[pvaldes]

Most scientists work for free for the journals as reviewers, the same Journals earn also money obviously selling the product and they aren't cheap. They didn't spend a cent into the research done. Somebody else paid for it.

How the cost of a translator could be too expensive when everybody is working for free for you?

> What is this, the year 1055?

If your surname is Brown your work will be treated clearly different by journals than if it is Gutierres or Coulibaly. The editors probably don't even perceive that there is a bias here.

Including at least a member with an English name in your team is a known trick that eases to be accepted by publishers.

[cge]

>How the cost of a translator could be too expensive when everybody is working for free for you?

I don't necessarily disagree that translation would be beneficial, but it isn't just a matter of cost. As an author, I would absolutely not be comfortable with a journal translating my research without my direct involvement. Translation would require too much expert knowledge of the specific fields involved. I'd even be uncomfortable myself with translation of specific terms, even for languages I might know in non-scholarly contexts: it would require knowing the literature of the specific field in the language.

So it wouldn't be enough to have the journal hire a translator. It would be more work for the authors, and likely for others in their field who would need to be brought in.