This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
English to French translations [PRO] Bus/Financial - Business/Commerce (general) / asset management/maintenance
English term or phrase:sell short
It’s time to put an end to reactive maintenance management once and for all.
Some businesses have been making do and getting by with asset management strategies that *sell them short*, driving up the cost of maintenance labor and materials and increasing the risk that critical assets will be offline when they’re most urgently needed.
is that you are completely ignoring that there is more than one type of "assets", and consequently more than one type of "asset management".
You have decided out of thin air (and not only you) that this ST is about the kind of "assets management" that involve a portfolio of shares / bonds / derivatives and a fund manager that will be "managing" them.
May I draw your attention to few words to come before and after the term "sell short", showing unambiguously / without the shred of the smallest doubt / ... that the type of asserts this ST is about has the following properties:
-- can be the object of reactive management - fair enough, that could apply to ANY type of "assets";
but then what follows seriously narrows down the list of possible meanings for "assets", namely if the management of the type of "assets" this ST is about is not done right it could lead to:
-- driving up the cost of maintenance labor and materials -- increasing the risk that critical assets will be offline when they’re most urgently needed.
Now, finding which type of "assets" would fit this description involves "knowledge of the real world", not "grammar".
Germaine, Exactement, mon analyse grammaticale est identique à la vôtre. Pourtant, la mienne est qualifiée de ''twisted'' mais pas la votre. Ce n'est pas moi qui parlerais en ces termes. D'ailleurs j'ai bien souligné que l'analyse grammaticale apporte un soutien tangible à la sémantique et, en effet, c'est bien votre analyse qui m'a aidé à mieux comprendre les choses et à modifier ma contribution. Bien vu Germaine. Ce qui est de ''hide and repost'', étant un novice, je me demandais justement comment le faire et j'ai finalement décidé d'ajouter un commentaire pas plus. Merci pour l'astuce. Je vais le faire.
this text is not a fantasy story or a tale about something happening in someone's dream - where anything goes.
It MUST make sense in the real world.
If one of the several possible meanings for "assets" makes no sense whatsoever in this text, then you have to look at the other meanings.
THAT is BTW supposed to be the difference between protein-based "translation devices" ant the silicone-based ones.
Even the most perfect grammar is not going to made it credible that shares or bonds could suddenly "go offline" or require spending on "labour and material costs" in order to be "maintained"!
Je ne savais pas que tirer des conclusions d'une analyse grammaticale est "twister" cette analyse (qui ne diffère par ailleurs en rien de la vôtre: "that" renvoie toujours à "asset management strategies", "management strategies" ou "strategies", peu importe qu'on insiste sur le substantif ou sur le groupe nominal). Mais vous, dites-moi, comment en êtes-vous venu à considérer que "sell short" pouvait signifier "déprécier" plutôt que vendre à découvert"? Vous avez choisi le tango?
Pour modifier une réponse déjà donnée, il vaut mieux cacher ("Hide") votre première réponse et en afficher une nouvelle. Sinon, votre "déprécier" risque de passer inaperçu.
It is that grammatical analysis that provides tangible evidence that ''sell short'' means what it does. It just struck me, without the least aftermath considerations, why you didn't react likewise and consider Germaine's grammatical performance a tentative to twist a purely grammatical analysis. Cheers.
whichever way you try to twist a purely grammatical analysis of a text, remains the obstinate "little detail" that in the tangible real world the ONLY kind of "assets" to which could apply
to put an end to reactive maintenance management
or
asset management strategies ... , driving up the cost of maintenance labor and materials and increasing the risk that critical assets will be offline when they’re most urgently needed.
The relative pronoun ''that'' substitutes for ''asset management strategies'', not just ''assessment strategies. This very same relative pronoun is subject of the verb ''sell short''. The referent of the object pronoun ''them'' is ''assets''.
Enfin (et surtout), dans « management strategies that sell them short », l’acteur (sujet du verbe) est « management strategies » et les stratégies de gestion ne « vendent » rien, que ce soit à découvert, à crédit (ne pas confondre « buy short » et « sell short ») ou comptant. Reste donc l’autre sens de l’expression :
Le CONTEXTE se lit: … put an end to reactive maintenance management. Some businesses have been making do and getting by with asset management strategies that sell them short, driving up the cost of maintenance labor and materials…
To sell short – vendre à découvert Vendre, à un prix déterminé, des marchandises, des titres ou autres instruments financiers que l'on ne possède pas au moment de la conclusion du marché, avec l'espoir de les acheter à prix moindre lorsque la baisse des prix que l'on prévoit se produira. http://gdt.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/ficheOqlf.aspx?Id_Fiche=505001
En partant, il est clair ici qu’on ne parle pas de titres ou instruments financiers - les valeurs n’ont pas de « costs of maintenance labor » - et tout aussi clair qu’on ne parle pas de marchandises que « l’on ne possède pas » - rien n’indique qui s’agit d’une gestion des actifs d’autrui et le cas échéant, en quoi cela pourrait-il entraîner « des coûts croissants d’entretien »?
how many shares / bonds / derivatives of any description would need:
"maintenance labor and materials" and would present "the risk that critical assets will be offline when they’re most urgently needed."
How would it happen that "shares / bonds / derivatives" end up being "offline" when they’re most urgently needed?????
What does make sense in this ST: assets = some kind of hardware, most likely IT equipment / infrastructure
THAT can (and has the extremely annoying habit of) "going offline" when you need it the most badly.
roughly:
la manière dont ils gèrent leurs équipements ne leur rend pas service.
BTW there is another clue staring in your face, and screaming like an attention-seeking spoiled brat:
to put an end to reactive maintenance management once and for all
you do "reactive maintenance" on something tangible - a building, a road, a railway, any kind of hardware - "reactive" in the sense that you wait for some problem to happen and then you "react" i.e. fix it.
Like you just keep driving a car, and put some water in the cooling system only when the engine starts overheating, or don't bother checking oil level until you end up with a seized engine or...
C'est le sens ici, effectivement. En contexte, ça donne quelque chose comme « Certaines entreprises [se contentent de] [se débrouillent avec des] [improvisent des] stratégies de gestion [de l'actif][des actifs] qui les dévalorisent, font grimper le coût de la main-d’œuvre et des [équipements] [matériaux] d'entretien et accroissent le risque que des actifs essentiels soient [hors-service?] [indisponibles?] au moment où ils sont le plus urgemment requis.