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.
Cookie settings
FF Internes
en arracher
This question was closed without grading. Reason: Answer found elsewhere
Sep 10, 2023 19:18
8 mos ago
31 viewers *
French term

présence réelle, simultanée et non interrompue

French to English Law/Patents Law (general) Testament
Bonsoir il s'agit d'un testament authentique et cette phrase conclut l'acte comme suit :
Le tout en la présence réelle, simultanée et non interrompue des notaires soussignés et du testateur.
Il y a peut être une expression formelle et standardisée dans ce contexte spécifique ?
Merci beaucoup pour votre aide
Proposed translations (English)
3 +1 physical, simultaneous and continuous presence
4 -1 (Business conducted ) in real time with all parties in attendance throughout.
References
https://www.nvsos.gov/sos/licensing/notary/enotary-faqs

Discussion

Daryo Sep 13, 2023:
Fancy that ... "insistence on the letter of the law" being somehow a priori unworthy of legal terminology? Wow, I never though of that ...

Avoiding ambiguity when possible being somehow surplus to requirement? Another trick to unlearn for this old dog ...

BTW I never said that you don't "attend" virtual meetings" - the whole problem of "ambiguity" stems from the fact that you CAN "attend" virtual meetings. Compare that with the fact that the ST is ONLY about being present "in person".
Andrew Bramhall Sep 12, 2023:
@Chris Farrell Well, are you satisfied now? The asker has closed the question without grading out of embarrassment for what ensued as a result of your and Daryo's actions, i.e, initially more or less agreeing with me with caveats, then downgrading to a disagree after me defending myself by answering your criticisms, which I have every right to do.There were no " below the belt insults", but interesting you think you can behave like this and still expect to do so with impunity, without any comeback whatsoever.
AllegroTrans Sep 12, 2023:
Andrew Bramhall "Despise" my comments (and Daryo's) as much as you like, but please have the courtesy to do so with linguistic reasoning, not below the belt, crude insults. You know well that you already have had several site punishments for this behaviour.
Lucia28 (asker) Sep 12, 2023:
Thank you for all the comments
Lucia28 (asker) Sep 12, 2023:
Thank you for all the comments
Andrew Bramhall Sep 12, 2023:
You've answered your own question, Allegro! It's because I don't believe in the validity of your comments. In fact quite the reverse; I despised your comments. I responded to your initial comments after which you changed your neutral comment to a disagree ,shortly to be joined by Daryo. His assertion that you don't " attend" virtual meetings" is nearly as ludicrous as his pluralising of " way" twice. You both validated AMM's clumsy and incongruous attempt to translate the words when I'm sure any asker with a dictionary could have come up with something better. And all this after the asker's response to my answer: " Thank's, that's absolutely perfect". So, following your exhortation to think about it, I have, and come to the conclusion that it's you two who have come up short, not me. If you could see your way clear to p@ssing on someone else's parade I'd be much obliged, but if this attitude continues I shall ask for a mutual ban to be imposed. Thank you.
AllegroTrans Sep 11, 2023:
Quoting #Andrew Bramhall "Allegro's insistence on the letter of the law has long been an attempt to cover his own pusillanimity, these comments just further proof. Daryo's comment, like the quality of English used to express them, absolute b@llocks."
Why, when people make valid linguistic criticism of your answers, do you find it necessary to hit back with insults?

Proposed translations

+1
1 hr

physical, simultaneous and continuous presence

... in attendance physically, at the same time and unbroken...

Section 9 of the UK Wills Act - may not fit other English-speaking jurisdictions, so I have adapted accordingly:

'[F2(1) ] No will shall be valid unless— (a) it is in writing, and signed by the testator, or by some other person in his presence and by his direction; and (b) it appears that the testator intended by his signature to give effect to the will; and (c) the signature is made or acknowledged by the testator in the presence of two or more witnesses *present at the same time*; and (d) each witness either— (i) attests and signs the will; or (ii)acknowledges his signature, in the presence of the testator (but not necessarily in the presence of any other witness), but no form of attestation shall be necessary (?).
Example sentence:

Under the 1837 Wills Act, two witnesses' signatures are required in the physical presence of the person making the will (the testator).

Reference:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4and1Vict/7/26/section/9

Note from asker:
Thank you very much
Peer comment(s):
agree AllegroTrans : Yes, but "commonsense" rather than the 1837 Wills Act should be the prevailing driver of a suitable translation here, this being from France and not England; still an "authentic" translation which stays close to the source text
15 hrs
agree Daryo : exactly - the **physical** very tangible presence is a key ingredient in this mix.
16 hrs
disagree Andrew Bramhall : Lacks the ring of authenticity, as is so often the case with your uniquely idiosyncratic constructs;
21 hrs
Something went wrong...
-1
8 hrs

(Business conducted ) in real time with all parties in attendance throughout.

My suggestion sounds authentic , rather than a mere dictionary translation of the text; with due deference yo Jessica Noyes' reference comment below.
Note from asker:
Thank you Andrew yes ! That sound just perfect ! However would there be another word to replace "business" ?
Peer comment(s):
agree Marion Linssen : Maybe: Notarial act recorded in real time ... (as suggested by Jessica) instead of business conducted?
5 hrs
Yes indeed; 'notarial act' as you suggest ; better than ' business' or ' transaction'probably. Thanks!
disagree AllegroTrans : I think you have unnecessarily changed the structure; I would avoid "business"; "all parties" should be avoided because the sentence says explicitly who was present ans it's wrong to fudge that; valid comments by Daryo. Ambiguous trans., think about it
8 hrs
The 'business' bit in in brackets to cover the recording/logging of the notarial act, similarly 'all parties' rather than list them all; disagree with your sentence structure comment;
disagree Daryo : In the era of teleconferencing (/ doing all sort of "meetings" by video-links) "in attendance" is ways too ambiguous and ways too much open to wrong interpretation. // Parallels between "patriotism is the last ..." and "nativism ..." = absolute b@llocks?
9 hrs
Allegro's insistence on the letter of the law has long been an attempt to cover his own pusillanimity, these comments just further proof. Daryo's comment, like the quality of English used to express them, absolute b@llocks.
Something went wrong...

Reference comments

16 mins
Reference:

https://www.nvsos.gov/sos/licensing/notary/enotary-faqs

Here's an instance of it: (Seventh paragraph) "For instance, one requirement is that the recording of the notarial act performed by means of audio-video communication must be transacted in real time with an uninterrupted simultaneous audio-video feed."
Peer comments on this reference comment:
agree Andrew Bramhall : Yep, that rings true;
7 hrs
neutral AllegroTrans : OK, but in the asker's text it seems the will is being executed in the notary's office, and not by telecomms
16 hrs
agree Daryo : A very good "negative reference" - of what the term used in the ST is not.
17 hrs
Something went wrong...
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search