Glossary entry (derived from question below)
Dutch term or phrase:
wel in het sub a gemelde geval
English translation:
specifically in the case mentioned in subarticle A
Added to glossary by
Erik van Vliet
- The asker opted for community grading. The question was closed on 2016-12-29 15:54:07 based on peer agreement (or, if there were too few peer comments, asker preference.)
Dec 25, 2016 21:00
7 yrs ago
1 viewer *
Dutch term
wel in het sub a gemelde geval
Dutch to English
Law/Patents
Law (general)
Statuten
An extract from the Articles:
de gevraagde goedkeuring wordt geacht te zijn verleend en wel in het sub a gemelde geval op de dag waarop de vergadering uiterlijk ha moeten worden gehouden
de gevraagde goedkeuring wordt geacht te zijn verleend en wel in het sub a gemelde geval op de dag waarop de vergadering uiterlijk ha moeten worden gehouden
Proposed translations
(English)
5 -2 | punt A | Erik van Vliet |
5 -1 | specifically in the case mentioned in subarticle A | Erik van Vliet |
Change log
Dec 29, 2016 16:03: Erik van Vliet Created KOG entry
Proposed translations
-2
12 hrs
Selected
punt A
sub a betekent punt A. Je hebt dus een opsomming, en sub A verwijst naar het eerste punt ervan.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 14 hrs (2016-12-26 11:36:30 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
As Textpertise and writeaway only give deductions and no answers of their own:
The sentence means:
"the approval that was asked for and is considered to have been provided, specifically in the case mentioned in subarticle A, on the day on which the meeting should have been held at the latest"
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 14 hrs (2016-12-26 11:36:30 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
As Textpertise and writeaway only give deductions and no answers of their own:
The sentence means:
"the approval that was asked for and is considered to have been provided, specifically in the case mentioned in subarticle A, on the day on which the meeting should have been held at the latest"
Note from asker:
That´s giving some clue, thank you |
Peer comment(s):
disagree |
Textpertise
: punt A is geen Engelse vertaling. Wel NL-NL.
7 mins
|
Yeez, you say? Het is een antwoord op zijn vraag! Constructief, hoor.
|
|
disagree |
writeaway
: You have provided an explanation in Dutch. Asker is Russian and wants the entire phrase in English. As Textpertise says, this is an Nl-En question, not NL monolingual/you post 100% confidence but haven't answered the question. does that deserve an agree?
49 mins
|
Asker is a translator who obviously has to know Dutch if he is translating from it. Also really constructive, to hit me with a disagree.
Note that I have already answered in English too...
That certainly does not deserve a disagree for trying to help.
|
|
agree |
Lianne van de Ven
: "en wel" means "specifically" or "more specifically"
7 hrs
|
disagree |
sindy cremer
: Sorry, another disagree.If you post 100% confid, your answer needs to be 100% accurate. It's not.//OK; the main answer is wrong; I don't like 'subarticle' for 'sub a' (e.g. subsection/(sub)paragraph). Plus, sorry again - it sounds a bit, well, dunglish.
9 hrs
|
That comment doesn't help at all if you don't say what you think is wrong. Try to be constructive, please. You don't add anything now but negative input. You did see that a complete translation was offered, or did you just scan the title only?
|
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Selected automatically based on peer agreement."
-1
23 hrs
specifically in the case mentioned in subarticle A
See above.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 23 hrs (2016-12-26 20:18:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Formally put the answer in the title, to satisfy the disagrees above.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 23 hrs (2016-12-26 20:18:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Formally put the answer in the title, to satisfy the disagrees above.
Peer comment(s):
disagree |
sindy cremer
: Changed into a disagree because subarticle is not used in legalese. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Code
27 mins
|
neutral |
writeaway
: agree with Sindy. It's what's suggested in Jurlex but it's not what I use/what's normally used in English. 100% confidence with 0 refs to show asker your answer is right?
4 hrs
|
Reference comments
1 day 22 hrs
Reference:
artikel [number] lid [number], sub [a, b, c...]
In this specific context (articles of association/incorporation), 'sub a' probably refers to a 'sublid' (EN subparagraph).
As in: artikel 6 lid 1, sub b >> Article 6(1)(b)
Thus: sub a >> under a / under (a). Or possibly more fully: in subparagraph a / in subparagraph A. Or: in subparagraph (a).
Obviously, this is just an educated guess. It all depends on the actual context.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day22 hrs (2016-12-27 19:37:24 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
PS. Or indeed, as already suggested by Sindy in her first peer comment: "subparagraph" or "subsection".
As in: artikel 6 lid 1, sub b >> Article 6(1)(b)
Thus: sub a >> under a / under (a). Or possibly more fully: in subparagraph a / in subparagraph A. Or: in subparagraph (a).
Obviously, this is just an educated guess. It all depends on the actual context.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day22 hrs (2016-12-27 19:37:24 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
PS. Or indeed, as already suggested by Sindy in her first peer comment: "subparagraph" or "subsection".
Discussion