About

I work at the intersection of language quality and translation technology — reviewing translations, evaluating MT and LLM output, and building reference material that makes Norwegian localisation more consistent and more defensible.

My background is in software testing, which shapes how I approach language work: systematically, with an eye for where things break rather than where they pass. The goal is always to find the failure mode before it reaches the end user. This is a different orientation from a translator who reviews for correctness — it's closer to how a QA engineer thinks about a system.

I am a Norwegian native speaker. Most of my clients work in digital products — platforms, games, software — where Norwegian is one locale among many and the localisation process is engineered rather than artisanal. I work well with organisations that have strong internal infrastructure and need Norwegian language depth on demand, rather than those looking to fill a volume translation seat.

References are available on request, and my professional background is on LinkedIn.

Quality assurance

Translation review, error taxonomy, severity assessment, structured feedback for translator development and vendor management.

Technology evaluation

MT quality assessment, LLM output evaluation, post-editing quality review. Norwegian-specific failure mode identification.

Reference material

Style guides, glossaries, and terminology databases. Corpus-based. Written for translators and engineers who need clear decisions, not committee hedging.

Domain research

Primary source research into evolving terminology — especially gaming, tech, and platform content where standard reference material lags behind actual usage.

I work best with clients who have a clear problem but an open brief — where the question is real and the methodology needs to be figured out rather than applied from a template. Standard QA work is straightforward; the more interesting engagements involve novel evaluation questions, unfamiliar domains, or workflows that are being built for the first time.

I adapt to existing tools and processes. If you use a specific CAT platform, QA tool, or annotation environment, I work within it. If the workflow is still being designed, I can contribute to that conversation — not as a project manager, but as someone who has seen where quality processes break down and where they hold.

Evaluation outputs are documented in a way that can be handed upward. A quality report that requires me to be in the room to explain it has not done its job.

Most engagements start with a short call or email exchange to establish fit. There's no intake form to fill out before that conversation.

Contact me