Um die vollumfängliche Abwicklung der Förderungen

14:59 Nov 22, 2015 

I did find other sources now:
https://www.tgci.com/grantsmanship-center-consulting/grant-m...

In German, Fördermittelmanagement is more or less used both ways, and it seems - this is where I will stand corrected, Robert (and that's why I asked before) - that in English, you can also use it for the receiver of the grants. But: grant management seems to only include managing grants you have at least selected; I am a bit uncertain whether "vollumfänglich" doesn't mean more than that.

I'd still prefer your second option, because I think complement + by providing is ambiguous.

Regarding the second issue:
Robert did say UK English and I consider subsidy the preferred option here (yes, that may be my opinion based on my experience). The US government may see that a bit differently (like when they say grant-maker for all funders), but the UK government does say "grants and subsidies," and the general understanding should be that subsidy can be used for a lot of things (which you confirmed by saying "broad" and which is mentioned here as well: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/subsidy.html ), but grant is rather limited.

Best wishes.

14:43 Nov 22, 2015 

I am not quite sure what you are trying to say.

I do consider it a bit unfair to say (at least it sounds like it) that I am only looking for references to support my interpretation. I am not in the business of trying to impose my opinion and my opinion alone, because that's not the intersubjectivity I would be striving for. Moreover, we were able to agree on other issues, also after discussion.

Of course, all online and offline searches will be searches for indicators (including credibility of the source), nothing more. I don't use Ngrams lightly and everyone may understand certain things to be a bit different (I told Ramey I'd prefer include; she tells me she prefers encompass; I agreed, because this seems more like a personal preference to me).

All you had to do was post a source to the contrary - which you usually include in your answer. I am one of these people who will change stated opinions based on new info. You should know how fickle Google searches can be.

Frequently, I encounter those pages:
https://fluidreview.com/grant-management-software/

That's funding source only.

[continues...]

16:55 Nov 20, 2015 

I like the sound of encompass better than that of include. It's an aural hug.

16:06 Nov 20, 2015 

Ramey, of course I know the difference, but you're omitting "augment" from the equation.

It doesn't say "it includes," but it would say "it is augmented to include," which means "it now encompasses" as in

"Paragraph two has been augmented to include reference for LA and Board
partners to provide the LSCB with data to enable it to fulfil its statutory
functions effectively."
http://www.safeguardingchildren.co.uk/managed/NYSGC/pg/Worki...

The infinitive with to describes of what purpose the augmentation is. You could also say: "We are augmenting our services. The intent is to include subsidy procurement facilitation." That's what the infinitive is for. It's the same way with "extended to include" or "expanded to include."

07:27 Nov 20, 2015 

Of yourse you can use include for encompass. Still there is a fine difference:
Include indicates something INSIDE an object, idea, etc.
Encompass indicates the object, idea has OPENED to embrace a further idea, object.

18:14 Nov 19, 2015 

Thanks, Ramey, I figured.

My issue with keeping the register during translation is that based on experience, almost any document written in German has to sound more formal than in English, because any attempts to "simplify" the language in German is met with associations to low-class speech capabilities.

You see that when you translate the other way around - all those business software documents speaking directly about you and your company seem too personal.

No, Ramey, Germans love to be "direct" - no offense taken :) You are right, it's not appropriate here. I am just trying to "climb up the register" by presenting some basic notion first and then eventually getting to the right point.

I do like "augment" - can we replace "encompass" with "include"? It just flows better, IMO.

18:11 Nov 19, 2015 

I hope that wasn't too direct! Here is what I feel to be an appropriately formal rendition:
We are augmenting our services to encompass subsidy procurement facilitation. This will lower our customers' costs.
I often think two English sentences are much more effective than trying to stuff the German into one.

18:01 Nov 19, 2015 

wrong orchestra, if you catch my meaning. It's much more formal

17:59 Nov 19, 2015 

I know what you mean. The important thing here was in my view to a) correct the German sentence, b) clarify the usage of subsidy, and c) provide a gentle push into the right direction (which I think a simple "subsidy/grant management" and "sponsorship" both fail to do).

Any objections about recycling part of my suggestion below or do you feel it is the wrong register?

Our customers will save even more money because we will take care of (the long and tedious process of) subsidy procurement.

Just an idea.

17:50 Nov 19, 2015 

it should be subsidy procurement formalities - as they cannot ensure they will actually procure the subsidy, but they can ensure they will use every trick in the book to try to.

17:47 Nov 19, 2015 

Thanks! Subsidy procurement sounds nice. I knew you would not disappoint me :)

To your second sentence: Yes, but that is common in German and is usually replaced by "you" in English. Germans just love third-person and passive structures. Don't ask me why.

With third person, I meant that you're talking to the customer about the customer being a cost factor. That just doesn't sound right to me. I entirely agree with "our clients'/customers' cost(s)" as the more appropriate option.

17:41 Nov 19, 2015 

By expanding our services to encompass complete subsidy procurement, we will lower our clients' costs/our clients' cost will be reduced.

the text does talk of the client in the third person.

17:40 Nov 19, 2015 

Isn't client/customer costs the other way around, too?
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/customer-costs....

I.e., the costs associated with customers. It's like you're talking to a customer about him in the third person.

17:36 Nov 19, 2015 

Packages, portfolio, offerings
We are expanding our services to encompass complete funding management, which will further lower our clients' costs.

17:28 Nov 19, 2015 

"We advise private sector bidders, we help them to develop structures that allow them to access local and international funds."
http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/transportation-logistics...

I also know "to secure funds."

"The challenge that lies ahead is to secure sufficient funds for core costs for CRP
Officer salary and office overheads of"
http://www.abbeyline.org.uk/Abbey_Line_Annual_Report_2013_20...

17:10 Nov 19, 2015 

Thank you! Ha, but the comma was at the wrong place in German.

Um Kosten für den Kunden zu senken, ergänzen wir unsere Produkte um die vollumfängliche Abwicklung der Förderungen (Fördermittelmanagement).

Do you see it now?

17:06 Nov 19, 2015 

..and yes..it turns out that this wording is not missing a verb and is intentional, but he did admit it was awkwardly-phrased.

This is what he wrote:

***der Satz ist nicht ganz klar bzw. etwas unglücklich formuliert. Somit kann ich gut nachvollziehen, dass das Gefühl - eines fehlenden Wortes - entsteht. Es fehlt aber keins… Vielleicht macht es den Satz klarer, wenn er anderes herum formuliert ist: „Wir ergänzen unsere Produkte um die vollumfängliche Abwicklung von Förderungen (Fördermittelmanagement), um Kosten für den Kunden zu senken.“ Anstatt „vollumfängliche Abwicklung von Förderungen“ könnte man auch schreiben: „Wir ergänzen unsere Produkte um die Leistung „Fördermittelmanagement“, um Kosten für den Kunden zu senken. Ich hoffe, dass hilft Ihnen weiter!? Falls nicht, stehe ich Ihnen gerne für weitere Erläuterungen zur Verfügung. ***

As for the product type, it's basically railway services (shunting services, train services, infrastructure services, information logistics, capacity management etc.)

I am still considering all I've read so far and am trying to find an appropriate expression.

17:02 Nov 19, 2015 

When in doubt, it's funding.

17:01 Nov 19, 2015 

I quote Robert
"And yes, the sentence does have that comma after \"Produkte\" and then begins with \"um die..etc.\" but without ending with a verb"

The comma before "um" is wrong, Robert if it does not end with a verb. Don't expect all Germans to be grammar geniuses. The whole phrase is "um...etwas ergänzen."

17:00 Nov 19, 2015 

(see below) regarding subsidy acquisition.

In order to lower client costs, we are expanding our field of expertise to encompass all avenues leading to subsidy acquisition.
The Products has got me, here. What products?

16:58 Nov 19, 2015 

I agree. I usually provide only some "official" links (government links, judgments, mono-lingual dictionaries, ENS company product pages), but I don't use Google, e.g., for proving that A has more hits than B - which I already discussed with Charles a long time ago; if someone does that, he has not understood Google's inner workings.

I said I like your suggestion of "formalities," I was just trying to search for some short combination of words that is readily understood. I think a two-word solution of subsidy/grant management gives the wrong idea, but I couldn't come up with a snappy phrase - that's when I thought, I'd ask you ;)

16:51 Nov 19, 2015 

procedures, paperwork

As you know, Björn, I do not rely much on Google hits, and that for two reasons:
1. Google will tell you what everyone else is saying, but what effective translator wants to repeat every other translator?
2. Even if everyone is saying it, doesn't make it appropriate (or intelligent or correct or grammatically valid)

16:29 Nov 19, 2015 

Oh, and a US link, sections E through G:
http://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/view.php?topic=17-vii-1...

In addition, I stick to what I said about grant management - it's the opposite of what you need, am I correct? When you look for subsidy management, you'll find:

"Companies who are looking for ways to help employees pay for the high cost of child care may want to establish a child care subsidy program."
http://www.childcareanswers.com/subsidy_mgmt.html

Grant/subsidy management means that you help a company or government agency to manage their program, not as in your document to obtain funds from it. Thus, you cannot shorten it in such a way.

Like Ramey's "formalities," but it doesn't yield many search results. Trying to find the right combination, just have writer's bloque at the moment :-/

16:22 Nov 19, 2015 

Thank you for your feedback. Does this help for reassurance?

"Funding for Network Rail and the train and freight operating companies comes from a combination of passenger fares, government subsidy and commercial operations. For total railway income, the 2013-2014 figures show:"
http://orr.gov.uk/about-orr/open-rail/how-the-rail-industry-...

"A recent study found that directing public subsidies to infrastructure managers correlates with a better performance of the railway network. A look at different funding models across Europe reveals how the distribution of subsidies could influence rail efficiency."
http://www.railway-technology.com/features/featuremanaging-s...

13:04 Nov 19, 2015 

...I would have to go with subsidy for this entry. Since the text is referring to a type of "corporate welfare", it is the most appropriate term, given the context of the rest of the text.

20:01 Nov 17, 2015 

Any thoughts on this, Robert?

01:25 Nov 17, 2015 

Our customers will save even more money because we handle their entire subsidy application process.

01:21 Nov 17, 2015 

Grant management seems to be the wrong way around. It helps government agencies, not companies. See: http://www.brightsystems.co.uk/site_sp/Our_Products/Grant_Ma...

Do you agree with me here?

01:14 Nov 17, 2015 

Always a hot topic: grant or subsidy?

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/whats-difference-between-gran...

Disagree with sponsorship, but I am rather certain it's subsidies, not grants. You have the last word, of course.