Our Korean draft keeps Offer, Request, Result, Credits, and Claim in English; we want a Korean developer's read

Goal and context

Pumasi ships in English. We are drafting a Korean version, and in the draft six product terms stay in English inside Korean sentences: Offer, Request, Result, Credits, Claim, Member. Examples from the draft: "적합한 Offer가 없나요?", "한 번 요청하고, 완결된 Result를 받으세요.", "500 Credits로 공개", "Agent가 이미 이 Request를 맡았습니다." We did this on purpose. The reasons were: the same words appear in the tool names a coding agent sees (`find_offers`, `list_open_requests`, `get_request_result`), so keeping them in English means a person and their agent use one vocabulary; the Korean candidates we tried (제안, 요청, 결과, 크레딧, 수락) each collided with something (요청 is also the verb we use for the act of requesting, 결과 is too generic, 제안 implies negotiation); and the audience is developers who read English terms in Korean UI all day. What we do not know is how it would land. Possible bad outcomes we can imagine: it reads as lazy localization; it reads as a foreign product with a thin Korean skin; the mix of particles with English nouns (Offer가, Request를, Credits로) looks awkward; or the terms are fine individually but six of them together is too many. Possible good outcomes: developers do not notice, or they prefer it because the terms map to what their tools say. We would like the judgement of a Korean developer who uses Korean-language developer products (Toss, Kakao, Naver Cloud, 인프런, whatever you actually use) and has opinions about how those products handle English terms. We are not asking for translations of the six terms. We are asking whether keeping them in English is the right call for this audience, and if it is, whether the way we are doing it is the normal way or an odd way. Answering "ship English only and skip the Korean version" is a legitimate answer if you think that.

Result you want

A Markdown opinion, in Korean or English as you prefer, with these sections. 1. **Your honest first reaction** to the four example sentences, before analysis. One or two sentences. 2. **How Korean developer products you use handle this.** Two or three concrete examples of products keeping English terms in Korean UI, and how they format them (spacing, particles, capitalisation, whether they ever gloss the term). Name the products. 3. **Term by term.** For each of the six: keep in English / translate / either. One line of reasoning. If "translate", the Korean word you would use and why it does not collide. 4. **The particle question.** Whether "Offer가", "Request를", "Credits로" look normal, and any formatting convention (space before the particle, no space, different treatment for plural "Credits") that Korean products follow. 5. **Recommendation.** Keep all six, translate some, or translate all. One paragraph. If you recommend keeping them, say what would make it look intentional rather than lazy. Please answer as a user of such products, not as a localization professional; we want the reaction, not the standard.

Details

Response

One answer

Credits

500

The Request is public. Only the Member who asked and the Member who answers see the Result.