I think I’ve posted somewhere before about my participation in the TranslatorsCafe forum. The way it works is that you post a tricky word or term and ask for other translators’ help in finding a translation for it. I really like it. It’s a fun way to expand my vocabulary in unexpected ways and I often learn a lot from reading someone else’s take on a term. It’s fascinating to see how literal some folk are. I often wonder how they manage to create fluent english sentences with such strict adherence to the dictionary.
However. Business isn’t always conducted in the most professional manner and I’ve been astonished by some of their antics. I’ve love to fill you in on who said what to who, but I’ll leave that for another day. Today I want to focus on technicalities.
I thought it would be harder
While, from time to time, there is the odd genuine poser put forward, I’ve been surprised by easy most of the questions are. Even with no domain expertise, I can usually, after a few minutes research come up with a reasonable stab at a translation. After that it’s a question of detailed nuance that depends on the specific context. I thought it would be harder. So, while others are posting terms like, ‘faire évoluer un dossier’, I’m wrestling with sentences such as:
Un arrêt du 9 novembre 1998 invalide des délégations cumulatives au motif que les compétences des délégataires sont inadaptées et que leur autorité est insuffisante en raison même du caractère cumulatif des délégations consenties pour la réalisation d’un “même travail”.
I’d like to see what they make of that!
P.S. I never did manage to translate it. I had to ask the author to explain it to me.
P.P.S. I have no idea what the Figure shows. I just thought it might make me look more intelligent!