Adapting content to make it more meaningful, appropriate, and effective
Like many of you, I have frequently had to explain what localization is, usually in the context of what I do for a living. I find localization easy to explain, often using the example of getting a mobile phone adapted for other countries. Because most people own one, they can imagine why adaptation makes sense. For good measure, I add that it is not only the language, but often local laws, different technical specifications, and customs that need to be considered.
As I get fired up and start explaining the difference between localization and internationalization, eyes quickly glaze over because, like in all languages, words are not just words; they represent concepts that, in turn, often rely on the comprehension of other concepts for a clear understanding. At this point, the value of a guide like The Language of Localization becomes apparent. Like any other profession, we have developed a jargon of our own. We took common words that have multiple meanings and defined them in the context of localization, or if a word did not exist, we invented one.
A clearinghouse for localization terminology
This sounds a lot easier than it is because there is no central authority to do that work, no arbiter to clarify meaning. Instead, it was and continues to be, a crowd-sourced exercise with no central repository to use for reference.
Enter Kit Brown-Hoekstra, Scott Abel, Richard Hamilton, and their merry band of subject matter experts. For the benefit of localization professionals, global marketers, and technical communicators, they compiled a “must-know” list of terms that define the common language of our industry.
I appreciate how thoroughly they tackled the task. Not only are the terms defined clearly and their importance explained, but in the essay, they explain why business professionals need to have this information.
When localization goes wrong
Which brings to mind a case when poor communication and a lack of clearly defined terms cost a pretty penny. In 1999, NASA lost a US $125 million Mars orbiter because NASA was using metric measurements, while Lockheed Martin, the contractor, relied on English Imperial units.
We can do much better
Having clarity in the way we communicate about the many tasks and processes that make up life in localization benefits every aspect of our work. It helps us achieve good quality, speeds up time-to-market, and improves the cost-effectiveness of our collaboration. Everyone benefits, from the translator to the project managers to, maybe most important of all, the end users.
We all owe thanks to the people behind this project for helping to develop a shared language for a still young industry. Along with other standards, it is a critical tool in meeting the challenges of an ever faster-paced, globalized world.
As new terms appear and existing ones change their meaning, I hope that the authors will issue new editions of this excellent guide.
Well done, and thank you on behalf of the localization community.
Ulrich Henes Madison, Wisconsin, USA