Translation - Frans-Engels - Attestation de travail

Hi!
As the guy is still employed in the company, wouldn't it be better with the present tense ("...is employed at the company..."

Then, depending on some of the context we haven't got here (the year when the guy was employed), "for the past year" seems not appropriate either


CC: Lein

I already posted the reason why I think the translation is wrong (my preview post)

"Has been" is present perfect continuous and seems most appropriate for the meaning intended here: he has been working since (year) and continues to work.

For the duration/time of employment, I agree that "since (year)" would be more appropriate.

Thanks guys!

Is it clear from the French (or Serbian) text if he has been employed only since last year, or if the writer is trying to say he has worked there during the whole of last year (i.e., maybe longer)?

a) There is a good tradition to put addressee in legal documents, at least "To Whom It May Concern:" in English, "À ceux qui ont le droit:" in French.
b) The purpose of this document is to confirm that the person has consistent incomes. Thus it should be called "Confirmation of Consistent Income".
c) I believe this is not the case when "We confirm" should be applied, as it is sufficient that only one person sign this document. Besides, I ask you to recognize that legal documents have some phrases we don't use in everyday life, like hereby, therein, thereof etc. Thus I suggest to begin this document by phrase "In the name of company "…" hereby I declare that …
d) Usually legal documents demand indication of residential address, not a place one is living at.
e) There is a better phrase for term "work notebook". Wikipedia editors call that thing "Employment Record Book", see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Record_Book .
f) First of all, certificates and other documents are issued, only after they are delivered. It is why I suggest you to change the last paragraph, as given below:

This document is issued upon request of …, in order to supply him with necessary information for the inquiry of visa of French Republic, provided that this visa is to be issued for travelling purposes only and valid for a period of 30 (thirty) days. Other usage of this document is prohibited.

Hi Lein!

It is not notified "since last year" in the French version, it is said "is employed -or "has been employed, you're right about this point,sartzsche- since year (...) so it could be thirty years or one year, but it is not said (the form is to be filled up with the exact year, I guess it is a standard work certificate for any official (administrative) purpose (here in order to obtain a visa).

Thanks! Could you have a look at the translation now (I have made a small edit) and let me know if that is better?

I think "has been employed since year (...) Would be more appropriate, as it is not mentioned "last year" in the French version.
Apparently, according to this version in French, the year that is going to be inscribed instead of "(godina)" has to be the year when the guy started to work for this company. (this is why I said, "it could be thirty years or one year", as we don't know it)

Je ne juge que la traduction de l'anglais vers le français.
L'ensemble est bon, il y a quelques coquilles cependant. Voilà ma version.

Nous, sous signée (the giver of the attestation)confirmons que N.N, demeurant à ..., rue..., à ...., numéro personnel d'identification...., numéro de série du carnet de travail....est employé de l'entreprise .... et ce depuis (year). Son salaire mensuel est de .... dinars.
La présente attestation est délivrée à M. N.N., afin qu'il soit en mesure de faire une demande de visa français, pour un séjour à vocation touristique d'une durée de trente jours. Elle ne saurait être utilisée à d'autres fins".

Hm, sorry, my French is not good enough to comment on that one. Anyhow, I think the French translation had been approved - this is about the English one

Francky, I have removed the year altogether because I think 'godina' means 'year'. The problem with 'since' last year' would be that it does in fact mean they employed him last year.
Marija, could you take a quick look at the comments to make sure I didn't mess them up?


CC: maki_sindja

This translation can be improved.
What durklis said makes perfect sense.
See above.

@Prometheus : Hi! Thanks for your help, but I'm afraid you did not pay too much attention about which was the source-text and which was the translation. There isn't any translation from English to French, actually the English version has been translated from the French one.

@ RedShadow : Merci de participer à cette évaluation, mais je ne suis pas d'accord avec toi. Il s'agit d'une banale attestation d'employeur pour obtenir un visa, il ne s'agit pas d'un courrier. C'est un formulaire qui se doit d'être laconique, sans formules d'introduction, de destinataire etc... (d'ailleurs ce qu'on demande ici est de traduire le texte serbe tel qu'il a été rédigé)

@ Lein : You can trust my French as this is the only language I'm really fluent with.

Hello everyone.

In Serbia you write N. N. for unidentified person. Can U. P. or J. D. (John/Jane Doe) be used for English version? (a person filling in this document should write the exact name instead of it)

"for a period of 30 days" - "for a period of 30 (thirty) days"
"at the end of a tourist trip" - "by reason of a planned tourist trip" (or something like that; this explains why a French visa is necessary)

Lein, maybe you should also put
"JMBG broj - personal identification number"
"broj radne knjizice - work notebook serial number"
"iznos plate - salary amount"
in the remarks field...

I like Bojana's bridge, too.

je pense que "dans le but de" signifie plutôt "with the aim", je suggerais "This certificate is delivered to him to fulfill the requirements for the French visa for a period of 30 days so as to make a trip and is cannot be used for other purposes than mention hereabove."

It's perfect except for "used used".

Oops! Thanks kafetzou!
I have incorporated the different comments and will accept.

Durklis, I think you have some good points for writing a letter like this, but I am not convinced we should change the translation this way;

a) There is a good tradition to put addressee in legal documents, at least "To Whom It May Concern:" in English, "À ceux qui ont le droit:" in French. -> yes, but that is nowhere in the original, so I don't think we should add it here.

b) The purpose of this document is to confirm that the person has consistent incomes. Thus it should be called "Confirmation of Consistent Income". -> or maybe it is to confirm the person has a job in Serbia, or with this particular company. Let's keep the original title.

c) I believe this is not the case when "We confirm" should be applied, as it is sufficient that only one person sign this document. Besides, I ask you to recognize that legal documents have some phrases we don't use in everyday life, like hereby, therein, thereof etc. Thus I suggest to begin this document by phrase "In the name of company "…" hereby I declare that … -> again, as this is not in the original, I don't think we can add 'in the name of' to the translation. If someone is asked to confirm this person works for him, that is what he will want to do...

d) Usually legal documents demand indication of residential address, not a place one is living at. -> That was not so clear from the first version, but I believe that is what it says now.

e) There is a better phrase for term "work notebook". Wikipedia editors call that thing "Employment Record Book", see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Record_Book . -> nobody else seems to do this though - and as anybody can edit Wikipedia, it is generally not a good idea to use it as your only reference. I have seen 'workbook' on a few trustworthy sites and think 'work notebook' may cover this well.

f) First of all, certificates and other documents are issued, only after they are delivered. It is why I suggest you to change the last paragraph, as given below:

This document is issued upon request of …, in order to supply him with necessary information for the inquiry of visa of French Republic, provided that this visa is to be issued for travelling purposes only and valid for a period of 30 (thirty) days. Other usage of this document is prohibited.
-> It looks like the document has been issued and delivered though.

Especially because the translation went from Serbian via French to English, I think it is a good idea to stick quite closely to the original so that no extra or incorrect words slip in. If someone wants to confirm someone works for him, it is not our job to decide he should declare the person has an income in Serbia, even if that would be a more common way to write a similar declaration.

"à ceux qui ont le droit" is never used in French anyway, I don't know where you got that fanciful expression from, Durklis
"À qui de droit" is used though (not that far from what you said but... ), this is very formal, and completely useless here as this text is not a mail nor an e mail, but an attestation (certificate of work) that is delivered by the employer for any legal and/or administrative purpose.

You tend to be willing to "improve" translations from texts,and in other circumstances it might be a worthwhile initiative, but as far as a source-text is correctly written, what we've got to do here is to respect the way it was initially written. Maybe if we were to write such texts by ourselves, would we display the terms otherwise, but here we've got to translate texts, not to interpret them.

This is the way we are intending to work on

I posted this remark here, but I could have posted it under several other translations you were willing to "improve" as well, with the same way to interpret texts, and once again, our point here is precisely NOT to interpret texts, but to translate them as accurately as possible, and as close to the original text as possible.