22:02 Oct 23, 2005 |
|
French to English translations [PRO] Bus/Financial - Investment / Securities / Mutual Funds/OPCVM | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
3 | adding to positions that ought to be being reduced |
| ||
3 | the reinforcing (or reinforcement) of positions |
|
Discussion entries: 8 | |
---|---|
le renforcement des positions qui ont vocation à être allégées adding to positions that ought to be being reduced Explanation: My Larousse defines “avoir vocation à/pour” as “être qualifié pour”, although this definition is subject to the qualification "droit". Basically, in the absence of a lot of helpful context, I feel that DrPC's suggestion in her question to the asker is about right. I was about to make the same comment myself, but I refreshed the page and saw her note. I think it is possible to interpret the "avoir vocation à" as an extension of the definition in Larousse, perhaps with a bit of heavy-handed sarcasm. But I must say I haven't seen it used in quite this way before. |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
le renforcement des positions qui ont vocation à être allégées the reinforcing (or reinforcement) of positions Explanation: since it's investments, I suppose we are talking about stock (or bonds or other investment) positions the rest should really be another question -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 15 hrs 8 mins (2005-10-24 13:11:16 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- I'll post the rest here -- pour simplifier et ne pas répéter -- réponse : the reinforcing of positions that must (ou "ought" as suggested by Richard) be lightened or reduced dans ce cas, lightened et reduced veulent dire la même chose une position (disons dans les actions de XXX) qui est réduite est aussi allégée et vice versa les deux expressions sont donc équivalentes ici sauf que généralement, on ne renforce pas une position en l'allégeant - c'est plutôt le contraire à moins qu'il n'y ait vraiment trop d'un certain type et qu'il faille diversifier |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
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.