Why would you want to use babelfish? It is horrible at translations. I'd much rather not know what they are saying that use babelfish. I suppose you are not familiar with the classic Fig Newton example of Babelfish's horrible accuracy?
Translate: A cookie is just a cookie, but fig newtons are fruit and cake.
Translated to French (and back to English):
A biscuit is right a biscuit, but newton of fig are fruit and cake.
Then, Translated to German (and back to English):
A biskuit is quite a biskuit, but Newton von Fig are fruit and cakes.
Then to Italian (and back to English):
a biskuit it is a biskuit enough, but Newton von Fig is fruit and cakes.
Then to Portuguese (and back to English):
one biskuit is one biskuit sufficient, but Newton von Fig is fruit and hardens.
Then to Spanish (and back to English):
biskuit is biskuit sufficient, but Newton von Fig is fruit and hardens.
Yes, babelfish is a fine tool for translation, but seeing as how the word "babel" means confusion of speech, I suppose it does exactly what it claims. It manages to take a perfect English sentence and turn it into a pile of gibberish.
As I said, I'd rather say "I can't understand you" than try and understand them using babelfish.
