Wrong Translation - Legal Problem?

Anna Estellés estelles at aditel.org
Sun Sep 18 13:04:18 CDT 2005


Dear colleagues,

In my opinion, your idea of referring to the original as the only legally
authentic document is very good and recommended. Furthermore, in legal
translation, sometimes the translation documents includes a "Certificate of
Translation" (above I included an example). I hope it will help you, but of
course, it's only an oponion based on my experience on English & French to
Spanish legal translation and maybe it's not useful or interesting in other
contexts.

Regards,


Anna Estelles
Dep. Traducció i Interpretació
Univesitat Jaume I

-----------------------------------------------------
Certification of the translation

The undersigned is a well educated person with appropriate technical
qualification to understand and translate the attached document.

My mother tong is <mothertonguehere>.

I/We hereby certified that this translation is conformed to general practice and
do not deviate from the <SourceLanguage> of the source document at:

<http://SourceDocument>

Done in PLACE, this ____ of ____ 200_


_______________
Translator/s signature or name

-------------------------------------------------------------------





Quoting Peter Jochum <peter.jochum at gmail.com>:

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Peter Jochum <peter.jochum at gmail.com>
> Date: 18.09.2005 16:49
> Subject: Re: Wrong Translation - Legal Problem?
> To: mdke at ubuntu.com
>
>
> well, i think the translated licences are better understandable if
> someone doesn't have good english skills (if any at all). some small
> errors are acceptable here, but maybe there should be a disclaimer
> that there is no guarantee on the translation, and it was just made to
> make the lincence more understandable. and a link to the valid english
> version.
>
> on http://www.gnu.de/gpl-ger.html i found a german translation for the
> gpl for example, and in they header there's a german & english
> statement that this document is only for better understanding of the
> licence and shouldn't be used as a licence.
>
> Ped
>
> 2005/9/18, Matthew East <mdke at ubuntu.com>:
> > On Sun, 2005-09-18 at 16:23 +0200, Peter Jochum wrote:
> > > I got a question about translating the licencing stuff in
> > > ubuntu-docs-faq. I have only monitored the progress on the german
> > > translation. We progressed quickly at first, but now there are many
> > > strings about which rights people have or don't have.
> > >
> > > Should these strings be translated at all?
> > > If they are translated, could there arise problems from a wrong
> > > translation? (for the translator or even ubuntu itself)
> >
> > Yeah this is another good question. I have tried to find a solution
> > whereby we leave the licences out of the template, but have not been
> > successful so far. My view, reading the licence, is that it should be
> > left in English where possible.
> >
> > If I find a better solution, I will upload a new template.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
> >
> > iD8DBQBDLXl4tSaF0w5rBv8RAgPPAJ90AGLo9B8j9Dui2qcAPIe/Pi08IgCfWWb/
> > o8Nziizeb5zQwaNEfRS9rsE=
> > =naT0
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> >
> > --
> > ubuntu-translators mailing list
> > ubuntu-translators at lists.ubuntu.com
> > http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> ubuntu-translators mailing list
> ubuntu-translators at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-translators
>


-- 
Anna Estellés
ADITEL



More information about the ubuntu-translators mailing list