English translation: Access ... is restricted to those areas ...
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.
As far as could tell, most people seemed to think I was asking about the term "Aufenthaltsbestimmungen" rather than about the sentence, which was what I tried to explain and clarify in my posting at 16:27 yesterday.
I beg to differ with your statement "at least someone has understood the question". The discussion showed clearly - not least by your own posting of Dec 26, 16:27 - that your question as put was well understood by all. Regards.
for a neater, less verbose way of putting it than using 2 or 3 different verbs, opolt.
I thought it was quite clear from the outset that my question was about how best to put the German sentence in English, especially given that the term in the title is neither used in the German sentence, nor reflected in my English draft translation.
... why not just "to stay", "to move around (an area)", and yes, "to enter"??? There's not much more to it really. All the rest is implied in the actions/verbs that follow: working, eating, changing clothes.
Anyway if your problem is with a complete sentence, IMHO you should say so in clearer terms right from the beginning ...
my question is concerned with the sentence, not the title. I put one term in as the title due to ProZ requirements "(one term at a time please)", but thought it was quite clear that is is the sentence as a whole that I have a problem with.
The title of the question should therefore perhaps be the general (and generally unhelpful) "Problem mit Satz" or "Frage zu Satz". Sorry if that was unclear.
... as your question is concerned with the title, not with the details, so a braoder term constitutes no problem whatsoever IMHO. (Of course, "Aufenthalt" does not equal "movement", but it is the basic message that counts. I mean it's really just a header.) Maybe not the term proposed by me -- but why complicate things unnecessarily?
Because wrt to the concrete restrictions, those are specified in the sections below that title, and need to be spelled out accordingly, of course. But that's not what your question is all about.
So again I believe the title of the paragraph isn't all that important, as long as it makes sense in general terms -- legally and from a pure communication standpoint, its the concrete directions contained therein that are really important.
... something along the lines of "restrictions on movement (of staff)", "constraints on the movement (of staff)" would surely do the trick, wouldn't it? And even "staff movement restrictions" or "rules for staff movement" would work IMHO -- the details are explained in the text below, so there's not a big risk of misunderstanding anyway.
I'm not happy with "sich aufhalten" or the entire remainder of the sentence "dürfen sich nur an den Stellen des Werkes aufhalten, an denen sie ihre Arbeit ausführen, ihre Mahlzeiten einnehmen oder sich umkleiden."
Instead of "external employees", how about "contractors and their staff"?
"Contractors and their staff may only enter those parts of the factory where they are required to work, the canteen / staff break room and changing rooms." or similar.
Automatic update in 00:
41 mins confidence:
Guest employee conditions
Explanation: Conditions for Guest/Outside/External employees, i.e, those workers not contracted directly to the firm itself.
Oliver Toogood United Kingdom Local time: 17:05 Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 12
Notes to answerer
Asker: That is the subject of the entire document (20 pages).