KudoZ home » Russian to English » Law (general)

Личные Неимущественные Права Физического Лица

English translation: Non-property rights

Advertisement

Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
Russian term or phrase:Неимущественные Права
English translation:Non-property rights
Entered by: David Knowles
Options:
- Contribute to this entry
- Include in personal glossary

08:05 Mar 25, 2003
Russian to English translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Law (general) / Law
Russian term or phrase: Личные Неимущественные Права Физического Лица
Насколько приемлем вариант:
Personal Non-Proprietary Rights of Natural Persons?

Контекст таков. Так называется часть (книга вторая) нового Гражданского Кодекса Украины.
Jarema
Ukraine
Local time: 02:44
Difficult, fundamental decisions need to be taken!
Explanation:
If you are going to translate неимущественный literally, it should be non-property rights. As Yuri says, "non-proprietary" is wrong.

W.E.Butler's translation of the Russian Civil Code is a masterpiece of "official" translation. You can recover the original Russian almost word for word, and it reads extremely awkwardly! This is quite deliberate - he avoids familiar western legal terms and sticks closely to the Russian, so for example he uses "juridical person" and "natural person" (and "joint-stock society").

The reasoning is clear - this is an independent body of law, with its own terms that has to be understood by western lawyers without them importing their own ideas of what terms mean. If Jarema is producing an "official" translation, I think she is almost bound to follow this model.

If however Jarema is producing an understandable translation or summary for the layman, I think she should use terms like "civil rights", "individual" and "legal entity". To avoid misleading comparisons, there is still a case for avoiding too much western terminology.

Either way, good luck!

Ref: Civil Code of the Russian Federation Parts 1 & 2 Second Edition, edited and translated by William E. Butler, published by Simmonds & Hill.
Selected response from:

David Knowles
Local time: 00:44
Grading comment
Всем огромное спасибо! В который раз убеждаюсь, что отвечать самому легче, чем в некоторых случаях выбирать ответ. Мне очень понравился комментарий Yuri Geifman. Некоторые ответы для меня практически равноценны. Поэтому благодарю всез без личных обращений. А на самом деле я еще немного подумаю.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

Advertisement


Summary of answers provided
5 +4Difficult, fundamental decisions need to be taken!
David Knowles
4 +4In favor of one of the "non-property" answers abovexxxJoeYeckley
5 +2Personal Non-Property Rights of Individuals
Vladimir Pochinov
4 +2personal intangible rights of individuals/natural persons
cheeter
5Personal Non-property Rights of Natural Persons
Leonid Dzhepko
5civil rights
Sergey Gorelik
2Personal incorporeal property rights
Olga Demiryurek


Discussion entries: 4





  

Answers


4 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5 peer agreement (net): +2
Personal Non-Property Rights of Individuals


Explanation:
...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-03-25 08:35:54 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

In most legal documents I have dealt with, the term \"individual\" was used for \"физическое лицо\" (as opposed to \"legal entity\", i.e. \"юридическое лицо\").

Vladimir Pochinov
Russian Federation
Local time: 01:44
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in RussianRussian
PRO pts in category: 94

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
disagree  cheeter: w/non-property rights
21 mins

agree  xxxJoeYeckley: Just "individual non-property rights," I think.
3 hrs

agree  Yuri Geifman: I would just say Individual Non-property Rights (as Yuri Lurie once told me, it's the translator's job to translate a legal document as closely to the original as possible, leave the interpretation to the lawyers)
11 hrs

agree  Yakov Tomara: I'd say even more literally,"Non-Property Rights of an Individual"
23 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

23 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5
Personal Non-property Rights of Natural Persons


Explanation:
Противопоставление физических//юридических лиц, проходящее по всему ГК, лучше не нарушать.
Non-property представляется более правильным, чем non-proprietary

Leonid Dzhepko
Russian Federation
Local time: 02:44
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in RussianRussian

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
neutral  David Knowles: The terms "natural person", "juridical person" and "citizen" are so awkward in English as to be almost unusable (although W.E.Butler uses them in his translations!)
38 mins
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

27 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5
civil rights


Explanation:
Неимущественные права - это гражданские права. По определению они носят индивидуальный характер, поэтому уточнение "физические лица", по крайней мере, в английском, избыточно.
Перевод на английский термина "неимущественные права" встречается только на русскоязычных сайтах и тех, где речь идет о России и странах бывшего СССР. Во всем мире это определяется понятием "гражданские права".

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-03-25 12:24:14 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Коллеги, ну есть же разница между гражданским правом (как сводом законов) и гражданскими правами. Да, Гражданский кодекс (российский!) определяет как имущественные, так и неимущественные права, но в английском в отношении прав граждан понятию property rights противопоставляется не \'non-property\', а \'civil\'.
Перевод же нужен не только как проекция местных реалий, он должен учитывать и культурные и юридические особенности той страны, на язык которой мы переводим. А иначе реанимацию, например, иначе как reanimation переводить нельзя будет.


    Reference: http://lawlibrary.narod.ru/suh/gl26.html
Sergey Gorelik
Local time: 01:44
Works in field
Native speaker of: Native in RussianRussian
PRO pts in category: 14

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
neutral  Vladimir Pochinov: Не только на русскоязычных сайтах, проверьте еще раз...
7 mins
  -> Да, еще, например, Киргизия...

disagree  cheeter: это общегражданские права и свободы.
21 mins

agree  David Knowles: I would add "of individuals" but the reference is quite clear.
31 mins

neutral  xxxJoeYeckley: you're mostly right in your reasoning, Sergey, but there are some property rights that are handled under Russian civil law (esp. in land law) so it still seems useful to look at non-property rights as a [major] subset of civil rights.
3 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

46 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +2
personal intangible rights of individuals/natural persons


Explanation:
Точно не proprietary, поскольку этот термин относится к праву собственности (e.g. proprietary rights to the land), а не к имущественным и личным правам.

Ср.
Proprietary rights. Rights in property; rights of ownership.
p. 307

Property. (1) That which is capable of ownership, whether real or PERSONAL, tangible or INTANGIBLE.
...
(3) INTELLECTUAL property.
p. 306 [выделено мной]

Intangible - неимущественные

Intangible property. Things not physical in nature but capable of beign owned, r.g. shares in a company or INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.
p. 210


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-03-25 09:04:40 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

ОТВЕТ НА ДИЛЕТАНТСКОЕ ВЫСКАЗЫВАНИЕ О ВИДАХ ПРАВ:
Разделение прав на имущественные и неимущественные (tangible vs. intangible) и на личные и неличные (real or personal) присутствовало в праве многих (если не всех) государств со времен римского права. Это относится к частному праву.

юр. фак. МГУ

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-03-25 09:19:55 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

В английском и американском праве incorporeal больше относится к правомочиям (называемым правами), КОТОРЫЕ НЕ МОГУТ СОСТАВИТЬ ПРАВО СОБСТВЕННОСТИ, как например, права ограниченного пользования (сервитутам и т.д.)
в отличие от правомочий пользования, владения и распоряжения, которые все вместе составляют право собственности.

Ср.

INCORPOREAL PROPERTY legal interests in REAL PROPERTY that do not ential the right of possession.

p. 288 Barron\'s Dictionary of Business Terms (U.S.)

К таким legal interests в русском относятся и \"ограниченные права пользования\" (например, сервитут, узуфрукт и т.д.)

В английском праве INCORPOREAL также используется и для обозначения ограниченных прав пользования и прочих прав, не связанных с правом собственности.

INCORPOREAL HEREDITAMENTS. Rights of perperty, such as annuities, advowsons, easements, profits, franchises, tithes, rentcharges.
Curzon\'s Dictionary of Law, 2002. p. 212

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-03-26 09:05:53 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Личные неимущественные права неразрывно связаны с личностью обладателя таких прав и неотделимы от нее, т.е. не могут быть переданы. К личным неимущественным правам относится, например, право автора называться автором своего произведения.

Например, автор может продать права на публикацию, распространение и т.д. своего произведения. Но продать, передать или каким-либо иным образом расстаться с правом называться автором произведения он не может.




    Osborn's Concise Law Dictionary, 2002.
cheeter
Local time: 02:44
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in RussianRussian
PRO pts in category: 62

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Olga Demiryurek: Я согласна с Вами. Но и мой ответ мне представляется правильным. Что в юридических документах чаще используется? Спасибо
23 mins
  -> браво за правильный подход к поиску термина. однако приведенное Вами использование термина и деление прав относится к шотландскому праву (отличному от английского и американского). а в мире принято использовать термины англичан или американцев.

agree  Сергей Лузан: Quite likely.
1 hr

neutral  Yakov Tomara: Нельзя не согласиться с каждым словом Вашего пояснения, но словосоч. "personal intangible rights" практически неупотребительно...
22 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

54 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 2/5Answerer confidence 2/5
Personal incorporeal property rights


Explanation:
Introduction to the Scottish Law of Property


Incorporeal Property

Incorporeal property is defined as that property which has no corpus or body - in other words, it has no physical form. It is therefore comprised of different types of rights, and the category of such rights is wide and potentially diverse. There are three main sub-categories of these rights: ‘real’ incorporeal property rights; ‘personal’ incorporeal property rights; and intellectual property rights.

Classification

There are three ways in which property can be classified. The first and most important distinction is between heritable and moveable property. Heritable property (or heritage) is essentially the ownership of land, and other rights and interests relating to land. Moveable property (or moveables) is anything else. The important principle here is that inaedificandi solo, cedit solo: anything which is built on the land is part of the land. It is a principle of Scots law that one cannot separate the ownership of buildings from the ownership of the ground upon which it is built (although there are exceptions to this). Second a distinction can be made between corporeal and incorporeal property, Corporeal property is that which has a physical, tangible form, whereas incorporeal property exists only in a more abstract sense. Incorporeal property obviously includes intellectual property rights, but it is not restricted to such rights. As in Roman law, the paradigm example of incorporeal property is a debt. The third distinction is of limited significance. An item of fungible property (a fungible) is something of a generic type, which can be replaced easily by another substantially similar item of property of that same type. Non-fungible property is not capable of substitution in this way; it is a more specific property right.

http://www.luiss.it/erasmuslaw/scozia/property.htm.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-03-25 09:08:44 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Although there appears to be no comprehensive definition of intangible property [citations], such property is generally defined as property that is a \"right\" rather than a physical object. [Citations.] As the court in Roth Drug, Inc. v. Johnson, supra, 13 Cal.App.2d at page 734 observed: \"Tangible property is that which is visible and corporeal, having substance and body as contrasted with incorporeal property rights such as franchises, choses in action, copyrights, the circulation of a newspaper, annuities and the like.\" An intangible right may be evidenced or represented by a physical object such as a promissory note or a certifi- cate of stock. When an intangible right is so represented, the physical object representing the particular right, while capable of perception by the senses, is nevertheless considered intangible property for tax purposes. Thus, for purposes of the law of taxation, intangible property is defined as including personal property that is not itself intrinsically valuable, but that derives its value from what it represents or evidences. [Citations.] Slip Op. at 5.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-03-25 09:09:29 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://www.pmstax.com/state/navistar9502.shtml.


Olga Demiryurek
Turkey
Local time: 02:44
Works in field
Native speaker of: Russian
PRO pts in category: 4
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5 peer agreement (net): +4
Difficult, fundamental decisions need to be taken!


Explanation:
If you are going to translate неимущественный literally, it should be non-property rights. As Yuri says, "non-proprietary" is wrong.

W.E.Butler's translation of the Russian Civil Code is a masterpiece of "official" translation. You can recover the original Russian almost word for word, and it reads extremely awkwardly! This is quite deliberate - he avoids familiar western legal terms and sticks closely to the Russian, so for example he uses "juridical person" and "natural person" (and "joint-stock society").

The reasoning is clear - this is an independent body of law, with its own terms that has to be understood by western lawyers without them importing their own ideas of what terms mean. If Jarema is producing an "official" translation, I think she is almost bound to follow this model.

If however Jarema is producing an understandable translation or summary for the layman, I think she should use terms like "civil rights", "individual" and "legal entity". To avoid misleading comparisons, there is still a case for avoiding too much western terminology.

Either way, good luck!

Ref: Civil Code of the Russian Federation Parts 1 & 2 Second Edition, edited and translated by William E. Butler, published by Simmonds & Hill.

David Knowles
Local time: 00:44
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 521
Grading comment
Всем огромное спасибо! В который раз убеждаюсь, что отвечать самому легче, чем в некоторых случаях выбирать ответ. Мне очень понравился комментарий Yuri Geifman. Некоторые ответы для меня практически равноценны. Поэтому благодарю всез без личных обращений. А на самом деле я еще немного подумаю.

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Jack Doughty
1 hr

agree  xxxJoeYeckley: When it deals with rights in particular. I would still use corporation instead of "legal person" in most contract and business documents. But here, going for the "best fit" in UK or US terms would be a mistake.
1 hr
  -> Yes - If you are dealing with an individual contract, there's much more freedom.

agree  Yuri Geifman: I totally agree with W.E. Butler's reasoning, which is why, with all due respect to Cheeter and his solid legal references, I would still go with the "literal" version (one small correction: Jarema is a he, not a she :-D
10 hrs
  -> Sorry Jarema sir!

agree  Yakov Tomara: BTW, "non-property" is already used in the translations of Ukrainian laws - http://www2.essex.ac.uk/elect/electjp/ukr_pal92.htm
22 hrs

disagree  cheeter: the meaning (scope) of the rights to be translated coincide in any legal system. and the fact that laymen do not know what they are does not you have to invent new terms. see above
23 hrs

agree  Svetlana: it's the same old question,different schools of translation theory,source vs target culture.I agree,the purpose of translation,extratextual considerations, will dictate the choice here.There is a clear danger in imporing meanings which may not be there.
1 day3 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

3 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +4
In favor of one of the "non-property" answers above


Explanation:
Russian law does indeed have some distinguishing features that we ought not to dismiss in this case. In the text below, for example, "civil rights" are divided into subcategories of "property" and "non-property." If it *can be* so divided, it is not helpful to translate a term signifying one part using a term that normally signfies the whole.

гражданское право следует определить как основную отрасль права, регулирующего частные (имущественные и неимущественные) взаимоотношения граждан, а также созданных ими юридических лиц, формирующиеся по инициативе их участников и преследующие цели удовлетворения их собственных (частных) интересов



    Reference: http://lawlibrary.narod.ru/suh/gl1.html
xxxJoeYeckley
Native speaker of: English
PRO pts in category: 31

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  David Knowles: That seems to settle the matter!
26 mins
  -> Thanks, David. It is nice to have things settled.

agree  Leonid Dzhepko: В юридическом переводе вольности в принципе нежелательны, даже если порой и ощущается некая "заскорузлость" перевода.
51 mins
  -> Thanks, Leonid. And it bears noting that some of these terms are a bit rough in the original language, where they were written to divide meanings rather than to warm souls.

agree  Yuri Geifman: just one comment: гражданское право (Civil Law) should not be confused with гражданские права (civil rights)
9 hrs
  -> Point well taken. The two are not the same but they are closely related in that civil law is the principle source or at least the major expression of civil rights and obligations,

agree  Yakov Tomara
20 hrs

neutral  cheeter: good point, against "non-property". W. Butler's translation is not a model one, I am afraid.
21 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.



See also:



Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search