Edward Diener wrote:
In theory, it's more correct to translate from X to Y, but in practice, it's hard to find people who are simultaneously fluent enough in X software terminology and Y software terminology to be able to produce a high quality translation.
But it is easier to find someone who is fluent enough in X and E and Y to do so ?
No, it's easier to find someone fluent enough in X and E, and someone else fluent enough in E and Y.
And in any event, the fact that the source texts are in E shouldn't preclude your translating from X to Y. You just take the translation text file for X which is basically a list of (E phrase, X phrase) pairs, and translate the X phrases to Y phrases. This requires no E knowledge on your part.
If only such a simplistic means of translating between 2 languages actually existed. I doubt it, even in the limited use of programming phrases. I know in my own area of expertise, literature, it does not exist but I will grant that the needs of a computer program may be much less linguistic precision. But even a computer program still deals in end-users who want to see text that makes sense to them in their own language rather than pig-latin type gobbledygook which they will laugh at. We are talking about computer users who will pay for a computer program in their own language and commercial companies who can not deliver poor quality in that regard and hope to be successful.
I have no idea what you mean, or how it relates to my statement above.