Topic: Translate 1917 Neurology Journal Article from German to English for BTC [done] (Read 669 times)
February 25, 2013, 09:22:37 AM
Task completed by user aesop.
February 24, 2013, 11:55:28 AM
AS a native german speaker I say this is very HEAVY.
I do translation work for you - 30 Bitcoins.
I do translation work for you - 30 Bitcoins.
February 22, 2013, 01:26:06 PM
Lets see if anyone else chimes in and what happens with btc by sunday. Most likely I am ok with 2 btc despite the warnings of greyhawk.
Haha, I'm just talking as a former professional translator.
I know there are lots of people who would offer the service for less. Usually the lack of experience and/or familiarity with the subject matter shows however, something one would like to avoid with scientific material. February 22, 2013, 11:15:43 AM
Ah we have a newbie who offered 1.5 btc.
February 21, 2013, 11:20:09 PM
Lets see if anyone else chimes in and what happens with btc by sunday. Most likely I am ok with 2 btc despite the warnings of greyhawk.
February 21, 2013, 12:40:29 PM
Quickly looked over it.
That's pretty heavy stuff.
I might do it if you spend at least 2 BTC. But not before Sunday and only if I'm bored.
That's pretty heavy stuff.
I might do it if you spend at least 2 BTC. But not before Sunday and only if I'm bored.
February 21, 2013, 12:34:40 PM
Ah, I have never translated anything. Thats a little steep for my purposes.
February 21, 2013, 10:44:28 AM
9 pages old style German in scientific jargon? No translator worth his pay would touch this for less than 5 BTC.
February 21, 2013, 06:24:02 AM
Uber regeneration peripherischer nerven.
W. Spielmeyer.
Zeitschrift für die gesamte Neurologie und Psychiatrie
December 1917, Volume 36, Issue 1, pp 421-430
This link may work for you.
My goal is to find out what he said about neurons being individual cells rather than one continuous network, as well as what was reasoned about neuroregeneration and neuroplasticity of the central nervous system (eg spinal cord). It is commonly claimed that neuroscientists did not believe this possible until the 1970s but all the references to this seem to be third hand from non-peer reviewed books or news media while I have found multiple old sources that make claims more consistent with what is thought today. One reference i found was to this article (although for some reason the page numbers in the citation do not match even though everything else does).
This is interesting since studies on this in the 1980s are what resulted in the formation of PETA. They were defended as groundbreaking and overturning the consensus thought on the matter, but I have not been able to find or get access to these groundbreaking studies. Further, later publications by the scientist charged with animal abuse over it seem kind of crappy to me. Rewriting history to sway public opinion about animal research? I don't know, I am more interested in how thought on the matter has progressed during the last century to give context to the current understanding of neuroplasticity.
Anyone interested? I'm not sure how long it would take but lets say an initial offer of .5 btc.
W. Spielmeyer.
Zeitschrift für die gesamte Neurologie und Psychiatrie
December 1917, Volume 36, Issue 1, pp 421-430
This link may work for you.
My goal is to find out what he said about neurons being individual cells rather than one continuous network, as well as what was reasoned about neuroregeneration and neuroplasticity of the central nervous system (eg spinal cord). It is commonly claimed that neuroscientists did not believe this possible until the 1970s but all the references to this seem to be third hand from non-peer reviewed books or news media while I have found multiple old sources that make claims more consistent with what is thought today. One reference i found was to this article (although for some reason the page numbers in the citation do not match even though everything else does).
This is interesting since studies on this in the 1980s are what resulted in the formation of PETA. They were defended as groundbreaking and overturning the consensus thought on the matter, but I have not been able to find or get access to these groundbreaking studies. Further, later publications by the scientist charged with animal abuse over it seem kind of crappy to me. Rewriting history to sway public opinion about animal research? I don't know, I am more interested in how thought on the matter has progressed during the last century to give context to the current understanding of neuroplasticity.
Anyone interested? I'm not sure how long it would take but lets say an initial offer of .5 btc.
Jump to: