| Sidor om ämnet: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | Second opinion needed on grammar Trådens avsändare: Mirella Biagi
|
|---|
I'm sorry, but "declares to have understood" is not correct. If the verb were "claims", this grammar could be used as a way of expressing reported (indirect) speech, but otherwise this sounds wrong to me. I'm not a grammatician so I can't explain off the top of my head how it's wrong, but it's wrong.
For example, take the phrase "seller declares to have" and put it into Google just like that, with quotes around it. I don't know about you, but I get a whopping 23 results, several of ... See more I'm sorry, but "declares to have understood" is not correct. If the verb were "claims", this grammar could be used as a way of expressing reported (indirect) speech, but otherwise this sounds wrong to me. I'm not a grammatician so I can't explain off the top of my head how it's wrong, but it's wrong.
For example, take the phrase "seller declares to have" and put it into Google just like that, with quotes around it. I don't know about you, but I get a whopping 23 results, several of which are obviously from non-English sites. Using Bing and Yahoo, I get up to 40 results, with the same problem of infrequency of use by native sites. If this were standard English construction (or anywhere near standard), this would get thousands of hits.
I don't want to pick on Sheila, but I wouldn't use "having understood" with "declare" either; again, to me this just sounds wrong. I also haven't seen any evidence online that the first option is common; Sheila, maybe you can cite a few (native) examples?
The issue is with the verb "declare". It just doesn't allow for very flexible verb use. Whenever you are unsure about grammar (and we all are from time to time), apart from going to grammar resources, one of the simplest ways to handle this type of dilemma is to do a search like my example above: Try to search for likely phrasing options and see if and where and how often they turn up in similar documents (so, for example, make sure the search also includes other words likely to be found in a similar document, like "seller" or "contract" or "revenues", whatever is relevant), especially on websites/in documents written by native speakers.
The "problem" with gender is not really a problem, there are other ways of handling that, for example, some people use the masculine to include the other possibilities (I personally don't like that method but it has traditionally been accepted), others like myself will use "he or she" or "s/he" or, in dire situations, "he/she/it", and some even advocate "they", which I use in informal speech but not in translations.
Basically, IMHO the safest and most logical bet in this case is "declares that ... ".
PS: A lot of English contracts use the words "affirm" or "acknowledge" instead of "declare"; depending on the leeway you have, you might find a more elegant solution with one of these options. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | I don't like 'declares to have understood' either | Nov 20, 2013 |
Otherwise I agree with Janet and Sheila, so I won't say it all again.
| | | | Phil Hand 
Kina
Local time: 11:16
Kinesiska till Engelska
| Personally, I think the problem is with "declare" | Nov 20, 2013 |
For me "declare" is one of those alarm bell words. I never see it in English contracts, but it seems to crop up all the time in bad translations. I don't know the context of this so I'm not making any assertion here, but I agree 100% with Janet above. If you're having a problem with declare, just pick another verb.
| | | | Giles Watson
Italien
Local time: 04:16
Italienska till Engelska
In memoriam | Formulaic language | Nov 20, 2013 |
A literal translation of an Italian (or French) legalspeak formula such as "dichiara di aver compreso" with "declares to have understood" is inadvisable because the form is based on a Latin grammatical construction (the perfect infinitive as a direct object) that tends to be avoided with verbs like "declare" in English.
But turning the perfect infinitive into a verb phrase ("declares that he or she") is not terribly appropriate for the legal context and is also pointlessly gender-se... See more A literal translation of an Italian (or French) legalspeak formula such as "dichiara di aver compreso" with "declares to have understood" is inadvisable because the form is based on a Latin grammatical construction (the perfect infinitive as a direct object) that tends to be avoided with verbs like "declare" in English.
But turning the perfect infinitive into a verb phrase ("declares that he or she") is not terribly appropriate for the legal context and is also pointlessly gender-sensitive.
Could you not use a more English phrase such as "The Agent (hereby) understands that", which is both shorter and gender-neutral? The form is slightly different from the Italian but the function is precisely equivalent.
FWIW ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Petro Ebersöhn (X)
Local time: 05:16
I agree with Janet and Christine.
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spanien
Local time: 03:16
Medlem (2007)
Engelska
+ ...
| "Curiouser and curiouser", as Alice said | Nov 20, 2013 |
Janet Rubin wrote:
I don't want to pick on Sheila, but I wouldn't use "having understood" with "declare" either; again, to me this just sounds wrong. I also haven't seen any evidence online that the first option is common; Sheila, maybe you can cite a few (native) examples?
To be honest, I'm having doubts now, too. I mean, it sounds fine to me but, as you say, it doesn't Google well if you look for "seller declares having". I think maybe I've been abroad too long.
Searching for evidence in my defence, I Googled for "declares having read", and that brought up a high number of matches. "Gotcha!", I thought. Interestingly enough, this was on the first page: http://www.proz.com/kudoz/italian_to_english/transport_transportation_shipping/1133656-mr_x_dichiara_inoltre_di_aver_letto_la_documentazione.html
Even if you don't understand Italian (and I don't), it's clear that answerers back in 2005 were happy with "declares to have read" as well as "declares having read"! However, when you restrict answers to .uk sites the hits drop close to zero. (Sigh! )
I have always advised my EFL students to avoid using the verb "suggest" as they'll run a 99% chance of getting it wrong: maybe I'd better take my own advice. Definitely a case for KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid!).
| | | | | Hmmm, different experience I guess | Nov 20, 2013 |
Giles Watson wrote:
But turning the perfect infinitive into a verb phrase ("declares that he or she") is not terribly appropriate for the legal context and is also pointlessly gender-sensitive.
I don't really understand why you claim this is inappropriate, and there are certainly valid (native language) examples to be found online, but I suppose our answers are subjective to at least some extent, based on our personal experience and even preference. In any case, I am personally all for "gender-sensitive", and I've never had a single client (or native speaker proofreader, for that matter) complain about the "he or she" construction.
Could you not use a more English phrase such as "The Agent (hereby) understands that"
Ouch, I would not use "hereby" with understands (by definition it wouldn't make sense). Using the present tense would be OK here though, as it would indicate the declarative form (no pun intended!), which is then affirmed by signature.
| | | | Giles Watson
Italien
Local time: 04:16
Italienska till Engelska
In memoriam | Please don't put words into my mouth, Janet ;-) | Nov 20, 2013 |
[quote]Janet Rubin wrote:
Giles Watson wrote:
But turning the perfect infinitive into a verb phrase ("declares that he or she") is not terribly appropriate for the legal context and is also pointlessly gender-sensitive.
I don't really understand why you claim this is inappropriate,
But I didn't say it was inappropriate! I said it "wasn't terribly appropriate" because it introduces information - the gender distinction - not contained in the original.
In any case, I am personally all for "gender-sensitive", and I've never had a single client (or native speaker proofreader, for that matter) complain about the "he or she" construction.
I wouldn't complain about it either. It is ungainly, though, and if it can be avoided without distorting the meaning of the original, it's probably better not to draw attention to the gender distinction.
Could you not use a more English phrase such as "The Agent (hereby) understands that"
Ouch, I would not use "hereby" with understands (by definition it wouldn't make sense).
"Hereby" usefully signals the performative native of the act attested. Obviously it is more natural with a properly dynamic verb but "understand" can be used both dynamically and statively.
[Edited at 2013-11-20 15:25 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
The first one is wrong!
Plus
using 'he' to stand for certain agencies in legal and other texts is acceptable practice
s
| | | | Oliver Walter
Storbritannien
Local time: 03:16
Tyska till Engelska
+ ...
| First is wrong | Nov 20, 2013 |
I agree with Sheila and Janet. If I were proofreading an English text and it contained "The Agent declares to have understood..." I would consider those words to be grammatically incorrect and that (if not already clear) it was probably a translation from a language in which the literal equivalent is correct.
Its only merits are that the meaning is clear (despite the error) and it is gender-neutral.
Finding something with thousands of Google hits does not prove it to be correc... See more I agree with Sheila and Janet. If I were proofreading an English text and it contained "The Agent declares to have understood..." I would consider those words to be grammatically incorrect and that (if not already clear) it was probably a translation from a language in which the literal equivalent is correct.
Its only merits are that the meaning is clear (despite the error) and it is gender-neutral.
Finding something with thousands of Google hits does not prove it to be correct. There must be millions of texts that a search engine can find that contain errors such a a verb in the wrong number (such as singular where it should be plural, often following "... one of ..."), or the incorrect use of "its", "it's", "your" and "you're".
Oliver ▲ Collapse
| | | |
I would say both are correct grammatically.
I can't understand why the first is sentence is wrong. Isn't it a case of to have + participle? Or am I confusing it with something else?
Which sentence is used depends on the context. But I was looking at it from the point of view of grammar.
| | | | | Not necessarily true in a legal context | Nov 20, 2013 |
Phil Hand wrote:
For me "declare" is one of those alarm bell words. I never see it in English contracts, but it seems to crop up all the time in bad translations. I don't know the context of this so I'm not making any assertion here, but I agree 100% with Janet above. If you're having a problem with declare, just pick another verb.
In a legal context you are conveying a concept from the source legal system, so sometimes it's perfectly appropriate to use a term that may not sound native, if the concept itself isn't native. A professor of mine used to refer to this as the "Verfremdungseffekt" - you are pointing out that this isn't, in fact, an English contract (unless you are also a lawyer and are actually doing drafting work). Of course, you're right in the sense that this approach has to be taken within reason - the text still has to be comprehensible to a target-language native.
Otherwise, I also agree with Janet.
| | |
|
|
|
Václav Pinkava
Storbritannien
Local time: 03:16
Tjeckiska till Engelska
+ ...
| For a legal document, clarity is paramount | Nov 20, 2013 |
"Notwithstanding" any wealth of evidence that the first formulation is indeed used in legal language - e.g. http://www.iwgonline.net/Terms-and-Conditions
"The Member affiliated to the "Service" provided agrees and declares to have understood all the rules and for no reason must he/she consider IWG, its employees o... See more "Notwithstanding" any wealth of evidence that the first formulation is indeed used in legal language - e.g. http://www.iwgonline.net/Terms-and-Conditions
"The Member affiliated to the "Service" provided agrees and declares to have understood all the rules and for no reason must he/she consider IWG, its employees or its associates liable for lacks."
- I would recommend using the second formulation of the two, for a less intellectual target audience, and "for the avoidance of doubt"
The gender conundrum is easily solved by using "s/he" throughout ▲ Collapse
| | | | Neil Coffey
Storbritannien
Local time: 03:16
Franska till Engelska
+ ...
| If gender not clear, you can use "they" | Nov 20, 2013 |
Mirella Biagi wrote:
Yes I agree that the second sounds more natural and in every day language it is the one I would use. However, is it correct though to use 'he' if there is no evidence that the 'Agent' is not a woman? Surely you could get into a lot of legal problems making an assumption of the sort?
If you're concerned about this, then you have at least a couple of options:
1) Use the gender-neutral "they": "The Agent declares that they have understood...". This is my preference.
2) Add a note to the effect that references to the male gender can equally apply to the female where applicable. Obviously you need to be careful that there is no ambiguity over which references this applies to.
[Edited at 2013-11-20 15:57 GMT]
| | | | | Apologies... + Too technical for me! | Nov 20, 2013 |
Apologies, Giles, for the words in your mouth, that wasn't the intention! In my defense, I likely got confused about the "level of appropriateness" since - in my very subjective opinion - "not terribly appropriate" seems at best about a half a notch up from "inappropriate".
As for the "distinction ... not contained in the original", in this case (apparently a contract, but I could be wrong) I would argue that this typ... See more Apologies, Giles, for the words in your mouth, that wasn't the intention! In my defense, I likely got confused about the "level of appropriateness" since - in my very subjective opinion - "not terribly appropriate" seems at best about a half a notch up from "inappropriate".
As for the "distinction ... not contained in the original", in this case (apparently a contract, but I could be wrong) I would argue that this type of "distinction" is not an issue. It's our job - in most if not all situations - to render the translation such that the translated document reads as if it were written by someone who is a native speaker of the target language.
Since gender-neutral construction has certainly caught on in the English-speaking world - even though it may not be popular with everyone everywhere - I would argue that using such a construction is perfectly appropriate in an English translation even if it is not used in the source text. (The exception being, of course, if the contract is referring to a particular person who is known to be male or female)
After all (for example), if the source text refers to a company as "she" (as it often does in German), we would still use "it" in English. That's not an introduction of information, that is simply "the way we write it in English".
But of course, everyone has their own opinion, and this has been dealt with in other threads (with, I believe, absolutely no unanimity on the subject! ).
Giles Watson wrote:
"Hereby" usefully signals the performative native of the act attested. Obviously it is more natural with a properly dynamic verb (which is why I added "agrees") but "understand" can be used both dynamically and statively.
Well, having "declared" that I am not a grammatician (haha), I guess it won't do much further harm to admit I don't understand half of what you just said, sorry! What I did understand was the dictionary definition of "hereby" (when I looked it up just to be sure), which (IMHO) doesn't appear to leave room to use it with the verb "understand", unless the contract is the actual means for making someone understand something... ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Sidor om ämnet: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Second opinion needed on grammar | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
