Medical Translation Insight

The Remarkable Communication blog had a great article called 50 things your customers wish you knew. While written for a general audience, it perfectly fits buyers of medical translation services.

For translation service providers, here is a bit of advice from the post:

If you knew, really knew, these 50 things about your customers, and acted accordingly, you'd gain their trust and even their love. After all, who doesn't want to be loved despite all our flaws and embarrassing insecurities? The better you understand both the noble and not-so-noble secrets in your customers' consciousness, the better you can serve them.

Much can be learned from this...


For more articles like this, subscribe to Medical Translation Insight via email or RSS!
 
 

According to the Korean Ministry of Labor, health test result will soon be translated into 10 languages.

Realizing that the globalization of our workforce won't reverse itself any time soon, more and more governments are insisting that their health insurers provide appropriate information to non-native speakers. And "appropriate" often means translated.

The California legislature in 2003 passed SB 853 requiring interpreters and translated materials be made available through private insurance plans paid for by the 1.1 million state residents who have little or no English language skills.

Wherever non-native language support gets mandated, insurance companies complain about increasing costs. Like the languages blog, I wonder if premiums might actually fall if the availability of translated information helped to improve medical treatment, resulting in fewer claims for insurance companies.


Tweet! Tweet! Did you know that ForeignExchange is on Twitter?
 
 

While there are many translation blogs, there are few translation-related podcasts. Filling this void are industry veterans and self-professed "language geeks" Eve Bodeux and Corinne McKay.

For the past couple of months, the duo is producing the Speaking of Translation podcast. If the quality of the just-released second episode is any indication, this project will be a huge success for Eve and Corinne. Head on over there and sign up!

Device companies usually conduct in-country reviews for one of two reasons:

1. Compliance requirements (validate translations)
2. Marketing requirements (obtain buy-in from local offices)

When reviews go well, they do indeed act as additional QA step and add substantial value. Technical accuracy is improved if the reviewer possesses the necessary product expertise. Global branding and messaging can be improved if all participants have access to a current terminology glossary and brand guidelines. And buy-in can be obtained if the reviewers have sufficient time to complete the task.

The problem is that in 90% of the cases that I see, these aren't the case. Much more common is:

• Lack of information sharing (e.g., no reference materials)
• Lack of understanding regarding brand
• Review schedules that are "black holes"
• Clarity of review changes is lacking (ever try reading a French doctor's handwriting?)
• Mechanics fail (file exchanges don't work, changes are entered inconsistently)
• Quality of review changes (linguistic, technical errors are introduced)

Beyond lots of frustration, it is not uncommon for product launches to get delayed, especially in multilingual documents where the last language is lowest common denominator.

So how do you fix in-country reviews? If you cannot scrap reviews altogether (as many device manufacturers have done), focus on these five elements:

1. Know why you are reviewing
2. Consider outsourcing the reviews
3. Communicate early, often, and widely
4. Document your processes and track review metrics
5. Put in place a continuous improvement process specifically for in-country reviews

For further information on in-country reviews, take a look at the following:

• Improve your in-country reviews - by having somebody else do them
• How to streamline in-country reviews

Like this post? Subscribe to Medical Translation Insight via email or RSS!
 
 

Do operating manuals and instructions for use (IFUs) really need to be translated? In Europe and in many other countries around the world, the short answer is: Yes.

Many countries, e.g., Japan, China, Taiwan, maintain legislation that require that IFUs be translated into the national language.

In Europe, putting the CE mark on your product means that you conform to the rules, including translations. And the rules are outlined in Annex 1 section 13 of the Medical Device Directive (MDD): the IFU should be a document "...describing for the user the safe use of a medical device for the purposes designated by the manufacturer".

So, how much information is necessary to use the equipment in a safe way? The MDD provides some more guidance by stating (for example) that:

• "(a)Each device must be accompanied by the information needed to use it safely..."


• "(d) Instructions for use must be included in the packaging for each device..."


• "(i) any special storage and/or handling conditions"


• "(j) any special operating instructions"


• "(k) any warnings and/or precautions to take"

The generally accepted interpretation of this is that all safety instructions must be in the national language of the user.

Is there a difference between professional and other users? Not in most countries. In transcribing the In-vitro Diagnostic Directive and MDD, some countries have excluded manufacturers of professional devices from the translation requirement. However, most countries treat all devices the same, regardless of whether they are for professional or other use.

Are there consequences if the IFU is not translated? In theory, yes. In practice, rarely.

Some countries have language on the books that provide for severe penalties if a manufacturer applies a CE mark without meeting the essential requirements. Here is an example from Sweden: "In accordance with the Medical Devices Act (1993:584) a fine and imprisonment of up to 1 year can be imposed for circumvention of the requirements and conditions for placing products on the market."

IFUs are considered part of the product and have to be produced using processes and quality levels identical to the "core" product. It's no wonder that writing and translating IFUs for an international audience is such an important and involved task!

Or so Steve Ballmer, the CEO of Microsoft, proclaimed back in March of 2001. Eight years later, we're still waiting.

Sure, XML has made some inroads. For instance, as of late 2005, FDA requires that all US-marketed package inserts be submitted in XML format. So far, the goal for most organizations was solely to implement systems and/or processes to achieve compliance with Structured Product Labeling. By and large, though, drug and device companies are still publishing (and thus translating) content in unstructured formats.

This is a shame, for both manufacturers and translation companies. Use of XML would offer the opportunity to reduce turnaround times through reduced analysis time and a generally simpler process flow (fewer steps, fewer technical issues). It would allow translators to focus on linguistic work without the distraction of desktop publishing tasks (focus on core competency).

But – and this is one of the reason why XML has not been more widely adopted – it would also require a retooling and relearning of teams, both on the client and on the supplier side. Some processes would need to be updated or reworked from scratch, i.e., how do authors and linguists work with out-of-sequence text elements?

So given all of these challenges the question is: Will it be an XML world?

As of January 1, 2009, Brazil has adopted important changes in orthography. All eight Portuguese-speaking countries around the globe signed the 1990 Orthographic Agreement, and Brazil is the first country to officially adopt it.

The Guia Michaelis da Reforma Ortográfica provides an excellent summary of the changes introduced by the new spelling. Here are some of the important changes:

The letters K, W, and Y are now permitted for use in certain words (neologisms or terms imported from other languages). These letters were previously unknown.

The umlaut symbol is not used on vowels anymore. For example, the old "cinqüenta" will now be written as "cinquenta".

The combinations éi and ói used to carry an accent - not anymore. "debilóide" is now "debiloide" and "epopéia" is now "epopeia".

Translators of Brazilian Portuguese are already using the new spelling rules. One important consideration is that existing translation memories need to be updated. This is sure to cause some confusion and translation delays as legacy materials get updated.

UPDATE: For a good overview of all the changes, take a look here.


ForeignExchange Translations provides specialized Portuguese translation services to pharmaceutical and medical device companies. Contact us to learn more.

This headline from a couple of years ago sure got my attention. Here is an excerpt from the article:

Steel's attorney, John J. Kerrigan Jr., said his client, a construction worker, became fluent in Spanish while living in Mexico a few years ago. Steel will serve as a translator for Bucks County Court and county housing and health agencies that come into contact with Spanish-speaking individuals, Kerrigan said. "His sentence has to be served in community service, and his community service will be translating Spanish into English," Kerrigan said.

If growing marijuana and working as a construction worker in Mexico qualifies somebody to work as a translator, then we're really in trouble...

Like this post? Subscribe to Medical Translation Blog via email or RSS!

Good translations are a vital part of all global clinical trials. To ensure the highest quality, it makes sense to employ the best tools to maximize their benefits, and no tool offers as quick a pay-back as a translation memory (TM) system.

Informed consent forms (ICFs) are a great example of how TM technology lends itself well to clinical translations. When a trial is planned for a particular geography, and there are a number of sites within the geography, the only changes in the ICFs are often only the doctors’ and clinics’ names and other minor details. This makes the translation of these documents fast and consistent. The TM can “pre-translate”, or populate, the target language document, only leaving the new phrases or fuzzy matches for translation.

Here are some ways clinical trial managers can reap maximum benefit from TM technology:

• Word source files are ideal for translation and TM use. Therefore, submitting Word files to your translator can cut down on prep, analysis and translation time, as well as reduce error risk. That having been said, very large (e.g., more than 50 pages), graphic-heavy Word files can bog down a TM tool. Consider breaking up large Word documents into smaller "chapter" files for submission to translation.
• Whenever possible, do not submit Adobe PDF files for translation. PDF files have their benefits. But due to their nature, the text cannot be parsed into RTF easily and therefore any benefit of TM is not available.
• Re-use content as much as possible. If you can use a previous document as basis for a new one, changing only what is necessary, you will be rewarded with faster, more consistent and cheaper translations. Resist the urge to re-word that paragraph or apply new styles for effect unless it is unavoidable or crucial to the document.
• Finally, prevent, or minimize, post-translation changes. Changes made in the field by local trial monitors or clinicians, after translations are delivered, will result in lower TM match rates the next time around, since the final documents won’t match what was entered into the TMs during translation. If revisions need to be made, be sure to send the final edited documents to your translator or agency for final analysis and TM updating.

Having said that, there are some clinical documents that tend not to benefits from TM usage (because they contain handwritten text or stored in incompatible formats), including clinical reports, inserted data in CRFs or patient-reported outcomes, and chemical manufacturing control documents that are often scanned.

If you are not yet deploying TMs on your international clinical trials, you are missing out on a big opportunity to save time and reduce cost!


ForeignExchange provides specialized medical translations for clinical trial applications, protocols, informed consents, patient diaries, INDs, patient recruitment, and health economic research - in Chinese and dozens of other languages. Contact us for more information about our clinical translation services.
 
 

The folks over at DeviceTalk pointed out that the long-awaited government proposal to issue separate regulations for the domestic medical device industry is likely to get delayed by up to 9 months. Currently, medical devices, according to the definition of the Indian Government, are considered drug and are put under the same regulations as the medicines. This makes it hard for device manufacturers to receive licenses and comply with rules.

There is some good news though: Apparently frustrated by the lack of progress, 150 general and diagnostic medical device manufacturers are forming AIMED (Association of Indian Medical Device), which will work as a single voice to press the interests of the industry. AIMED will push aggressively for regulatory reforms and will seek to help Indian device manufacturers catch up with competitors in China, Malaysia, Taiwan, and elsewhere.

Over the past couple of years, readability testing has become a hot topic in the EU.

The safe and correct use of medicines has always depended (amongst other things) on consumers reading the labeling and packaging accurately, and being able to understand and act on the information presented. Almost 20 years ago, the European Commission published A Guideline on the Readability of the Label and Package Leaflet of Medicinal Products for Human Use.

But it is only since the recent introduction of the Centralised Procedure that companies selling medicines in Europe had to account for this and conduct readability testing of patient leaflets ("PL"). If user testing is required (there are some exceptions, such as for products intended for hospital use or type II variations), it needs to be conducted in any one of the official EU languages.

The aim of readability testing is to demonstrate that patients can locate information in the PL, understand this information, and know how to act on it. Unfortunately, there are no absolute guidelines on how readability tests should be performed. Tests are generally conducted in two rounds with 10 subjects each. To pass, 16 out of 20 people (i.e., 80%) need to be able to answer each question correctly.

Not surprisingly, drug companies have encountered some challenges in getting used to these new requirements. In addition to having to schedule (and pay for) an additional step, many of the early readability tests have shown the PL to be lacking in clarity. Companies often had to rethink how information is compiled, written, and presented.

The good news is that companies have seen that readability testing greatly improves the quality of written and translated information. Each round of readability tests provides input for and improves future PLs. By developing style guides and terminology glossaries, companies can further improve readability scores, making medicines easier and safer to use.

Currently, as many as 1 in 9 patients avoid using medicines because the leaflet scares them off. Improved compliance rates will result in more patients actually receiving the treatment that was prescribed for them and adds millions of Euros to companies' income.

Implementing risk management into the medical device development process has become a regulatory necessity. As a result, more and more translation service providers are implementing risk management systems. Unfortunately, many companies struggle to not only fulfill the requirements of ISO 14971, but also to find ways to implement risk management into the overall operating framework in a meaningful way.

One area that causes particular challenges is the validation stage. A good way to overcome some of the problems is to keep in mind the "three Cs": Completeness, Correctness and Coverage.

Make sure that you are complete – did you really test everything that you needed to test?

Make sure you are correct – did you test what you’re supposed to test? There are many cases where people thought they were testing something and in reality they did something completely different.

Coverage means you cannot test 100%. Specifically in software that is very difficult. So you have to be able to test as well as possible by using certain testing strategy. (It is a good practice to at least estimate your test coverage for your test cases.)

One final tip: If you want to implement a risk management system, use ISO 14971 as a template. The ISO standard is basically a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP). If you use it as a template for your risk management system, you will just have to adapt it to other procedures within your company.

Before going dark, the Better Localization blog had a good post on How to make localization cheaper. Once you get beyond the title, the list of 19 concrete, actionable, and sensible recommendations should be a must-read for any buyer of medical translation services.

Not all of the recommendations are applicable in every situation. However, there is food for thought there. For instance, I like the suggestion to use machine translation. While we're a far way from replacing quality human translation services, the fact is that machine translation has a role to play. In the right environment, with the right up-front prep work, and with appropriate quality controls, machine translation can streamline the translation process.

Similarly, I agree with the emphasis on technology. When it comes to leveraging technology to improve translation processes, drug and device manufacturers are far behind software publishers and car manufacturers. Clinical research translations are often completed by site staff, without the use of any technology beyond a computer for typing. Similarly, few tech pubs organizations have invested in tools to improve authoring or tying writers' work with translation memories or integrate their content management system with translator's systems. And speaking of translation memories, many companies still do not understand (let alone manage) TMs.

These kinds of inefficiencies inevitably lead to higher costs. Will the current economic crisis force drug and device to become savvier about getting value for their translation spend?

Find out more about translation budgeting with the following posts:

• Creating a translation budget
• Developing an RFP? 7 tips for getting the responses you want
• Budgeting for translation - beyond the crystal ball

To receive an aggressive quote from ForeignExchange Translations, fill out our brief proposal request form.

Over the past couple of months, we have been pursuing an opportunity to provide clinical trial support for a top-10 pharmaceutical company. The process has been dragging on, in part, because of the client's difficulty in comparing prices from the different suppliers they're talking to. Some of the translation companies are quoting per word, others per page. Frustrated by several rounds of quoting, the client finally sent a number of sample files to the suppliers and asked all of them for the proposal amount to complete this work.

That got me thinking: It really is difficult to collect translation pricing from multiple vendors. Even something as simple as a "word" isn't that simple when you take into account

• net words vs. gross words
• source words vs. target words
• words requiring translation vs. those that don't (e.g., large tables of numbers that won't change)
• the impact that existing or yet-to-be-developed translation memories will have

And the same is true when expressing prices per page or per line or per hour or per anything else.

We all know that the tool that was used to count the words can have a huge impact on the results. We have lost some bids because our word counts were 40% higher than those from our competitors. We all looked at the same files, so how could our word counts have been so much higher?

And it's easy to say "price isn't everything - you need to take quality into account". Yes, of course, but because quality is even less easily defined and compared, it does usually come down to price. Plus, companies that buy large amounts of anything need to understand the pricing methodology that underlies the quotes that they're receiving. Worse than paying too much is being surprised by ever-changing prices.

In the absence of a standardized approach for pricing translations, it seems that the current situation kind of works. Well, it doesn't work for clients but it does work for efficient, innovative, streamlined translation suppliers who can figure out how to reduce the number of words being quoted.


Did you like this post? Subscribe to Medical Translation Insight via email or RSS.

Last week, I wrote about Zamzar. Several people have asked about other options for converting files online, so here is another option: youconvertit.

Like Zamzar, youconvertit provides web-based file conversion. You upload audio, video, image or document files and convert them from one format to another. All you need to do is select the file from your computer, select your target format, and the file will be uploaded and converted. Once the conversion is complete, you receive an email link to download the converted file. youconvertit stores files for 7 days, compared to Zamzar's 24 hour storage.

Unlike Zamzar, youconvertit does not have a file size limit (that may change once youconvertit emerges from Beta). Furthermore, you can convert measurement units like size, area, distance, time, velocity, mass, and it has an online media download manager for YouTube, Metacafe and Google videos. To download videos from YouTube, Metacafe and Google, just enter the URL of the file and then either convert it directly or download it to your computer.

Both Zamzar and youconvertit are tremendous productivity enhancers. What file conversion tools do you use?

The good folks over at the Übersetzungsfehler blog brought this gem to my attention. Maybe not quite a life-or-death situation but nonetheless a good illustration of what a difference two letters can make!

Like this post? Subscribe to Medical Translation Insight via email or RSS!

Idioms are notoriously difficult to translate. From a linguistic perspective, it's interesting to note how different some idioms are around the world - and how widespread the use of other idioms is.

While it makes sense to avoid idioms when writing texts for translation, idioms also provide an opportunity to have some fun.

Like this post? Subscribe to Medical Translation Blog via email or RSS!

As the European single market has evolved, product directives - and the CE Mark that indicates compliance with them - have been introduced to ease the movement of manufactured goods throughout the European Union.

The economies of these advanced nations are complex and collectively enormous. Directives now cover dozens of categories of products sold within them, ranging from construction materials to explosives, recreational vehicles, gas appliances and toys (the very first product to receive a CE mark was a teddy bear).

The "CE" in "CE Marking", by the way, appears to have no agreed upon literal meaning. It may be an abbreviation of French phrase Conformité Européene, " meaning "European Conformity," but there is no consensus on this. In any event, the actual CE Marking is the manufacturer's placement of the letters "CE" on those products intended for distribution within the European marketplace.

Both consumers and manufacturers are intended to benefit from the directives. They create product consistency and reliability and provide an assurance of safety for consumers. For manufacturers, they remove the trade barriers imposed by a hodgepodge of national regulatory systems and approaches-often at odds with one another-and replace them with a pan-European process whereby compliance with a single set of regulations allows access to the colossal, multinational European marketplace.

Three directives on medical devices have been promulgated. The first, dealing with implantable devices, like pacemakers, went into effect in 1993. The second "general" directive covers all medical products except implantable and in vitro diagnostic devices. It became effective in 1995. The most recent of the three directives is the In Vitro Diagnostic Directive (IVDD), approved in October 1998.

What is CE Marking?
By adding the CE Mark to a product its manufacturer declares that it complies with all applicable directives. Depending on the level of risk inherent in the product's use, its manufacturer will either be permitted to self-certify that the product complies with the directive, or will need to obtain that certification from an authorized third-party organization (referred to, for instance, in the IVDD as a Notified Body). These organizations are independent testing laboratories authorized by the European Union to evaluate products and issue reports and certificates attesting to product conformity with the relevant directives.

CE Marking and a Declaration of Conformity are required for most products sold in the EU, including all those covered by the IVDD. Most products can be self-assessed by the manufacturer to meet IVDD's "essential requirements." The ability to "self-declare" saves considerable time and expense, but while the CE Marking opens a product's access to the European marketplace, it is not intended as an indicator of approval, certification or quality, but simply declares the manufacturer's recognition of its responsibility for product safety and quality.

There are several key steps a manufacturer must take in the process of CE Marking:

• Preparing a detailed technical file that describes the product and its usage, effectiveness and safety considerations;
• Preparing and signing a Certificate of Conformity;
• Registering the product with the countries in which it will be sold;
• Identifying an authorized representative in Europe who will answer inquiries about the product and take necessary actions should any "unforeseen adverse incidents" occur from the use of the product;
• Adhering to the packaging and information requirements of the directive, including the translation of these materials into the national language or a language deemed acceptable for this purpose by the country in which the product is sold.

For a more detailed look at European directives and CE marking take a look here, here, and here.


ForeignExchange translates labeling, packaging, and regulatory filings for medical device manufacturers. Ask us why our clients rave about us!
 
 

How often have you had conversations with colleagues about how to write a particular passage or document? Sometimes it's hard to agree on the appropriate tone, style, and content. And that's only in one language.

Now add multiple languages, cultures, locales, and experiences into the mix and it's easy to see that what's a good translation for one person is a bad translation for somebody else.

The answer to sidestepping these kinds of unsolvable situations? Develop quality metrics. Quality metrics are:

• Objective quality measurements that are customized to your needs (timing, post-ship defects per 1,000 words, number of review changes per page)
• Jointly defined between client and vendor
• Tracked on every assignment
• Reviewed and reported on regular basis

The goal is to create an environment for continuous improvements ("we're doing well in this one area, so let's set the bar a little higher") and for identifying and fixing problems objectively ("we seem to have a problem here; let's look for underlying causes").

Given the importance of quality in medical translations, it is surprising and disappointing that in the course of this decade, very little progress has been made in the area of measurable translation quality. Nine years ago, I wrote about Six approaches to measuring translation quality. Looking at these six approaches now, the only change is that the Germany-only DIN 2345 standard has been replaced by EN 15038, a European standard that sets out the requirements for providing quality translation services.

Are there really no new models, no approaches, no new ideas?


Tweet! Tweet! Follow us at twitter.com/fxtrans.

While on a conference call with the organizing committee for the next Medical Localization Roundtable, I was wondering why there are not any additional medical translation-related conferences and seminars out there. It seems that the twice-annual Localization World events and sporadic events organized by the medical division of the ATA are all that's out there.

Could it really be that there is no demand for this?

Maybe. After all, medical translation is a small niche in a small industry. Few freelancers and translation companies specialize in the field. And in many drug and device companies, translation responsibilities are usually assigned to marketing, clinical, regulatory, or engineering staff on top of there core job.

Nonetheless, I would think that the thousands of medical translation practitioners would be looking for opportunities to learn, exchange ideas, develop new approaches, and socialize. What do you think? What medical-translation events do you currently attend or would you be interested in attending?

A recent discussion on nelocsig focused around the question of "is there one Unicode font that can be employed for Simplified & Traditional Chinese and Japanese software?".

Interestingly, there was no consensus on whether or not it is advisable to use a generic font like Arial Unicode MS. Even the Unicode Consortium is a bit wishy-washy on the subject: "Using a single font for all four locales allows the characters to be legible, but means that some characters may look odd."

Most experts agree that if you want your device to look like you have created your software for a specific country, you should use fonts for specific languages. Microsoft maintains a list of Vista fonts for each language. TranslationDirectory.com recently featured a good article on software localization for medical devices.

The revised Medical Device Directive considers software o be part of the device. As a result, manufacturers are increasingly grappling with the need to support non-English languages in the established markets of Europe and Japan and the fast-growth market of China.

Going through the library of great content at our sister site, www.MultilingualWebmaster.com, I came across this gem of an article on how complicated it is to correctly translate puns.

And it's no wonder: Since puns deliberately exploit confusion between similar-sounding words for humorous effect, it would seem that adapting them to the target culture is the appropriate course to take.

Some of the masters of adapting puns are the folks involved in writing and translating the Astérix and Obélix comic books and movies. Lingual Fun has a good story about managing text expansion and translating characters' names so that the absurdity and fun was maintained. For example, the dog of Obélix, Idéfix (idée fixe, obsessed with something or some idea) is translated to Dogmatix (from 'dogmatic', and the dog prefix is very funny).

So, if you're feeling adventurous, try translating the following:
   "Don't you know the King's English?"
   "No Sir, is he?"

And if you have a few more minutes, why don't you take a look at other articles that we've written?

• Translation of humor - impossible or "just" difficult?
• Teenage sex and the translation business
• The weekly adventures of Mox the translator

For a detailed proposal on your next clinical, regulatory, or marketing medical translation assignment, contact ForeignExchange Translations.
 
 

This morning, I received a promotional email entitled "Statistical Machine Translation--A New Concept from Miilos". Despite all of the overblown marketing-speak, I decided to check out www.miilos.com. The site contains only scant details - nothing regarding the technology used, language pairs supported or even pricing.

On YouTube I found the following demo:



It all looks interesting but does anybody have any details on this?


Are you on Twitter? Follow us at @fxtrans.

I was recently asked whether or not Europe had a regulation that was equivalent to 21 CFR Part 11, the FDA guideline that defines the criteria under which electronic records and electronic signatures are considered to be reliable.

Some research uncovered a good article with lots of relevant information. GPM Annex 11 also provides helpful information.


For daily updates, subscribe to Medical Translation Insight via email or RSS.
 

The 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is developing it's own medical device directive (AMDD).

Under the 18-article AMDD, device manufacturers will be required to register with each national regulatory authorities and to submit technical documents through a Common Submission Dossier Template. The AMDD is expected to include language requirements similar to Europe's MDD.

According to the report from ASEAN's working party, member countries will sign the finalized AMDD in July 2009 with national transpositions occurring in 2010.


ForeignExchange Translations provides specialized Korean, Thai, Chinese, and Japanese translation services to pharmaceutical and medical device companies. Contact us to learn more.

This is a recurring theme (problem?), and John White, the Localization Guy, has published a helpful list of resources on how technical publication managers can get their team members to be more mindful of translation issues.

How do you help technical writers be aware of translation issues?

Jost Zetzsche's Tool Kit newsletter brought a terrific tool to my attention:
Zamzar.

It is a tool that converts video, audio, images and documents from nearly
between dozens of file formats. Can't open a Word 2007 file? No problem.
Want to convert a Flash video for viewing on your iPhone? Done.

File conversions take but a few minutes. When the process is completed,
Zamzar emails you a link to the converted file. The files are kept on the
Zamzar servers for 24 hours. The free version limits file sizes to 100 MB
but there are no limits on the number of files converted. If you need to
convert larger files, paid subscriptions allow you to convert files up to 1
GB in size.

What translation service provider hasn't received an unsupported file format
from a potential client. The next time around, give Zamzar a try!

Our friends at Excel Translations run a print ad entitled "Translations don't have to be painful!". You can see a sample at the bottom of this PDF file.

The use of the word "painful" got me thinking: Is this how translations are being viewed? To get a feel for this, I turned to Google. Here are results for a handful of search terms:

• "painful translation" ... 3,180,000 results


• "good translation" ... 54,200,000 results


• "happy translation" ... 14,000,000 results


• "translation problem" ... 44,700,000 results

A mixed bag of results... It looks like Excel Translations might be on to something, and that we translation providers have some work left to do to improve our image.


Are you on Twitter? Follow us at @fxtrans.

Welocalize, the new owners of GlobalSight, recently announced that the new GlobalSight 7.1 is now available under the Apache 2.0 license.

But as our friends at Common Sense Advisory pointed out six months ago, the open source model doesn't generally do well in the translation/localization space. The reason companies are willing to pay SDL's outrages prices is that TRADOS is widely supported. TRADOS has become the IBM of translation management - you won't get fired for buying TRADOS.

And judging by the fact that a grand total of 15 people have joined the GlobalSight group on LinkedIn, it sure isn't looking like translation companies or clients are rushing out to install GlobalSight.


Are you on Twitter? Follow us at @fxtrans.