This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Explanation: I agree with the fact that Company should come first, but also suggest that "not inclueded" is more accurate than omitted or withheld (the latter is something completely different as it implies that the names were deliberately withheld)
This kind of thing happens all the time around here. We are all friends at KudoZ. Alberto and Richard are both good friends and KudoZ companions for more than a year. We've had several discussions before, and this doesn't affect the mood of the community.
Mario and Marcia, I'm not a new member - I've been one for nearly 5 years....I was actually saddened by your lack of faith in fellow translators and in humanity in general...if there's anything I can do to help restore it (perhaps a small free translation at some point with best wishes?) please let me know! (yes...I'm a bit of a hippy -sorry - I can't help it :D) All the best, Juliet
Do you seriously expect your answer to be selected when it's not even spelt properly? We all make typos, but it does diminish our right to have a hissy fit afterwards.
I confess I´ve never seen here such an arduous battle, even exchanging personal offenses to eachother, for only some score points. Considering everything said below in an unpleasant environment, I'm with a clear conscience and conclude that unfortunately such "hot" discussion could even occur whatever were the chosen response, My intention when asking the question or electing the answer was never intended to harm and, or favoring anyone else. Again, I thank all friends that help me here and wish a more peaceful and enjoyable week for all of us
it's good to know that more people are able to understand the spirit here. At least you know how I felt (again) and why I posted the note below in the discussion. Regarding the mentioned note about a person not being able to be awarded points because he/she is not part of the group, I was pretty curious to know who was so stupid to say such nonsense, but never mind. Whoever said something like that doesn't deserve my attention anyway. As to ethics, unfortunately I must agree with you, not that it's nothing, yet that is has been ignored or faced as nothing by people with no scruples. It is one of the factors that could possibly allow humanity to perhaps survive in this planet. But it doesn't seem to be in the plans.
By the way, I was only contributing because I thought we were sabotaging Google Translate and that is why only eventually would I get my points. Because your supposed answer (was not on the board by the time of the decision) is actually my answer with one word less and one word swapped, I can see now that it is simple absence of respect for the 'rules of the game', what then makes me feel infinitely more upset.
I received this note from the Dr. Juliet. You had written that she was not part of the group and, because of this, she could not be awarded points or anything. It is my own teaching that people improve the text when we have a document that has been emitted by a governmental entity. As for ethics, even though I teach it, it can only be a joke, in practice, that any of you ever respected it. I have many entries here that were way more perfect than the others and they have always awarded points to others. Plenty closed the discussion soon after I have expressed my opinion, obviously implying that they agree with me, so clear the breach of ethics was. We however are not talking about breach of ethics in translation or interpreting in this case, but in this competition. Dr. Juliet, I am not cynical. We are not here to help fellows because we all compete. We are here getting paid points to be stupid and contribute to Google Translate, first of all. I am sure nobody wants to help everyone and we want to help very few people in life, if we do. For someone enduring the amount of atrocity I endure since end of 2001, however, and it is all because of breach of ethics in the higher sector, ..
The word is "ethics". We are all used to new members copying another answer and changing one syllable to make it look like another answer. It happens to all new members, and we usually tell them not to do that, but to use the "neutral" option and make a comment on the collegaue's suggestion. What bothered me, though, is the fact that two old members ignored my invisible answer and agreed with yours. Than the asker did the same. Did I use white ink and didn't notice it? So, never mind, Juliet. This has happened many times here in KudoZ, and everytime, I call people's attention to it. And I always will. Nothing personal. The "Dr" thing was merely a sacarstic joke.
Golly - I'm sorry, I had thought that the role of the site was so that we can all help each other and improve the quality and standards of our profession through working together? I hadn't realised it was seen as a competition, and I certainly had no idea that the fact that I happen to have a post-graduate degree would cause a problem! To be brutally honest, the fact that I have a phd does not mean that I'm any more successful than anyone else - I still have to bring up 2 children alone on a pittance!!!! Wishing everyone a successful and fulfilling week, All the best, Juliet
Richard, that's a fine response, as I'd mentioned before, except that in your instance you reversed the order of company and agency, as others did... any reason for that?
The criterion is accuracy! You obviously did not ask for help with "Nomes de Agências de Tradução e Nomes de Empresas", yet for "omitidos". I suggested "not included" seven hours before the other suggestion. But it's OK. I'll add a "Dr" to my username, too, and maybe this kind of thing will stop happening in KudoZ.
Não é uma questão de cronologia aqui. Na realidade, por exemplo a sugestão que eu dei poderia também "encaixar" bastante bem como resposta à sua pergunta, uma vez que o Alberto esclareceu aqui que se trata de um cabeçalho de uma lista, e daí a necessidade de uma tradução mais concisa e "telegráfica", e não de uma tradução alongada do tipo: The names of the translation companies and of the companies have not been included... Seja como for, bom trabalho e bom fim de semana e uma saudação deste lado (hoje muito chuvoso) do Atlântico!
Hi Alberto - I think that "withheld" in this context works then.... as in "withheld to protect the...." :) Hi Marcia, I'm not sure that using "Names" just the once actually constitutes a change in style just because the ST uses it twice. You're right it's not necessary in the ST, but for the sake of clarity and ease (it's a factual text and not a literary one after all) I think it could quite safely be left out in the TT?
I think we should never change the style of the text, if possible. In this case, the original could also have said Nomes de agencia de traducao e empresas, but it said Nomes de agencia de traducao e Nomes de empresas instead... . Nomes appears twice instead of once in the original and also in the original language they had the choice.
Jack, Many thanks for your clarification. In fact, my first idea was to use the possessive form. Fell free to submit your best suggestion within the dashboard.
So the answer is: Names of translation agencies and companies have been omitted to protect the confidentiality of the information.
You can also use agency and company as adjectives: Translation-agency and company names have been omitted.
Or you can use the possessive: Translation agencies' and companies' names have been omitted.
The first option is preferred because it's more concise and avoids confusion since the agencies and companies were not omitted, rather, only their names were omitted.
I disagree with the 4 suggestions provided by the other translators so far. Companies does NOT have to come before translation agencies. That's just wrong. And "not included" is NOT more accurate than omitted.
Thanks everybody. The complete sentence is: Nomes de Agências de Tradução e Nomes de Empresas omitidos para preservar a confidencialidade das informações. Regarding the use of the possessive ´s, it was really my main concern (to use it or not). It seem that nobdy would use it. I wonder why? The context is easy> This phase is a header of a poject list.
Hi Alberto - if this is a complete sentence, can you provide the rest of it? Also, you indicated you want to use 's (in the possessive form). The suggestions by the other translators show that you don't have to. But if you really want to you can: Translation agencies' names and companies' names have been omitted.
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
39 mins confidence:
Names of companies and translation agencies (were/have been) withheld
Explanation: This would be my suggestion. "companies" must appear before "translation agencies" for clarity purposes and to avoid confusion - i.e, as would be the case if "names of translation agencies and companies" were to be used instead.
Ana Vozone Local time: 09:14 Does not meet criteria Specializes in field Native speaker of: Portuguese PRO pts in category: 74
Names of translation agencies and enterprise names omitted...
Explanation: We have to try to stick to the original as much as possible. If you have Nomes de Agências de Tradução in the original text, then you should have Names of translation agencies in the translated version of the text.
Names of Companies and Translation agencies not included
Explanation: I agree with the fact that Company should come first, but also suggest that "not inclueded" is more accurate than omitted or withheld (the latter is something completely different as it implies that the names were deliberately withheld)
Juliet Attwater United Kingdom Local time: 09:14 Meets criteria Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 4
Grading comment
Many thanks
1 day 14 hrs confidence: peer agreement (net): +1
Names of translation agencies and companies have been omitted...
Explanation: I have changed my mind regarding keeping the style of the original text after discussing the item with others. Because it is a technical text, clarity is more important than style. I would perhaps still add some notes in this case, just to let others know of the original text and how it was written.
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.
