native"
b) then try to define the contents of that field on the basis of that function (which may or may not be native language per se - I obviously contend there is a valid argument at this stage that it may not be)
Incidentally, who is this "Robin" people keep quoting and where did he say these things? I keep googling snippets to try to find the original post, and all I'm getting back as hits are the posts here that are suddenly quoting him.
| | |
|
|
|
| one definition | Sep 13, 2012 |
Michael Beijer wrote: Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Definitions for native language, please!
B
Hi Bernhard, I actually answered the question you addressed to me back on page 133, on page 134. I'm pretty sure you missed it as this thread has become quite unwieldy in its present gargantuan mutant form, so I will repeat it here, for posterity:
I actually saw it. Thank you. Sorry I didn't reply. I was busy the last two days.
Thanks for your definition (attempt). I should have said: More definitions please! I am looking for consensus.
One definition for native speaker:
Michael Beijer wrote:
I know for sure because I have spoken English to my family all my life. My English might not be perfect, and may occasionally contain traces of Dutch, but this is to be expected as I am bilingual.
Actual definition:
I don't have a bullet-proof definition, but if I had to come up with one, I think I might say something like: 'the language you grew up speaking at home, for the first 10 years of your life', which, in my case was English, and to a lesser extent, Dutch.
I would add a few other things to a possible definition, for example (just a few points:)
elementary and secondary schooling, speaking the language with other native speakers outside the family and continuing to speak it throughout your life (or at least most of your life).
As far as the schooling aspect is concerned, some might make the point it's not that important but schooling outside the home makes you think in that language and think in all kinds of different ways to interact successfully in that language. But social contact (with friends for example) in that language outside the family is maybe even more important when you "try" it out with as many other native speakers as possible and acquire all of the native language (level), not just a non-typical use at home. (Just my thoughts).
B
[Edited at 2012-09-13 16:25 GMT]
| | | |
Charlie Bavington wrote: Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Definitions for native language, please!
Before we get too carried away: a) decide on the actual desired function of the field currently labelled "native" b) then try to define the contents of that field on the basis of that function (which may or may not be native language per se - I obviously contend there is a valid argument at this stage that it may not be)
Fair enough.
My desired function: to exclude non-native speakers of a language (per se).
But I want to hear yours.
B
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 15:18
Chinese to English
| Not a fan of definitions | Sep 13, 2012 |
1) Charlie, you're looking for complexity that isn't there and doesn't need to be there:
a) decide on the actual desired function of the field currently labelled "native"
Could you not just accept that maybe it is what it says on the tin? The desired function of the field is to tell people what your native language is. What people do with that information is their own business, and beyond the scope of our discussion.
Edit: "I obviously contend there is a valid argument at this stage that it may not be"
Please tell us what these arguments are, though. Look, at some point we've got to make some decisions. The time for "there are arguments" is past. Bring out the arguments now, or forever hold your peace.
2) Bernhard - I think calls for definitions are a bit wrong-headed, frankly. Words are vague, and yet we get by perfectly well, with only acceptable levels of misunderstanding.
Any definition you give to this word, native, is going to cause someone to have a hissy fit. Proz's approach avoids that danger. And it is NOT the lack of definition that has caused the problem. Despite what Mr B claims, and despite the comic Lilian, the problem is not being caused by people who sincerely *think* they're native in whatever, and would be corrected by a clear definition. The problem is being caused by people who don't care about the fact that they're lying.
Having said that...
In my suggestion for a questionnaire, there is an implicit definition. The system I proposed would accept any language you (reported that you) spoke as a child.
Now, this is too broad, and not very precise (I deliberately didn't define "child"), but that would be OK by me. Because my objective is not to get it *right* (everyone assigned to their correct native language), but to reduce the problem.
[Edited at 2012-09-13 16:56 GMT]
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Should “native language” claims be verified? | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
