SafeTex Jan 29, 2021:

@ Daryo But you too Daryo are on shaky ground.

You said yourself that ghits (statistics) are a bit like statistical MT engines but these engines normally use very extensive data in the form of translation memories of work done or at least checked by TRANSLATORS

This type of MT engine therefore, which is neither grammatical nor neural, actually reflects HUMAN translations of phrases.

So when you say that I'm taking the translator out of the loop and relying on MT, you are not really right.
Statistical MT engines are broadly based on TRANSLATORS' work as are ghits. This is where they get their statistics from !!!

You may have also noticed that "strikes in the sector" got the most agrees from other translators even if it was not chosen by the asker and "strikes in the profession" got more disagrees. So you don't seem to give more credence to translators than you do to statistical MT engines

Anyway, you kicked off this conversation with a pretty sarcastic analogy which was uncalled for. We know we don't agree on this and I'm going to keep using ghits and you are going to keep handing out disagrees.

"It is as it is" as a famous ex-President recently said👹

Daryo Jan 29, 2021:

But what I can see, besides you still insisting on feeding ammunition to those who would happily replace all translators by MT, is that you describing yourself as "descriptivist" does NOT match your acts.

You want in fact to prescribe to one group (lawyers) what kind of language they should be using, and your "prescription" to lawyers is based on a "description" extrapolated from samples taken from the general-purpose / undifferentiated everyday language.

BTW, I would have expected that in the theory of languages / translation there would be some mentions of the concept of "context", and of the "purpose" of the text (as in "translation fit for purpose") ...? And possibly of "meaning", not only of basics of (oversimplified) statistics?

Daryo Jan 29, 2021:

I never studied linguistics I "only" practised it, most of it as interpreter, where any vagueness / mistake / deviation from the subject is immediately spotted by the "final user(s)" and reacted upon without delay. Not surprising, as your "final user(s)" would be sitting either next to you or on the other side of the negotiation table.

Not exactly the same level of "cushioning from end-user's opinion" you usually get when doing a translation, rarely getting any feedback, or sometime not even knowing who exactly are the "end-users" of your "creative work".

The relevance of this?

Got to do with the whole point of any "language service" - it's got to be useful to someone, to some "end-user". Not much use for "L'Art pour l'art" when it comes to translations needed for practical purposes.

So what would be the relevance of the dichotomy prescriptivists vs descriptivists, for the purpose of producing translations that are usable for the kind of real-life end-users that need translations for very down to earth practical purposes? No idea ...

SafeTex Jan 27, 2021:

@ Daryo I did Linguistics at university and there are basically two types of linguist, prescriptivists and descriptivists.
You and Ms. Hall are prescriptivists and right big ones at that. You simple never stop prescribing how English should be spoken and written. This is all confirmed by your continual disagrees and comments, often to answers that are chosen as correct by others on the forum.

I'm a descriptivist, and so I try to describe how it is actually spoken and written.

That said, there is no surprise therefore that I give more credence to ghits than you.

You are essentially saying "look here, it doesn't matter if only me and a few people say it this way and all the other native speakers say it that way, we are still right and everyone else is wrong".

Now if you want to continue in your own little arrogant and pompous presciptivist world, that's your choice but don't expect everyone else to conform to it and certainly not me.

Daryo Jan 27, 2021:

@ SafeTex The idea on which you keep insisting, that ghits are a relevant criterion to decide which translation is the most appropriate, is a master-stroke.

More precisely would be a master-stroke from experts in scoring own goals / shooting themselves in the foot (/ add any variation on the same theme) ...

Translating of the basis of counting ghits is just another way of "translating by using statistics", which is in fact the method used by the previous, now outdated generation of "Machine Translation" software.

Even MT has moved on from that model, and is now upgraded to the next generation, based on neural networks.

I'm just curious to know, given how highly you value "translating by statistics", what would be your arguments against giving a preference to devices that are and always will be better that humans at generating statistics?

Following your logic, it would be perfectly sensible to use even the outdated MT based on no more than a simple statistical analysis, instead of living translators.

I'll let you follow the logic of your method to its logical end ... a superb own goal!

SafeTex Jan 23, 2021:

@ Eliza Wow, all that just for me but it changes nothing

"Strikes in the profession" 7 ghits
"strikes in the sector" 148,000 ghits

It's like when you read a contract with force majeure

You might see the words "industrial action" but you won't see "professional action".

You have to give reasonable consideration to what ghits tells you and it's telling you here that "strikes in the sector" is a far better translation than 'strikes in the profession".

Eliza Hall Jan 22, 2021:

Daryo is 100% right When Daryo says, "the exact intended meaning for the purpose of this contract of the term 'la Profession' can make a huge difference... depending on how the term is interpreted by the Court.... There must be somewhere a very clear definition - there is no way that a subcontractor (or the main contractor) would be given a free pass if just about any strike happened"

That's exactly why contracts have defined terms: to inform the court or arbitrator what is and is not covered by that term. And I agree that no half-decent contract would contain such a huge loophole for the sub or main contractor.

And in both FR and EN contracts, defined terms are capitalized (usually in FR just the first word of the term is cap'd, while in EN all words in it are).

Sources: "Lorsqu’on définit un terme dans un contrat, on lui donne une majuscule initiale..." https://e2f.com/952/

"The first letter of each word in a defined term is capitalised so that the reader can identify that the meaning of the term is 'different' and that he should interpret what he is reading in accordance with the definition given." https://www.netlawman.co.uk/ia/defined-terms-in-legal-docume...

Eliza Hall Jan 22, 2021:

Proper nouns vs. defined terms @SafeTex: These are 2 different things: (1) proper nouns (e.g. the legal name or abbreviated name of a company), and (2) defined terms.

Proper nouns are capitalized in EN, no matter what kind of document it is. Defined terms are only capitalized in contracts.

In a contract that says "the Company offers XYZ... ABC is at the Client's expense" (your example), 99% of the time the first paragraph of the contract--the one saying who the parties to the contract are--will say something like this:

"This agreement (the "Agreement") is made and entered into on the date set forth below by and between Name of Company, Inc. ("the Company"), a Delaware corporation with a principal address of 123 Yada Street, City, State, and Name of Other Company, LLC ("the Client"), a Rhode Island Limited Liability Company with a principal address of 123 Blabla Street, City, State..."

You will not find the parties' names in the definitions section because the proper nouns used to refer to them were already stated in the first paragraph, or sometimes in the recitals (the "Whereas..." clauses that precede the numbered paragraphs in most US/UK contracts).

SafeTex Jan 22, 2021:

@ all (about capitalization) In my experience, capitalization is used without the word being a defined term.

But it does often refer to a definite object.

For example (given in English), you might have:

"The Company offers clients many benefits" (our company)

but in the same contract

"If the intervention of an outside company is needed, this is at the Client's expense" (another company)

So the usage is as if Company has been defined but it hasn't actually been formally defined

"Profession" in our case is a specific sector as opposed to any old sector but the capital letter is not obligatory in English as we have "the" beforehand, (definite article referring to definite object)

Eliza Hall Jan 22, 2021:

A haiku about this translation Capitalized words
In contracts are defined terms
Or typos. The end.

*Edited to respond to SafeTex's comment*:

Capitalized words
In contracts are defined terms,
Proper nouns, typos.

Mpoma (asker) Jan 22, 2021:

Thanks to all ... all great points. I'll definitely be raising this capital letter question with the client.

Daryo Jan 21, 2021:

@ Mpoma in case of serious delays and litigation, the exact intended meaning for the purpose of this contract of the term "la Profession" can make a huge difference - up to the point of a business either going belly up or surviving, depending on how the term is interpreted by the Court of the Arbiter.

It would be probably a good idea to check with the client at least how "la Profession" was translated in previous related documents, or even better to get its definition.

There must be somewhere a very clear definition - there is no way that a subcontractor (or the main contractor) would be given a free pass if just about any strike happened to cause difficulties.

Daryo Jan 21, 2021:

What in actual fact Mpoma said is just slightly different:

That the definition of the term "Profession" for the purpose of this contract is nowhere to be found in the document(s) made available by the agency.

Which isn't so surprising because the ST is about "modifications" to some another document that the agency apparently didn't see fit to join to the document to translate. That definition does and must exist, it's simply in another related document.

Strangely enough, something reminded me of "je l'ai appris de Sethon, ambassadeur de France dans cette cour" ...

philgoddard Jan 21, 2021:

Eliza The asker has told us this is not a defined term. And I don't know about you, but a lot of the legal writing I translate is semiliterate.

Eliza Hall Jan 21, 2021:

@ PhilGoddard & Connor & Mpoma @Connor, that's a good point. There could be a separate master contract that covers the parties' business relationship in general, and then each transaction gets its own contract. It may be the latter that Mpoma has been asked to translate here. Or this contract could have a separate schedule of definitions. Etc.

@PhilGoddard, we're not talking about people, we're talking about lawyers :)
And lawyers do not just capitalize words in contracts for no reason.

@Connor and Mpoma:

"Lorsqu’on définit un terme dans un contrat, on lui donne une majuscule initiale..." https://e2f.com/952/

"The defined terms can usually be found at the beginning of a legal document, or at the beginning of a stand-alone section such as a schedule.

The first letter of each word in a defined term is capitalised so that the reader can identify that the meaning of the term is 'different' and that he should interpret what he is reading in accordance with the definition given."
https://www.netlawman.co.uk/ia/defined-terms-in-legal-docume...

philgoddard Jan 21, 2021:

It doesn't sound like it's a defined term in the contract. People just capitalise nouns for no reason.

Conor McAuley Jan 21, 2021:

General Terms & Conditions and Special Ts & Cs
Mpoma, you've got me thinking -- often the definitions will appear in the Gen. Ts & Cs (or in a framework agreement or "contrat cadre") and not elsewhere in the contractual documents, so the capital P is indeed significant.

Mpoma (asker) Jan 21, 2021:

@Eliza Interesting idea. This is the only mention of the word, capitalised or not. It certainly can't do any harm to ask whether this is defined somewhere, but I feel fairly confident that it won't be. I think the author simply expects the reader to understand. Also, looking at the original, which is in suivi des modifs mode, I can see that this expression was added by an amender, which may be significant.

Eliza Hall Jan 21, 2021:

Profession = contractually defined term It's capitalized in the middle of a sentence, so it's a defined term in the contract. Do you have that section of the contract?

Even if you don't, I would just translate it as Profession with a capital P, and if you're not translating the definitions section of the contract, then let your client know that it's a defined term so the meaning should be found in that section.

Lara Barnett Jan 21, 2021:

Union Maybe they are referring to strikes that are legally set up through official unions, covering an entire industry, i.e. "industrial strikes".
https://thelawreviews.co.uk/digital_assets/ace95e81-366e-493...

Emmanuella Jan 21, 2021:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27814832/

Conor McAuley Jan 21, 2021:

"Profession" May refer to one or all of the building trades, IMO, your context should tell you.

Suzie Withers Jan 21, 2021:

Could it mean an "all-out" strike?

Mpoma (asker) Jan 21, 2021:

NB EP = Entrepreneur Principal, FWIW