Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5] >
English word "herefrom" in business agreements
Thread poster: José Henrique Lamensdorf
Tom in London
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:24
Member (2008)
Italian to English
I agree Jan 28, 2016

Angie Garbarino wrote:



José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:

I cut through legalese as much as I can while translating such documents.



Never..


I agree with Angie. This is very important.


 
Preston Decker
Preston Decker  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 09:24
Chinese to English
Neither here nor there Jan 28, 2016

Most of the reading I've done on modern contract writing (although almost entirely by US authors), has suggested that the "here" and "there" words should only be used with great caution because they are somewhat ambiguous and archaic. Case in point:
http://www.adamsdrafting.com/what-does-hereunder-refer-to/

Now this is just one man's opinion, and as translator
... See more
Most of the reading I've done on modern contract writing (although almost entirely by US authors), has suggested that the "here" and "there" words should only be used with great caution because they are somewhat ambiguous and archaic. Case in point:
http://www.adamsdrafting.com/what-does-hereunder-refer-to/

Now this is just one man's opinion, and as translators we are obviously looking at this from another perspective, but I would give extra thought before rendering anything written precisely in the source text into English using any of the "heres" or "theres".


[Edited at 2016-01-28 15:26 GMT]
Collapse


 
Inga Petkelyte
Inga Petkelyte  Identity Verified
Portugal
Local time: 13:24
Lithuanian to Portuguese
+ ...
Oh oh Jan 28, 2016

Tom in London wrote:

You may want to think that because it makes life easier for you, but it's not true.



I hereby confirm the aforesaid.

[Edited at 2016-01-28 15:17 GMT]


Tom, it may be you that like to think so as it is your native language and it must hurt to see it kind of profanated.
I am not biased on this, so I reiterate my previous statement
If it were wrong (ok, not true), why are there so many scholar studies on the matter?
By the way, I don't like "easy", it's not interesting, not challenging, it's shallow and boring.


 
José Henrique Lamensdorf
José Henrique Lamensdorf  Identity Verified
Brazil
Local time: 10:24
English to Portuguese
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
In memoriam
Extra resource in IT not available in PT Jan 28, 2016

Angie Garbarino wrote:

You know, Jose, in Italian it is possible to say DA QUI= FROM HERE, in a legal context, like herefrom, it can be used in both ways, "da qui posso vedere le montagne" and also "le dispute da qui derivanti"

Just a curious information

PS. of course "dal presente" is better.


In IT (of which I learned too little, too long ago, and possibly forgot too much, ma ancora parlo) there is DA, which implies motion, and DI, which implies origin or possession.

In PT there is only DE for both. Yes, we have DA, but it's DE+A (article), which in IT would correspond to both DELLA and DALLA. Likewise, we have DO for DELLO and DALLO (oppure DEL/DAL).

So if I say, anywhere, present location included:
Eu sou de Sao Paulo.
It's sort of "I belong to Sao Paulo", was born in and live here. No motion.
In IT, if I could say that exactly, it would be:
Io sono di San Paolo.

Then, if I say (anywhere outside São Paulo):
Eu vim de São Paulo.
In IT I'd say:
Sono venuto da San Paolo.
(= I came from Sao Paulo.)
Motion implied.

As the PT "DE" does not imply - nor fails to imply - any motion, DAQUI to replace HEREFROM in an agreement could perfectly mean "from here, where I stand" (and can see the mountains), or from the location where the agreement is being signed or read, and becomes meaningless, so it should always be avoided.

A theoretically possible option would be DISTO (DE + ISTO = from this = DI QUESTO in IT). This what??? This document, duh! So that's why in PT we use expressions equivalent to "this agreement/instrument/document/...", which takes us back to square NUMERO UNO!


 
Tom in London
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:24
Member (2008)
Italian to English
? Jan 28, 2016

Inga Petkelyte wrote:

profanated

scholar studies


Are those examples of "International English"?

It's certainly true that there exists a version of English that's simplified down to a level where most people can say a range of very ordinary things and be understood, but which lacks sophistication, nuance, elegance, subtlety, allusiveness, or style.

No doubt that's what you mean. A form of English that may be good enough for understanding how to get a taxi to the airport.

[Edited at 2016-01-28 16:04 GMT]


 
Angie Garbarino
Angie Garbarino  Identity Verified
Local time: 14:24
Member (2003)
French to Italian
+ ...
@ Jose DA in Italian Jan 28, 2016

Hi Jose

DA is indeed a very complicated preposition, it is used in many meanings, but yes there is DA and there is DI


Interesting anyway


 
Tina Vonhof (X)
Tina Vonhof (X)
Canada
Local time: 07:24
Dutch to English
+ ...
My take Jan 28, 2016

I am in favour of simplifying legal language and for 'arising herefrom' I would say 'arising from this agreement' (or decision or ruling or whatever the case may be). That might also be easier to translate in other languages.

 
Ty Kendall
Ty Kendall  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:24
Hebrew to English
Do we have a choice re: simplifying legalese ? Jan 28, 2016

I have noticed that if legal translations don't have a certain quota of hereins, therefroms, and whereupons in them then clients have a tendency to accuse them of "not being legalese enough". So, even if I were to be averse to these terms (I'm not) I don't really have the option of doing anything about it if I want to keep the customer happy.

 
Inga Petkelyte
Inga Petkelyte  Identity Verified
Portugal
Local time: 13:24
Lithuanian to Portuguese
+ ...
EIL is not a "taxi" language Jan 28, 2016

Tom in London wrote:

Inga Petkelyte wrote:

profanated

scholar studies


Are those examples of "International English"?

It's certainly true that there exists a version of English that's simplified down to a level where most people can say a range of very ordinary things and be understood, but which lacks sophistication, nuance, elegance, subtlety, allusiveness, or style.

No doubt that's what you mean. A form of English that may be good enough for understanding how to get a taxi to the airport.

[Edited at 2016-01-28 16:04 GMT]


Indeed, I too often see "profanated", "scholar" instead of "scholarly" and wonder how soon this will become a norm. I also wonder what in "scholar, scholarly" reminds you hiring a taxi.
Like it or not, EIL exists. Some (scholars, not taxi riders) debate heavily on whether EIL constitutes a new kind of English or it is simply an error-marred, simplified performance variety of English as a native language. It seems, that in the heights of your castle, only one answer is possible. Silly scholars, wasting their time...
Others, a translation agency in this particular case, define it as follows: "International English is a term often used to describe a generic version of the English Language used in documentation and technical writing. "
Nothing to do with simplification for hiring a taxi.
Sorry, José, for this deviation from the main topic.


 
Tom in London
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:24
Member (2008)
Italian to English
really? Jan 28, 2016

Inga Petkelyte wrote:

Indeed, I too often see "profanated", "scholar" instead of "scholarly" and wonder how soon this will become a norm. I also wonder what in "scholar, scholarly" reminds you hiring a taxi.
Like it or not, EIL exists. Some (scholars, not taxi riders) debate heavily on whether EIL constitutes a new kind of English or it is simply an error-marred, simplified performance variety of English as a native language. It seems, that in the heights of your castle, only one answer is possible. Silly scholars, wasting their time...
Others, a translation agency in this particular case, define it as follows: "International English is a term often used to describe a generic version of the English Language used in documentation and technical writing. "
Nothing to do with simplification for hiring a taxi.
Sorry, José, for this deviation from the main topic.


If the above is an example of "International English" I don't think lovers of languages (English and all others) have much to be concerned about. Oh, and I don't necessarily think that a translation agency would be my interlocutor of choice if I felt the need to define the characteristics of a new version (real or supposed) of any language. In most cases an agency would be my *last* port of call.

[Edited at 2016-01-28 17:29 GMT]


 
Preston Decker
Preston Decker  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 09:24
Chinese to English
RE Jan 28, 2016

Ty Kendall wrote:

I have noticed that if legal translations don't have a certain quota of hereins, therefroms, and whereupons in them then clients have a tendency to accuse them of "not being legalese enough". So, even if I were to be averse to these terms (I'm not) I don't really have the option of doing anything about it if I want to keep the customer happy.


I understand where you're coming from, but ultimately the goal has to be to convey the meaning of the source as accurately as possible. If the source text uses ambiguous legalese, then by all means do the same in the translation. However, "legalese" as we think of it in English does not exist in all languages. I'd argue that the meaning of Chinese legal writing is actually far clearer and more explicit (even to the lay reader) than most Chinese marketing and business materials.

In Chinese, there is a term (本协议), which literally means "this Agreement" (or the Agreement), but is sometimes translated using "herein" or "hereunder". I'm guessing this translation is often chosen precisely because of the reason that you mentioned: to make the translation more legalese. The problem with this is that an explicit term in the Chinese is potentially being turned into an ambiguous one in English (at least according to US courts). While repeating "this Agreement" a hundred times in the document may be awkward, it is far better than using "herein" just to make your document look more "legal". I will occasionally use "herein", but only when I feel the meaning is clear.

Furthermore, it's important to understand the court system of the locale with jurisdiction over a contract's interpretation. That same blog I referenced before interviewed lawyers from a well-known China law blog (read it here: http://www.adamsdrafting.com/using-english-language-contracts-in-china-my-q-and-a-with-china-law-blog/) . The answer to the second question is fascinating, especially the quote: "For China only the concept is important." I.e., if you're translating from English to Chinese for use in China, the courts are probably not going to worry as much about the ambiguity of a certain term, so long as the intended meaning is clear. If you're translating from Chinese into English for use in US courts, any lawyer in America would tell you that the wording is very important. Check out a legal drafting guide from the local library (a good one is by Thomas R Haggard and George W Kuney), and flip to the section on "and/or" clauses. Court interpretations in the US on "and/or" are literally all over the place; among other issues, as the above book writes, some courts view the word "or" as exclusive, and others as "inclusive" .

Indeed, some lawyers advocate not using translated contracts at all for precisely these reasons (and the fact that many translators do not have an intimate understanding of both legal systems). So while I do understand there is pressure from agencies to provide a "legal" looking final product, the translator ultimately must render the document as faithfully to the source as possible, even if this entails using simple language.



[Edited at 2016-01-28 19:16 GMT]


 
José Henrique Lamensdorf
José Henrique Lamensdorf  Identity Verified
Brazil
Local time: 10:24
English to Portuguese
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
In memoriam
Different kinds of legalese Jan 28, 2016

Tom in London wrote:

José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:

I cut through legalese as much as I can while translating such documents.


That could be a problem. Every language has its own version of legalese.

Legalese is not frivolous. On the contrary, it is the most serious form of language. It is not to be toyed with or just eliminated because you find it difficult to understand. If anything, it calls for the most intense concentration.

Having had occasion to translate numerous Italian legal documents, contracts, correspondence written by lawyers, etc., as well as the texts of laws themselves, I would worry about trying to eliminate the legalese, particularly if a translation of a legal document has to be sworn as true and faithful to the original.


There is the accurate, objective legalese, which leaves no loophole whatsoever for misinterpretation.

And then there is legal gibberish, written by lawyers and judges alike, who seem desperate to show off that they read too much ancient literature, and find no use in the contemporary world for all that bizarre, outlandish, and certainly untimely vocabulary they garnered.

There is a whole movement, led by many judges in Brazil, towards using clear, though correct and accurate language in court. Yet some lawyers tend to push it to the other direction.

Many years ago a neighbor of mine was an old-school lawyer. His pleas read like a senator's speech... in Ancient Rome! He told me that once a friendly judge called him, asking, "Hey, Walter, could you drop by my chambers today or tomorrow to translate your case into Portuguese? I am not that fluent in Latin any more."

So I don't merely cut the legalese when I translate. I work hard to cut THROUGH it, to understand exactly what they meant, and then I write it as clearly and as accurately as I can in the target language, so that any educated person will understand it without any doubt.


 
Ty Kendall
Ty Kendall  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:24
Hebrew to English
Hebrew legalese is a wonder to behold Jan 28, 2016

Preston Decker wrote:
If the source text uses ambiguous legalese, then by all means do the same in the translation.
So while I do understand there is pressure from agencies to provide a "legal" looking final product, the translator ultimately must render the document as faithfully to the source as possible, even if this entails using simple language.


[Un]Fortunately[?] I translate from Hebrew, it specializes in ambiguous legalese, even switching to another language (Aramaic, usually) just when you think things couldn't get any more obscure (although I suppose English does the same thing with Latin).

I tend to use the hereins and thereofs when the Hebrew register is roughly equivalent, i.e. most of the time, and when I come across a bog-standard "בהסכם זה" ("in this agreement") I will keep it at that, unless there's a really good reason for moving the English register up a notch (either for consistency or because the sentence demands it for some reason).


 
Preston Decker
Preston Decker  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 09:24
Chinese to English
Fascinating! Jan 28, 2016

[quote]Ty Kendall wrote:

Preston Decker wrote:
even switching to another language (Aramaic, usually) just when you think things couldn't get any more obscure (although I suppose English does the same thing with Latin).


That definitely wins interesting fact of the day. PRC legal Chinese does something a bit similar with numbers, as contractual figures are often written out in traditional, not simplified, Chinese.


 
Stepan Konev
Stepan Konev  Identity Verified
Russian Federation
Local time: 16:24
English to Russian
Subquestion Jan 28, 2016

Folks,

When reading this thread, I noticed a wording: "arising from the _present_ document/ agreement/ contract".
Until this moment, I was sure it was a Russian "loan translation" (in Russian, "the present" often means "this"). However it was used by a translator whose languages are French and English. Very surprising observation. (Jenny Forbes, nothing personal, just linguistic curiosity)
So, my question is: Is it ok to say 'present' [contract or document] when meaning
... See more
Folks,

When reading this thread, I noticed a wording: "arising from the _present_ document/ agreement/ contract".
Until this moment, I was sure it was a Russian "loan translation" (in Russian, "the present" often means "this"). However it was used by a translator whose languages are French and English. Very surprising observation. (Jenny Forbes, nothing personal, just linguistic curiosity)
So, my question is: Is it ok to say 'present' [contract or document] when meaning 'this' in English? (The present document=this document?).

Sorry to disturb your discussion, but this is real interesting for me.
Thank you.
Collapse


 
Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5] >


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

English word "herefrom" in business agreements







Wordfast Pro
Translation Memory Software for Any Platform

Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users! Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value

Buy now! »
CafeTran Espresso
You've never met a CAT tool this clever!

Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer. Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools. Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free

Buy now! »