Nikki Scott-Despaigne Oct 5, 2011:

French expression Sticking my neck out, I think it is easy to fall into a trap on this one. There is absolutely no reason to deviate from an ordinary rendering of the original "erreur" and "faute". The English words "error" and "fault" are accurate representations of the ideas expressed in the French.
The problem here is to avoid "over-translating". We all wish to avoid the false friend trap. However, there is another trap : seeking to repair something which is not broken. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. If ordinary words will do, use ordinary words, even if they seem too ordinary to be true.
As the French put it, rather tongue in cheek :
Pourquoi faire simple quand on peut faire compliqué?

Nikki Scott-Despaigne Oct 4, 2011:

Might I suggest adopting a different approach and leave well enough alone with the words "error" and "fault" which I think are faithful conveyors of the author's intention? Might I suggest, however, that substituting "be" may be a good ploy?

Sugegstion :

"Error" does not mean "fault"...
"Error" does not imply "fault"...
"Error" does not suggest "fault"...

etc

Kevin SC Oct 4, 2011:

Would "gross negligence" get us anywhere ?

B D Finch Oct 4, 2011:

Context I think that further information is required on what this is all about.

Cleartrans Oct 4, 2011:

I read it as "something for which one is to blame", implying a personal shortcoming or fault. Blaming people, oneself included, is seen as counterproductive.

liz askew Oct 4, 2011:

"faute" can also = carelessness, negligence

Tony M Oct 4, 2011:

on n'obtient pas Regarding the rest of your draught translation, I'd like to suggest that 'do not obtain' might be more accurate than 'cannot obtain' — and possibly even 'fail to obtain'.

Consider the meaning of 'faute' in the term 'faute professionnelle', which may sometimes be translated as 'professional misconduct' (though in other contexts, that might not be suitable).