Take your business to the next level!

Tap into 20 years of experience in the language industry -- Udo Leinhäuser Consulting

International SEO | Corporate Strategy | Online Marketing 

The GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) of the European Union slated to be implemented at the end of May means a lot of headaches for all kinds of companies, including providers of translation technology, and especially those with any kind of cloud-based service as part of their offering. For translators, on the other hand, it might be very beneficial. At least so far.

Why? Because technology providers have to provide clarifications about what is happening with what data and, specifically in the case of generic machine translation providers, how they have changed the handling of data.

I have often written about the differences in Google's and Microsoft's machine translation services through their respective APIs. Google has always claimed that they keep the data submitted though the API confidential but not data gleaned otherwise. (See right here. Yes, I know some have pointed out that this can't be trusted since this is "only an FAQ," but I have a very difficult time imagining that Google would make itself legally vulnerable by trying that assertion in court.) Microsoft, on the other hand, followed a different path. Only consumers of very large amounts of machine translated data -- 250 million characters per month with an associated cost of more than $2000 -- were able to choose to not have their data used by Microsoft.

Now Microsoft has changed its policy and everything processed through its API is subject to its "no-trace" policy, which says:

"Customer data submitted for translation through the Microsoft Translator Text API and the text translation features in Microsoft Office products are not written to persistent storage. There will be no record of the submitted text, or portion thereof, in any Microsoft data center. The text will not be used for training purposes either."

This is great (!) because it means that a) if you use Microsoft Bing Translator in a translation environment tool via its API, you can assure your client that none of the data is being reused; b) the same is true if you or your company uses the Microsoft Translator Hub, which allows the generation of customized machine translation engines; and (c) I don't have to bug Chris Wendt, the program management team lead for MT at Microsoft, that this exact thing should happen.

Shortly after that announcement was widely discussed and celebrated, the German machine translation developer DeepL, which had launched a machine translation in seven European languages with a quality that took everyone by surprise last August (and to which its competitors have since relatively successfully played catch-up), has now launched its generally available API. This means that it can now be used within a translation environment tool (in the announcement, DeepL stresses Trados but the connector is already available for several other tools as well).

Just as DeepL's management team had promised (see issue 278 of the Tool Box Journal), the "API'ed" data is not being used, unlike the data submitted through the free web interface. It's very interesting to see how DeepL connects this very clearly with the European regulations.

The pricing of the API access contains a little surprise, though. While it's seemingly priced very similarly to Google's API (€20 vs. US$20 per 1 million characters), the devil is in the details here because that charge is covered by a monthly subscription fee of €20, whereas Google's price is purely a usage fee with no monthly subscription fee. (The same is true for Microsoft, only Microsoft does not charge for the first 2 million characters per month and after that only US$10 per 1 million characters.)

For those of us who translate 1 million or more characters a month (very few freelance translators can boast those kinds of numbers, whereas LSPs easily can), this should not be a problem. For everyone else it means that you are going to pay significantly more per character and should probably re-evaluate whether DeepL is indeed so much better than its competitors in your subject matter and language combination (or, of course, whether it's available at all in your languages), and if so, whether this is a good investment. (My two cents: it likely is, if only as an additional source from which you can use bits and pieces of data.)

(And, ahem, for the time being, it's also still possible to get the DeepL data for free through the GT4T tool that I recently wrote about (see issue 280 of the Tool Box Journal). I asked its developer why that's still possible, and here is what he said: "I haven't received any complaint yet. I tried to buy the API right from the 1^st day it was out. At first [DeepL] said they were only dealing with companies that would need large quantities of data and asked me to wait for a version that opens to general public. And when the DeepL Pro came out, I immediately tried again but only to find that it only accepts EU bank cards. I don't know what to do except wait." Well, waiting is fine by me.)

So much about that. But then there was this other really interesting machine translation "event" last week.... (There was also an actual event -- the conference of the Association of Machine Translation in the Americas in Boston -- but these guys are not particularly social media happy so there was very little information that made it to the outside world from there...)

Microsoft storyteller (her own words!) Allison Linn wrote a Microsoft blog post entitled "Microsoft reaches a historic milestone, using AI to match human performance in translating news from Chinese to English."

I know... Cue the eye rolls.

And, yes, there were also some actual facts buried in the article and some links leading to more detailed information. But who ever reads that far? Certainly not the dozens and dozens of journalists (and I'm not over-exaggerating those numbers) who took it upon themselves to write great stories about our arrival in the promised land of ubiquitous translation out of the can! Same old, same old... .

I (and a good number of others) was not too thrilled about this story-telling approach and blew off some steam on Twitter. And something quite remarkable happened in the discussion that developed from there (you can see at least part of the thread when you click on the link above). The afore-mentioned Chris Wendt from Microsoft became part of the discussion. And while that really should not be meaningful -- after all, it's just a person responding to other people -- given the all-too-corporate cultures we're dealing with, it is in fact remarkable. Remember when many of us tried to lobby Google to honor translators with a doodle for International Translation Day? Not only did they not use one, but we didn't hear a peep from them.

Now, this doesn't mean we have to agree with everything someone like Chris says (and in fact, I didn't), but it's good to know we're being listened to and engaged with.

And, by the way, here is a smart response to the Microsoft blog post by Tommi Nieminen.

SDL Trados free webinars

Every month, SDL hosts a calendar of webinars to help translators navigate the profession and learn about our CAT tool -- SDL Trados Studio.

Join a free webinar this month on topics such as a beginners guide to SDL Trados Studio 2017 and how a CAT tool can help you.

Visit our full calendar and register today 

I had a talk with John Di Rico of Wordfast earlier this week about developments on that front - or really, I should say fronts because Wordfast is a multi-tool company. There is the MS Word-based Wordfast Classic, the web-based Wordfast Anywhere, the desktop-based standalone tool Wordfast Pro, and Wordfast Server, the tool to real-time distribute self-hosted TM and glossary data to various translators.

I've always had a relatively good idea why Wordfast Classic and Wordfast Pro co-existed -- many Classic users who primarily worked in Word files and liked the Word-based interface simply weren't willing to switch to the new tabular interface of Wordfast Pro. But I never really understood the existence of Wordfast Anywhere, which is very similar to Wordfast Classic only that it's all web-based, until John mentioned that it really was sort of a contingency plan for Wordfast Classic. Any developer who relies on a third-party tool for their own technology knows the risk associated with that. And Wordfast experienced exactly that when the support for Visual Basic -- on which it relies -- was withdrawn from Word 2008 for Mac, reinstated in Word 2011 for Mac, and then again put barely on life support in Word 2016 for Mac (the Windows-based Word versions had full Visual Basic support throughout).

Aside from its contingency status, though, Wordfast Anywhere has developed a life of its own, not only as a freely available translation environment tool, but also as a hub of sorts for the other systems. It's possible to connect to Wordfast Anywhere translation memories and glossaries through Wordfast Classic and Pro and build a network of translators. As John pointed, this can easily be used by a start-up translation agency to build a real-time shared network for translators without having to pay for it (aside from the individual licenses of Wordfast).

Of course, this is also possible through tools like OmegaT, MateCat, and Smartcat, and the administration of multiple users in Wordfast Anywhere is not particularly user-friendly. Still, it's a possibility if you happen to work with translators who all use Wordfast, anyway -- or, maybe more realistically, if a group of translators with Wordfast wants to build up their own workgroup.

In the context of that and the upcoming GDPR (see under "GDPR, Microsoft, DeepL, and All That Hype"), I asked where the data for Wordfast Anywhere is located, and I received this explanation from CEO Yves Champollion:

"I am aware that some powers (US, EU, etc.) insist on letting 'clients' know the location of data (funny law, as data centers virtualize data and spread it across continents). I understand it's essential when you sell a service, or make money on top of a free one, however that is not our case. We have no ads, no schemes, no data monetization.

"Eurocrats would insist that the billing entity is taken as 'location,' when Pentagon brass will insist that actual data location matters.

"At this time, all we can say is 1. Our data is not virtualized in a 'data center'; 2. It is US-based but we won't say more; 3. We (Wordfast LLC) run our own servers and hard disks in the US - we don't let others run our servers (like Amazon, GoDaddy, etc.).

"Wf Anywhere is serving the freelance community. It is not meant for corporate use (although employed individuals can use Wf Anywhere if they wish).

"We are closely monitoring the legal scene when it comes to providing web services. The EU, the US, etc., all have evolving policies that are being revised as we write. We aim at being as fully compliant with the spirit of the law as can be."

This all sounds fine, but as far as I understand this should make it impossible for European providers to use the service once the European legislation goes into effect at the end of May of this year.

Another interesting thing about Wordfast Anywhere is the "user-sourced" translation of its user interface that is happening now. French and Spanish are already finished, and other languages have been started or are waiting to be started. If you're interested in joining, click on the little Translation icon in Wordfast Anywhere's Help ribbon. For each of the 9300 words per language that needs to be translated, you can earn one credit as a translator (and half a credit as a reviewer). 4000 credits gets you to a Wordfast Studio license or a free registration for a Wordfast User conference. (And I don't want to be a nay-sayer, but this essentially means you can have only one colleague working on the translation of one language or do the editing of one language all on your own....)

(Incidentally, John also mentioned that if you register for the Wordfast Forward 2018 conference in Cascais, Portugal, and mention in an email to him that you learned about it through the Tool Box Journal (which you just have), he'll give you a €25 discount on the registration fee.)

Wordfast Pro has come out with a new edition (5.4) as well that contains an interesting feature called "Adaptive Transcheck." This feature allows you to use the real-time or post-translation QA and add to lists of permissive words or terms on the fly. This would be helpful if you kept on being shown false positives on terms because of a morphologically variant of an otherwise correct term. In that case you could enter that term by simply clicking it into an allowed list, and any other instance of that false positive would then be automatically corrected.

This also works for an independent HTML report generated for project managers or high-level reviewers, though unfortunately the data for the corrected false positives cannot (yet) be transferred back to the project in Wordfast Pro. 

Process management and control, high cost transparency, networked teamwork, higher quality -- a business solution.

Corporate Language Management powered by STAR CLM

Watch the short video for more information on STAR CLM functionality and usage. 

www.star-group.net 

Aside from interpreter consoles and FM and infrared receivers, there really isn't much hardware designed specifically for providing simultaneous or consecutive interpretation. So, when I came across a set of wireless earbuds with the ability to amplify speech and reduce background noise, I paid attention. I thought, "Hmm...if these really work, they could be useful in several scenarios where interpreters struggle to hear." So, for tech review number two of 2018, I take a look at the Nuheara IQbuds.

The IQbuds are lightweight, wireless earbuds that you pair with your smartphone to listen to music, take calls, and listen to any other audio that comes from your smartphone. Big deal, right? The consumer electronics market is awash with hundreds of wireless headphones and earbuds to choose from. But something separates the IQbuds from the rest of the pack -- they are equipped with powerful microphones that allow you to hear the world around you when you have them on. They also provide speech amplification. This feature immediately caught my attention because I can't begin to count the number of times I have been called upon to perform consecutive interpretation in noisy environments where it was difficult to hear the speakers. Using these earbuds to amplify what someone is saying while tuning out the other distracting noise sounded fantastic.

I have spent the last month testing out a set of IQbuds in different scenarios that will be familiar to many interpreters to see how well they perform. As I have done with other hardware, I've divided my review into four sections: 1) How Do They Work? 2) Product Design, Fit and Finish, 3) User Experience, and 4) Software Performance.

How Do They Work?

The IQbuds fit snugly into your ears and pair with your smartphone or tablet via Bluetooth. No cords or wires to connect. Earbud configuration and sound settings are controlled using an app installed on your smartphone. You can customize several "tap touch" settings that allow you to play or pause music, turn volume up or down, answer calls, or choose from a list of preset audio profiles for different listening environments (e.g. street, plane, restaurant, etc.) by touching one of the earbuds with your finger. Each audio profile can be further customized using Nuheara's SINC™ technology to balance the frequency response of the built-in microphones to focus more on speech or ambient sound. This is the speech amplification feature that initially caught my attention.

The app also allows you to adjust the bass and treble settings of the ambient sound as if you were adjusting a car or home stereo. Finally, the app allows the user to set up a personal profile and adjust the volume, bass, and treble of each earbud independently. Finally, you can also "turn the world off" completely so all you hear is the audio coming from your smartphone.

The earbuds come with a storage case that also functions as a charger. Battery life is more than adequate for almost all the different use cases I tested -- exercising, commuting to work on a bicycle, taking voice or video calls. One exception is long-haul flights. I used the earbuds on a coast-to-coast flight from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco. They ran out of power about half an hour before landing in San Francisco, just short of five hours. But, whenever you store the earbuds in their case, they recharge quickly. So, with as little as 15 minutes in the case, the earbuds will sufficiently charge for a little more than an hour of use.    

Product Design & Fit and Finish

The IQbuds are well designed. They fit snugly in my ears after I found the right sized ear tips from the eight different pairs that come with the earbuds. A good fit is important since each earbud has a speaker and two microphones in very close proximity, which could lead to feedback if not adequately isolated from each other. Once in your ear, the earbuds stay put and are comfortable. I had no ear fatigue or pain even after several hours of use. Everything from the earbuds to the app and storage case is well designed and made of top-quality materials. It's evident that the Nuheara team put a lot of time and effort into the earbud design and thought carefully about the user experience.

The storage and charging case is small and durable enough to carry in my front pants pocket, backpack, or jacket pocket without being bulky. The IQbuds app is simple and intuitive to use. It walks you through the setup and Bluetooth pairing process step by step. The app takes up just over 30 MB on your smartphone.

User Experience

Despite all my initial excitement about using these earbuds to amplify speech for consecutive interpreting, the IQbuds' speech amplification feature didn't make enough of a difference to warrant their use professionally. I tested them in two environments. First, during an outdoor walking tour with a guide stopping at various places to talk to a group of about eight people. Second, in an indoor setting where the speaker was about 15 to 20 feet away from me and who sometimes did not face me when speaking. For both scenarios I used the "Restaurant" setting, which amplifies speech and reduces background noise.

In the first scenario, there was an unanticipated annoyance -- wind. The day of this test, there was a stiff breeze blowing for some of the tour. As a result, the microphones picked up quite a bit of wind noise, which made them unusable for interpreting. When the wind died down, I could hear the speaker with them in, but the amplification didn't really make the experience any different from not using the earbuds and listening to the speaker as intently as I normally would when taking notes.

In the second scenario, I was hoping for a noticeable amplification of the speech coming from the speaker seated far away from me. That didn't happen. Again, the audio level with the earbuds in was comparable to listening to the speaker without them. The volume also dropped when the speaker turned away from me or moved farther away.

In retrospect, this makes sense. The microphones are IN the earbuds, which are IN my ears, so they will pick up the sound from that position, just like my ears do.

In all fairness, although the IQbuds didn't perform as I had hoped in professional interpreting settings, they were never designed to in the first place. They DO perform as promised in the different scenarios they were originally designed for, and frankly, are pretty amazing.

I found them very useful for airline travel. You can keep them in your ears in the airport to listen to music or take calls and still hear the boarding announcements using the "Street" setting. Once on the plane, you can set the earbuds to "Plane" mode and they work like a set of noise-cancelling headphones, but you can still hear the flight attendant talking to you while the earbuds filter out all the annoying background noise (Club soda with a slice of lime, please!). And, unlike when wearing bulky noise-cancelling headphones, you can sleep comfortably with the IQbuds in your ears (well, at least as comfortably as you can sleep on a plane in coach). They also work well for commuting and exercising.

Software Performance

The IQbuds work with newer iOS devices (iOS 9 and higher) and most Android devices (Android 5 Lollipop and higher). Although the earbuds do work with some Android tablets, they are not designed to do so.

During my month-long test with an iPhone 6, the earbuds never crashed once. Similarly, the app never froze. The Bluetooth connection was sometimes briefly interrupted when I rode my bicycle with my smartphone in my right pants pocket. The Bluetooth antenna is actually located in the left earbud, so the closer you can have your device to your left ear, the better.

Summing It All Up

I had initially thought the IQbuds could be a real boon to interpreters working in environments where they have to strain their hearing to do their job, like in courtrooms or in factories. Unfortunately, the speech amplification is not strong enough to recommend their use for consecutive interpretation in these environments.

That said, this technology is truly amazing and works well for what it was originally designed. Great for use when exercising, commuting to work, or traveling on planes but not appropriate for professional use...yet.

Do you have a question about a specific technology? Or would you like to learn more about a specific interpreting platform, interpreter console or supporting technology? Send us an email at [email protected] 

Do you work with Spanish? Then mark your calendar now and join your colleagues in Mexico City for Lenguas 2019 -- a perfect mix of keynote speakers, plenary and panel sessions, networking, and two full days of high-quality continuing professional education for translators and interpreters.

More information at lenguas.org.

I have not mentioned XTM Cloud for quite a while. XTM Cloud was one of the very earliest cloud-based and browser-only translation environment tools (only Lingotek and Google Translator Toolkit preceded it). It's a tool driven by the interest in XML and open standards of its co-founder and CTO Andrzej Zydroń. That interest is still unchanged, but one recent change that we should all be aware of is its new marketing focus.

Like many of its competitors, the responsible parties at XTM had all the different sectors of the translation world in their crosshairs: translators, translation agencies, and translation buyers. Also, like many of its competitors, they had visions of not just supplying technology but using that technology as the hub to bring all the different players and parties together. The XTM Exchange was supposed to become a place where users of the tool could register, and translation buyers or agencies could find providers or post jobs. And here is one more thing that XTM has in common with most of its competitors: That idea did not work out. It seems so logical (and it really does!), like a guarantee for success -- but it really isn't. The reason? Overall, because the world of translation is way too diverse to make it possible for one technology to play that kind of role. Remember when Trados's and later SDL's translationzone.com was founded under a very similar premise? Even they could not make the idea of a marketplace work. Alas, a company like XTM (the company's name is actually XTM-INTL) has even less chance for success because of its uneven distribution among the different user groups. (Freelance) translators have yet to warm up to a browser-based work environment, so only a very small handful decided to invest into XTM Cloud. Agencies were more interested, but the group that turned out to be the key was translation buyers.

And that really explains the change in XTM's appearance these days: While existing and potentially new agency customers are being taken care of, they are no longer the primary targets on the marketing radar. The companies sought out by XTM are primarily "mature" translation buyers -- companies that have the expertise, people-power, and desire to control their translation processes. This at least is according to John Weisgerber, XTM's Senior Solutions Architect and swim/film star (oh, no, wait, the latter would have been "Johnny Weissmüller"!).

The architecture of XTM Cloud lends itself to this top-driven approach. One of its distinguishing features is the "LSP Sub-contracting" function where the files are located on the translation buyer's premises and the various levels of agencies (multi-language vendors, single-language vendors) and the translators (and reviewers, etc.) are all working on individual "instances," allowing them to work on the client's files without the client actually seeing who they are (which in the case of the ever-present subcontracting is often the desired scenario from a translation agency's perspective).

The XTM Cloud owner -- typically the buyer -- holds a number of concurrent licenses that relate to every user in the process, from the admin to the project manager to the translators and reviewer. And that really is where, according to John, the agencies' agency (ha!) in XTM Cloud licenses comes into play: Since any number of licenses can be mixed from various owners, agencies who own a number of licenses or are willing to sponsor some licenses and throw those into the mix might be preferred by the client.

If you look at the release notes from the last couple of years, you will see that much effort has been spent on corporate concerns such as a widget-based reporting portal, lots of connectors to content management systems, and a replacement of the previous SOAP with REST API. (Huh? More info.)

John's comment regarding the CMS connectors was interesting: For their clients, a connector to (the high-powered) Adobe Experience Manager is much more relevant than one to WordPress. In the same vein, previous partnerships such as the one with proxy-based translation tool Easyling are also not as important anymore because they are not relevant to corporate buyers. And neither are any business management-related features within XTM Cloud -- that's something their clients have more mature and specialized systems for, anyway. Connecting to those is important, and that's where the above-mentioned APIs come into play.

There are some newish, directly translation-related features, and while they're great in principle, I'm not sure how useful they end up being. A couple of years ago I had already written about an HTML WYSIWYG (what-you-see-is-what-you-get) interface that XTM Cloud offers so HTML-based files can be translated right inside a preview of sorts. The same is now available for InDesign files and DITA files (the latter in the right batch order, according to the associated DITAMAP file). Sounds great, but is still very impractical for the translator since the processing is very slow (in fact, very large InDesign can't be processed at all) and most of the features translators need during the translation process to access content and provide quality assurance are not available in that view. So, it might be helpful for reviewers or editors -- but to be really honest, I doubt even that would be so helpful. (I'm sure it looks great in a product demo to a corporate client, though!)

Here's why I thought the story of the latest developments at XTM are interesting: To me they are yet another indication of the increasingly fractured world in which we live. (I mean the world of translation, not the painful division of "the other" world.) And as far as the world of translation goes, I welcome this, and I think we all should because it means there's very little that can be said about the "translation industry" that is true for all of us. On the flip side, this means there are lots of slots and niches for every one of us.

The best way to translate PDF

TransPDF converts your PDFs into high-quality XLIFF, ready for translation using your own tools. It then injects your translated XLIFF back into the original PDF to give you a finished PDF. TransPDF users also get free use of Infix PDF Editor to make any last minute changes to translated PDFs.

PDF translation is simpler, quicker and more accurate with TransPDF.
Get your free TransPDF account now and try it for yourself.  

As I said, it's been a long time since the last Tool Box Journal, so there's a lot to cover. Here are some tidbits that otherwise might have warranted a longer treatment:

• Mats Linder, the author of the Trados Studio Manual, wrote a great blog post about post-editing machine translation (PEMT) in which he positions traditional post-editing in relation to other and possibly more productive ways of using machine translation. Highly recommended reading.
• SDL and Nuance (the powerhouse behind all kinds of voice and data processing) announced "a strategic partnership to jointly develop Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered solutions that enable customers to convert, translate and gain insight from large volumes of voice and video content." You probably need to have some kind of intelligence to understand those mouthfuls, but it sounded interesting enough to check in with SDL about this. Here is what newly (re-)hired Kirti Vashee from SDL had to say about this: "This is an integration and service offering that is targeted at the enterprise and government and will not be something that makes sense for an individual translator given the scale and resources needed to deploy it. (...) This is focused on high volume ediscovery and information governance applications for large enterprise, law firms and government agencies."
• You think there's no way to make it to the very big leagues with translation or even machine translation? Think again. I (via the Canadian press) just stumbled on the very unsavory story of Robert Mercer, a leading figure in rules-based machine translation who was instrumental in making the bilingual corpus of the Canadian parliament ("Hansards") a milestone for the development of machine translation. That led him to investment banking and finally to becoming a financier for reactionary causes around the world, including Cambridge Analytica -- yes, the one of recent Facebook fame. It's all very sordid and, no, I'm absolutely not trying to imply that the machine translation community as a whole is reflected in this.
• Here is another, somewhat depressing story about machine translation. Slator reported awhile back on a study that looked at how machine translation is evaluated by end users. The study found that "users responded strongly to disfluent translations, but were, surprisingly, much less concerned with adequacy." I'm not sure I agree with the "surprisingly" in that statement because that is exactly what many of us would have suspected (and somewhat feared). Especially in the age of neural machine translation where the machine often errs on the side of fluency this is a dangerous perception, and something we need to keep in the back of our heads when we talk about the risks of (raw) machine translation.
• langtech.wiki. Need I say more? I probably do because many of you have still not visited or registered. It's the one place where you'll want to go and talk about what's missing, what could be improved, and what you envision for translation and interpreting technology. There's amazingly interesting -- and very high-level -- stuff discussed there. For instance, see this entry right here:

"Nowadays machine translation suggestions are dynamically generated and presented to translators and post-editors. They are even adapted depending on input by the translator/post-editor. It seems that these new methods yield better output from MT and they also seem to get the translator more "involved" in the post-editing process. Do these additional resources pose additional cognitive load on the translator/post-editor? Particularly when working in longer segments where the suggestions change frequently and rapidly?"

Make sure you join this and many other great topics by going to langtech.wiki.

• AceProof is the latest tool from AIT, the makers of Translation Office 3000, Projetex, and a host of other translator-centric tools. It's an easy-to-use, no-nonsense tool to help you with the QA of your translated files. Yes, there are a number of other tools that do similar things, and, yes, a few of those functions can be found within some translation environment tools, but what really counts is that you actually use a tool or set of features like this. (And I'm afraid too many of us don't -- and embarrassingly enough, myself included, when I hit the typical rush of finishing up a project right before the deadline...)
• And here is something completely unrelated to translation technology: I recently published an article about the amazing diversity in English Bible translation. Originally this was planned to be a whole book but, alas, due to events outside my control it ended up being only an article. But here's the thing: No matter your religious leanings, you are lovers of translation, and therefore I'm pretty sure you'll enjoy the article. If you love beautifully designed and illustrated articles, you might very well like it as well (though admittedly the design was not done by me). This is my second article about Bible translation in the same magazine. The last had a more global view -- you can find that in Translation Matters.

WithGT4T, the ultimate online reference tool, you can use Google Translate, DeepL and many others without ever having to leave your work environment.

GT4T works in all programs. Get ready to be amazed.

Learn more and download at gt4t.net.

If you would like to promote this journal by placing a link on your website, I will in turn mention your website in a future edition of the Tool Box Journal. Just paste the code you find here into the HTML code of your webpage, and the little icon that is displayed on that page with a link to my website will be displayed.

If you are subscribed to this journal with more than one email address, it would be great if you could unsubscribe redundant addresses through the links Constant Contact offers below.

Should you be interested in reprinting one of the articles in this journal for promotional purposes, please contact me for information about pricing.