An agreed review framework
We define whether the check is bilingual or target-only, whether it covers all content or a sample, and how findings are classified. Source accuracy, terminology, omissions, grammar and style can all be included.
Automation plus human judgment
Automated checks can flag inconsistent terminology, missing numbers, punctuation and placeholder issues. Human review evaluates meaning and context. A tool report alone is not a complete linguistic assessment.
Review in the final context
A PDF, website or test interface can reveal truncation, line breaks or ambiguous labels that were not visible in a text file. Access requirements and supported file formats are agreed before work starts.
Findings you can act on
Deliverables can include an issue log with locations, proposed corrections and severity criteria. Correction implementation and re-checking are scoped separately if required. Linguistic QA is not legal, clinical or regulatory validation.