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.
for sceptics to see on an English-only site: www.fulldls.com
I've also seen it on French-language sites; so I am 100% sure there is no need to be translating either "cute" or "teacute".
One McVittie biscuit coming up for kashew! I was indeed very perplexed by these terms... but, according to the client, both terms are code - to be left as is. My thanks to all of you! 4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer
Graham: spot on. Britt: if your client says don't translate, it's their business, but there seems no way that the text as you gave it can be correct. Simplest route to something that does make sense is just to cut out those mystery words "cute; teacute;"
Sorry Martin, teaching you to suck eggs... What fun anyway! "cuteté" doesn't exist as far as I know. Could "cute" be truncated, if so in French we'd have "eacute" or "é" which would give us "été"? That said, the sentence seems fine without the code...
Graham, I understand that entirely; if kashew does, it hasn't come through clearly in their explanation. I only meant, I don't see that a 'translation' proprement dit, even 'as is', can be offered if the diagnosis is that the source text is garbled.
The whole sentence was: "Attention: Une triangulation avec l'une des deux parties existe cute; teacute; pour ce type d'emballage." Again, according to the client, this is code "to be left as is" but the column heading is "Texte en Anglais" such that I am not translating code per se -hence the source of at least some of the confusion. Of course, I cannot say if this is google chaff or faulty code, but do find the suspicion compelling:)