| Страниц в теме: < [1 2] | client wants to remove the article "the" Автор темы: French Foodie
|
|---|
Craig Meulen 
Великобритания
Local time: 16:43
немецкий => английский
| re-opening the thread ... | Mar 8, 2007 |
Hi, I just thought I'd post here because I posted a KudoZ question relating to exactly the same problem.
Future visitors here may find the cross-linking useful, since there were some useful answers to my KudoZ question.
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/1809446
| | | | lingomania
Local time: 02:43
итальянский => английский
In modern English, the use of this tedious article has become quite arbitrary. A lot depends on how the inclusion of THE in the sentence sounds to our ears.
| | | | Spring City (X)
Local time: 00:43
китайский => английский
+ ...
| Er.. not always | May 16, 2007 |
topdate wrote:
You don' use "the" with abbreviations but when you write the full name you use "the".That is the shortse answer to ben given.
Ex: The United Nations launched a new programme
UN launched a new programme
In this case it would be: the UN launched a new programme. I can't think of any cases where UN would be without the article.
LSE: sometimes with the article too. "I studied at the LSE" does not sound wrong. In fact "I studied at LSE" sounds a bit odd, as if the management of the LSE is going in for rebranding or something. [I am British, by the way.]
The full name would always be with the article. In the case of abbreviations, use of the article is more tricky. Readable acronymns like NATO don't have the article. But to refer to the UN and the LSE as just UN and LSE sounds like the Tate Gallery's "decision" to try to modernize its image and be known simply as "Tate" - a controversial piece of nonsense. Private-sector companies, however, are entitled to indulge in any amount of rebranding. So, an imaginary "School of Bilingual Communication" could be rebranded as "Communication", and instead of welcoming new students to the School of Bilingual Communication, they could be welcomed to Communication, or to SBC.
There are other examples: I watched a programme on the BBC. I watched a programme on ITV. I saw it on CNN. It is difficult to arrive at one rule that fits all cases. The LSE, please. This is a publicly owned institution that is indulging in puerile rebranding...
[Edited at 2007-05-16 02:34]
| | | | | There is a "rule" and the client is “wrong”, but... | Jul 17, 2007 |
This subject is one I’ve been mulling over for the last few months, and I think I might be able to offer a synthesis that could help translators/editors and their clients reach decisions based on the specific merits of each case. Although I would agree with the consensus that the client can omit the article in this case, I would have made sure he was aware of what messages this choice sends about his organisation.
As Giles Watson pointed out, ECV is an initialism, not an acronym.... See more This subject is one I’ve been mulling over for the last few months, and I think I might be able to offer a synthesis that could help translators/editors and their clients reach decisions based on the specific merits of each case. Although I would agree with the consensus that the client can omit the article in this case, I would have made sure he was aware of what messages this choice sends about his organisation.
As Giles Watson pointed out, ECV is an initialism, not an acronym. Since this distinction often causes problems, it’s worth clarifying again. Acronyms, such as Nato/NATO or Unicef/UNICEF, can be easily pronounced as a word, and this word becomes the organisation’s proper name (the choice between an initial capital and all capitals seems to be a UK/US divergence). You would not normally write "the Nato" any more than you would write "the Sandra" or "the Thomas". In contrast, an initialism is an abbreviation that is not pronounced as a word; instead the initial letters are spelled out: USA = yoo-ess-ay, UK = yoo-kay, CIA = see-eye-ay, and so on). Notice that many abbreviations that could be acronyms, such as these examples, are used as initialisms; “yoosa” and “uck” somehow just don’t seem appropriate abbreviations for countries. In other cases, initials are spelled out because they do not form an easily pronounceable unit (like ECV and BBC).
The rule/guideline for the use of the definite article with title initialisms is that if the full title requires the definite article then the initialism does too. The key word here is requires. For entities that never have a definite article when pronounced or written in full (British Petroleum, United Airlines, Independent Television) it’s obvious that there should never be an article with the initialism (“BP”, not “the BP”). Conversely, entities like the Central Intelligence Agency and the British Broadcasting Corporation should always appear in texts with the definite article (when they are the head of a noun phrase). So, just as you would never write "Central Intelligence Agency has issued a warning", you should never write "CIA has issued a warning": the article is required in both cases.
But there are cases where you have a choice, and Charlie Bavington is spot on to cite place names as being among these (in fact, I can’t think of another case; I’d be interested to hear if anyone else can). One could quite legitimately write "Birmingham Children’s Hospital is a key centre for paediatric medicine in the UK", so you could likewise legitimately write "BCH is a key centre for paediatric medicine in the UK". But if you wanted, you could say "The Birmingham Children’s Hospital is a key centre …" and "The BCH is a key centre...". This is an area in which the translator/editor has to balance the client’s preference with her own knowledge and with current practice at the institution in question. Very often institutions don’t have a fixed policy, so for example you find "The LSE" and "LSE". In other cases one option is clearly favoured: "The MIT" is rarely used; the preferred option is "MIT" (pronounced em-eye-tee). This choice explains why the intitialism NYU sounds natural without the definite article, but FBI does not (compare "I teach at NYU" with "I spy for the FBI"). An important point to remember is that this optional use of the definite article only applies when the place name in the title is used as an attributive modifier (for example, New York University); it does not apply when the location is indicated with an adjective ("the American Heart Association"). Since national affiliation is usually indicated with an adjective (American, British, Spanish), national institutions will require the definite article ("the AHA").
In cases such as Mara’s, where the initialism stands for words in another language, I would apply the rule as usual by asking myself what I would do if I had to write the title out in full. Since I would write "The Ecole Communication Visuelle", I would, in principle, prefer "The ECV".
So it looks as if I’m saying that the client is wrong. But as previous posts pointed out, there is another issue at play. The initialism ECV is an essential part of the client’s institutional brand, and this can override the “rule” in some circumstances. It’s not that a strong brand identity is incompatible with the use of the definite article. The BBC is a universally recognised brand, and although BBC appears alone in the logo, it takes the definite article in texts. However, “visual grammar” increasingly dominates our culture, and there is a tendency to try and reinforce brand identification through the way the brand name is presented textually. This has been accelerated by the internet revolution over the last 15 years, for example with words joined together to form the company URL being carried over into other discourse situations. Dropping the article is one trend in this fashion. The fact that the client’s institution is a centre for visual communication, as well as his stated preference for all lower case in the abbreviation (a related trend), suggests that dropping the article might be appropriate for his target audience. More important, it suggests that he understands his audience’s expectations. Dropping the article is part of a message that says “design savvy, contemporary”. I don’t think this is a US/UK issue; it’s the fashion in certain discourse communities (commerce, design, fashion). It might last and it might spread; a possible headline of the future might be "USA today announced drastic measures to reduce carbon emissions" (but I doubt it). Or it might fade away. In a case like this you should respect the fact that your client knows his audience and recognise that “rule floating” is an important element of innovation, which is often central to establishing brand identity. I agree with Spring City that this trend is regrettable when the institution involved is publicly owned, and that a more complete rebranding, with a new name, would often be a better solution for private-sector organisations, but the most a translator/editor can do is make sure that the client is aware of the issues.
What about other potential clients? If you come across a similar situation in the future with, for example, an association of web-designers, dropping the article might be justified if that’s what the client wants, even if the “rule” requires it. But what if the client is the National Center for Geophysical Research? Here I would be conservative; an innovative, fashion-conscious brand image wouldn’t be appropriate. I would explain the issues discussed here to the client and stand firm for "The NCGR". ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| High prestige "rule" breakers | Jul 17, 2007 |
I thought I’d clinched it with my previous post, but I’ve just visited the National Institutes of Health website, and have to revise my position. Here are two sentences from their site (http://www.nih.gov/about/):
“The NIH traces its roots to 1887…”
“NIH is the steward of medical and behavioural research for the nation.”
These sentences occur six lines apart. I find the usage ... See more I thought I’d clinched it with my previous post, but I’ve just visited the National Institutes of Health website, and have to revise my position. Here are two sentences from their site (http://www.nih.gov/about/):
“The NIH traces its roots to 1887…”
“NIH is the steward of medical and behavioural research for the nation.”
These sentences occur six lines apart. I find the usage without the article inappropriate (just as I would the hypothetical sentence “USA is a country in North America”); and they could at least be consistent.
Is this a US/UK issue after all? The UK’s National Institute for Medical Research (http://www.nimr.mrc.ac.uk/) uses NIMR without the article for headings (“About NIMR”, not “About the NIMR”), but elsewhere ducks the issue by using “the Institute”.
I would still apply the "rule" whenever possible, and try to convince clients when it seems important. But it seems that this is a language area where things are changing. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Страниц в теме: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » client wants to remove the article "the" | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | 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! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
