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.
Dutch to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents - Automation & Robotics / legislation
Dutch term or phrase:geautomatiseerd werk/geautomatiseerde werken
Onder geautomatiseerd werk wordt verstaan een apparaat of groep van onderling verbonden of samenhangende apparaten, waarvan er één of meer op basis van een programma automatisch computergegevens verwerken. Het is goed om op deze plek stil te staan bij de reikwijdte van het begrip geautomatiseerde werk, mede in het licht van de ontwikkelingen die sinds de inwerkingtreding van de huidige wet zich hebben voorgedaan en in de toekomst te verwachten zijn.
This text is from Dutch legislation about security and intelligence. I cannot find a proper English translation of the term "geautomatiseerd werk", which means basically computer equipment in its broadest sense. Anyone?
Many thanks for everyone's contribution. I have found an English translation of the act, which actually uses "automated work". 4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer
I would go for Federal Standard 1037C rather than your opinion Barend (I can't see any link for your definition), and I suspect most careful translators would too.
Once more,
automated information system (AIS): 1. An assembly of computer hardware, software, firmware, or any combination of these, configured to accomplish specific information-handling operations, such as communication, computation, dissemination, processing, and storage of information. 2. [In INFOSEC,] any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission or reception of data and includes computer software, firmware, and hardware. Note: Included are computers, word processing systems, networks, or other electronic information handling systems, and associated equipment. [NIS]
You like yours: automatic data processing equipment (ADPE):
Any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception, of data or information
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *
Richard likes his: automated information system (AIS):
An assembly of computer hardware, software, firmware, or any combination of these, configured to accomplish specific information-handling operations, such as communication, computation, dissemination, processing, and storage of information.
Eén verbetering is dat de term 'equipment' is geïntroduceerd, men heeft het hier over apparaten. Tegelijkertijd bestrijk je met de term 'equipment' een groot aantal apparaten met het 'vermogen van data processing'.
Niet alle alle apparaten met het 'vermogen van data processing' zijn informatiesystemen.
Anyway, 'automatic data processing equipment' seems to me to be the best option here and I would go for it.
Ik heb genoeg gezegd nu. Willemina's oren zullen wel tuten inmiddels :-)
'processing' is de overkoepelende term net als in de vraag van Willemina.
Onder geautomatiseerd werk wordt verstaan een apparaat of groep van onderling verbonden of samenhangende apparaten, waarvan er één of meer op basis van een programma automatisch computergegevens verwerken
automatic data processing equipment (ADPE): Any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception, of data or information
one of the definitions of a so-called "geautomatiseerd werk" is that it is a thing that can:
1. store data 2. process data, and 3. transmit data
Your suggestion, "automatic data processing equipment", only covers one of these.
And yet, if you look at one of its definitions, e.g. @ http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-003/_0448.htm … you will see that it hardly matters. As I said, most of these general terms for "a connected computerised thingee, or group of such thingees", when defined, end up referring to the same general thingee.
Well we're going to call that a 'wikkelwerk' from now on, and reserve 'rolwerk' for wheel.
Except for the steering wheel of a 1971 Austin Allegro, which as everybody knows was available in a square version. That is now a 'vierkantachtige stuurwerk kopstuk'
Eén verbetering is dat de term 'equipment' is geïntroduceerd, men heeft het hier over apparaten. Tegelijkertijd bestrijk je met de term 'equipment' een groot aantal apparaten met het 'vermogen van data processing'.
Niet alle alle apparaten met het 'vermogen van data processing' zijn informatiesystemen.
Anyway, 'automatic data processing equipment' seems to me to be the best option here and I would go for it.
Yes Kitty, those are all AIS, no need to reinvent the wheel here. Note that they are 'slimme meter, navigatiesysteem, geavanceerd sporthorloge of pacemaker', not simple battery-powered devices.
I don't know why you are insisting on something else Barend, why don't you stick it up as an answer and explain the difference? I, a mere mortal with a degree in computer systems and electronics, cannot see your point.
"automated information system" + "automatic data processing equipment"
• the difference between automatic or automated: there's not much in it • information = data • it's obvious the data/information if processed • system or equipment: who really cares, it's all the same thing
the authors just need a general term to cover all the stuff that can be hacked. also, whatever term is chosen, it is then defined in a particular way anyway (re the particular law/Act etc it is being used in), which might differ slightly from the so-called standard definitions of said term
No I would call it (see below) "automatic data processing equipment"
Onder geautomatiseerd werk wordt verstaan een apparaat of groep van onderling verbonden of samenhangende apparaten, waarvan er één of meer op basis van een programma automatisch computergegevens verwerken
automatic data processingequipment (ADPE): Any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception, of data or information
The definition of 'geautomatiseerd werk' cited by Willemina seems to be taken from the wetsvoorstel Computercriminaliteit III (aka as the 'terughackwet') which was submitted to the Dutch House of Representatives in December 2015.
There is a lot of debate about what exactly falls within the scope of this definition (see also my reference comment).
From what I understand, the term 'geautomatiseerd werk' also covers devices such as pacemakers, smart watches, etc.
Het voorstel omvat de bevoegdheid tot het heimelijk binnendringen in een geautomatiseerd werk dat in gebruik is bij een verdachte. Daarbij wordt de vigerende definitie van «geautomatiseerd werk» aangepast, waardoor hieronder ieder apparaat valt dat op basis van een programma automatisch computergegevens verwerkt. Hierbij kan worden gedacht aan in de toelichting genoemde voorbeelden als een computer, tablet of smartphone, de router waarmee een computer(netwerk) met het internet is verbonden of een USB-stick, maar ook aan een slimme meter, navigatiesysteem, geavanceerd sporthorloge of pacemaker. http://tinyurl.com/jzgxw95
Would you really call such devices 'computer systems' or 'automated information systems'?
That's right Michael. You don't have to teach a native ENG kid the right way to say 'the black dog', or that 'black' is an adjective and 'dog' a noun, they will nevertheless manage quite well and never say 'the dog black' or 'I didn't knew that' or all the other common mistakes made by others. However, when teaching, it is useful to understand the structure, so you can explain to latinos for example that the adjective comes before the noun in ENG.
Given this, I bet 90% of the people on the street in the UK wouldn't be able to give you a half-decent definition of an adverb, for example, yet their ENG would often be pretty good.
I think you and I entered this profession quite differently. I never studied translation, I just started doing it. My mother had a small agency at the time, and asked me to help her one day, and the rest is history. I have no idea what half the stuff you mentioned is, and yet I have managed to translate quite successfully for many years now.
But I think we are mixing things up a bit. You keep saying "without an understanding of X, a translator wouldn't be able to …", but let's be clear about what we mean here. I obviously do know how to use the various grammar thingees you mentioned, but I just don't know what grammar people call them. I therefore have implicit knowledge of grammar (of course I do; anyone who can write or speak properly does), but it simply resides at a different, less conscious level.
If you speak/write your target language fluently, and have a very good understanding of your source language (as I do), I don't think explicit knowledge of grammar is necessary in order to translate very well. However, I do agree that if you are studying translation in a school, it might help you talk about it in a classroom.
Perhaps I forgot to mention the most important truth. The relevance of grammar to a translator.
During the translation studies syntax phenomena were constantly being referred to in the context of discussing translation problems.
Premodification, function shift, free adjuncts etc., etc., etc.
I fail to see how you could discuss translation problems without referring to syntax phenomema. These explanations were extremely useful.
As a translator you would also not be able to do without an understanding of more basic grammar issues such as the tenses.
Without an understanding of the present perfect continuous, present perfect resultative, the continuous etc. you would never be able to produce a decent English translation.
Especially the continuous is very subtle and it may need to appear or it would be much nicer if it appeared at points where you would not really expect it. Native Dutch speakers tend to use it either too often or too little or, more likely, both too often and too little. :-)
Understanding of the tenses is also relevant to English to Dutch translations for that matter.
because there are no real rules, just conventions. For example, avoiding starting sentences with 'and' And computer works does not sound natural! (and I think I've got away with starting a sentence with 'and' there)
No. You didn't. It is possible I would have written this sentence with an 'and', too. It happens sometimes. In the end, I am very aware of it and I always, absolutely always delete it. Most normally immediately after reading the sentence over again. There are some rules in English belonging more to the category of stylistic writing (tips) that it helps to remember at all times when writing or editing. The joke with it is that applying these non-grammar rules works every time to make the text more palatable. I mean it, at all times. The same as assigning a secondary place to the word “too” within a sentence. Otherwise, it doesn’t look or sound naturally in your head as text written by a native speaker. Palatable speech, on the other hand, has completely different parameters, and thrives on trespassing any boundaries set by any rules.
Maybe there are rules on why this phrase by Barend
'And studying formal grammar teaching material would greatly support you in formulating, in writing and in speaking, correct and palatable English/Dutch sentences, even if you were immersed in an English/Dutch speaking environment for a long time.'
would be better written as
'Studying formal grammar teaching material also helps us considerably in formulating, writing and speaking correct and palatable English/Dutch sentences, even for those who have been immersed in an English/Dutch speaking environment for a long time.'
but I wouldn't know where to find them, because there are no real rules, just conventions. For example, avoiding starting sentences with 'and'; although there are plenty of examples, here it just feels wrong. I don't know if you can even define all these things, in the end it comes down to what feels natural.
And computer works does not sound natural!
(and I think I've got away with starting a sentence with 'and' there)
My experience of teaching Portuguese kids mirrors that of Michael's; they can recite endless lists of irregular verbs, but are incapable of stringing a sentence together.
As an analogy, knowing how a car works doesn't mean you can drive, just like being able to drive well doesn't mean you have to understand the mechanics of the contraption.
Totally agree with "Understanding proper coordination and subordination of ideas, for example, can make someone a better writer", although that's not really grammar, more rhetoric, or just learning how to think clearly.
original: Wat niet wegneemt dat ik het wel erg leuk vind als een soort hobby, die helpt dat ik m'n Nederlands niet helemaal vergeet en dan op een gegeven moment alleen nog m'n Nederlandse achternaam over heb.
I think this was my first draft: Wat niet wegneemt dat ik het wel erg leuk vind als een soort hobby, om te zorgen dat ik m'n Nederlands niet helemaal te vergeten, zodat ik op een gegeven moment niet alleen nog m'n Nederlandse achternaam over heb.
another try: Wat niet wegneemt dat ik het wel erg leuk vind als een soort hobby. Het is voor mij een manier om te proberen om m'n Nederlands niet helemaal te vergeten, zodat ik op een gegeven moment niet alleen nog m'n Nederlandse achternaam over heb.
Interestingly, the two things you flagged were both things I had had trouble with.
I first wrote "er sluipen altijd rare dingen in", and then changed it to "er sluipen altijd rare dingen tussen".
And re "als een soort hobby, die helpt dat ik m'n Nederlands niet helemaal vergeet" – I first wrote sth else, but thought it sounded crap, so rewrote it, although I also wasn't happy with the second version, and suspected there was sth not quite right about it.
Good flow generally, sounds 'gezellig' and ends humoristically.
I will mention two small things.
Sorry, Barend, maar dit alles in het Nederlands schrijven zou te veel werk zijn. Het is laat hier, and NL schrijven kost me best veel moeite. En hoe vaak ik er ook naar kijk, er sluipen altijd rare dingen tussen (or: in). Wat niet wegneemt dat ik het wel erg leuk vind als een soort hobby, die helpt (I think this is a typical English construction) dat ik m'n Nederlands niet helemaal vergeet en dan op een gegeven moment alleen nog m'n Nederlandse achternaam over heb.
Just another teacher below (in the context of native speakers, no foreign language learner):
You do not need to know the formal rules of language for everyday life and conversation, but in order to understand your culture and language to its fullest, knowledge of grammar is very important. Somehow, this doesn't seem to fit in with our bite-sized educational system that encourages only a surface knowledge of almost anything before awarding you prizes, and even research grants. Graham Crispin, Southend-on-Sea
I think the problem is not the teaching of grammar itself, but the manner in which grammar has been taught. If grammar is not taught as a separate unit but as an integral part of writing instruction, students can more effectively use their grammar knowledge to improve their writing. We’re not just talking about parts of speech, here. Understanding proper coordination and subordination of ideas, for example, can make someone a better writer. However, just as in mathematics, more complex concepts build on the simpler items. Throwing out grammar instruction is not the answer; re-conceptualizing and re-working grammar instruction is. Joel McElvaney, Language Arts Teacher, USA
I shouldn't be too harsh on grammar. I do think it can be useful, but probably only if combined with lots of talking. And reading, of course. I learnt a lot of my own English from reading (voraciously), because (as freek pointed out) I spent a lot of my life in non-English-speaking countries. This is one of the reasons I am so happy here in the UK, as I can finally speak English again, all the time.
Sorry, Barend, maar dit alles in het Nederlands schrijven zou te veel werk zijn. Het is laat hier, en NL schrijven kost me best veel moeite. En hoe vaak ik er ook naar kijk, er sluipen altijd rare dingen tussen. Wat niet wegneemt dat ik het wel erg leuk vind als een soort hobby, die helpt dat ik m'n Nederlands niet helemaal vergeet en dan op een gegeven moment alleen nog m'n Nederlandse achternaam over heb.
The reason why my class did well was all we did was talk talk talk, and about things that my students were interested in. If you can get people talking in a relaxed atmosphere, about the things that matter to them, you can really improve their language. The poor kids in my Greek colleague's classes never spoke a word.
Probeer nu eens dat verhaal hieronder in het Nederlands te formuleren.
Zeker het helpt als je voortdurend verkeert in een Nederlands sprekende omgeving maar de meeste van ons die Engels leren verwerven de relevante vaardigheden op school, zij in het primaire, secundaire of tertiaire onderwijs. En dan kom je er niet zonder grammatica. Ook veel boeken lezen in de andere taal kan helpen.
Maar als je snel spraak- of schrijfvaardigheid wilt verwerven in de vreemde taal, met name in je eigen land, dat kan de grammatica je ontzettend helpen.
You don't need to know diddly squat about "the underlying grammar rules of a language" to learn to use it perfectly, whether it's your native language or not. It probably won't harm you, but is in no way necessary. I am in no way a qualified English teacher (like Richard, and my wife), but I actually did a bit of teaching when I was in Athens (to a small group of Greek kids and one lady of around 30), and guess what. My class were able to actually use the language relatively comfortably after a while, whereas some of the other classes (taught by a Greek teacher, who had a perfect command of English grammar) were unable to answer even basic questions. They did great though on their grammar tests, whereas my class failed them miserably, which is one of the reasons I didn't last long at the school :-)
But back to your specific point, Barend:
I too, was once "a foreign language learner" (of Dutch). When my brother and I were thrown into a Dutch school in Haarlem, we learnt to speak (and later write) pretty good Dutch, very fast, and I can assure you that I never learnt any grammar. I have always been allergic to it and tend to zone out when someone is trying to teach it to me.
"No you do not have to know the definition of an adverb, pronoun, subordinate conjunction or anything alse to speak and write perfect English."
I am convinced that as a foreign language learner you definitely need to gain an understanding of the underlying grammar rules of this foreign language.
And studying formal grammar teaching material would greatly support you in formulating, in writing and in speaking, correct and palatable English/Dutch sentences, even if you were immersed in an English/Dutch speaking environment for a long time.
knew I shouldn't have stuck my oar into this hornet's nest, to mix some metaphors...
Yes I forgot to insert 'us' No I don't know if Barend knows this. Yes MB's original sentence is correct No Freek's version is not Yes I am a qualified English teacher No you do not have to know the definition of an adverb, pronoun, subordinate conjunction or anything alse to speak and write perfect English
The reason I know/knew that Richard had just forgotten to type the word "us", is because I am a native speaker of English, as is Richard, who would also spot a similar typo in my writing. You and freek, however, wouldn't necessarily spot such things. Then there is of course the problem of humour, and its getting lost in translation.
But all of this is fine, as long as Richard and I stick to translating into English, and you and freek into Dutch ;-)
In this grammar example you're wrong Freek. What will become obvious is what is true at the present time, not what will become true in the future; 'one of is not great at English'. That's now obvious to me.
Onder geautomatiseerd werk wordt verstaan een apparaat of groep van onderling verbonden of samenhangende apparaten, waarvan er één of meer op basis van een programma automatisch computergegevens verwerken
automatic data processing equipment (ADPE): Any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception, of data or information [(i) by a Federal agency, or (ii) under a contract with a Federal agency which (i) requires the use of such equipment, or (ii) requires the performance of a service or the furnishing of a product which is performed or produced making significant use of such equipment.] Such term includes (i) computer, (ii) ancillary equipment, (iii) software, firmware, and similar procedures, (iv) services, including support services, and (v) related resources as defined by regulations issued by the Administrator for General Services
There's nothing wrong with my English but maybe there is with your peculiar sense of humor...
You don't need to know grammar to speak and write properly.
You don't...? Well you DO! But most of the times this is learned automatically when communicating with your (extra-parental) linguistic environment. As a subject in School it can be very annoying...
'the more you argue with me, in English, the more obvious it will become to our gentle readers that only one of us isn't great at English, and it ain't [something missing here] me.' .
I wasn't "compensating [my] lack of any grammar education with the fact that [I] went Montessori". It was a joke, something you would have understood if your English were better. I am shit at grammar and hate it. You don't need to know grammar to speak and write properly. Parsing a sentence and writing one are two quite different things.
And as far as Montessori schools are concerned, I am very happy I was lucky enough to go to one and hope to be able to afford one for my little girl here in the UK when the time comes. While I agree that they sometimes aren't great when it comes to the more technical side of things, they more than make up for it in the freedom and creativity they offer. I had a great time in mine in California, as did my brother, and can't say the same thing about some of the regular, cookie-cutter schools we attended, which were actually just a huge waste of our time.
Aha, Montessori! My mother went to a Montessori school and she still hates my grandmother for it (she can't do mental calculation for sh*t), but my late grandfather used to be the principal... And I met many students with a Montessori background in my first year of Bouwkunde; they all would design the most fantastic buildings but two-third of them had to leave the institution after exam round #2, because their brains were not trained to understand any technical subjects.
So compensating your lack of any grammar education with the fact that you went Montessori... (might not cover this...)
But overall: the vast majority of your (educational) life were spent in non-native English speaking countries, yet you claim fluency in English... so apparently you never left the house. You've got balls, I'll give you that...!
My first ever remark on fluency, being bi-lingual, etc. was that I don't care if some one is mono-lingual, bi-lingual or multi-lingual, as long as this some one does the job right (as a translator),...who cares?! In that same remark I remember introducing the term 'bi-tween-lingual'... .
My mother isn't americophile (far from it, she actually hates the US!), or East-German. You are odd. And she didn't "decide to speak English at home". She was raised in the US, and moved to Germany (because she spoke some German, which she had learnt at home) when she was around 17/18, where she stayed a few years, and then went back to the US. I myself spent the first 7 years of my life in California. We then moved to Holland (via Switzerland), where we continued to speak English at home. At some point, once my brother and I had learnt Dutch, my parents decided to try to speak Dutch at home. We did this for a year or so, but when we moved to Spain, we switched back to English, which we have spoken ever since.
My mother's mother (not my mother) was from Germany (west not east), and my grandfather was Polish.
Please update your file on me. It's nice that you are so interested in my personal history, but please try to get your facts straight.
article shmarticle. you complete and total buffoon: a native speaker wouldn't have used "work(s)" in the first place. period. the reason I was trying to see if work(s) could possibly be made/forced to work, was that a few of my esteemed collegas here seem to think it can.
you can insinuate that English is not my native language until you are blue in the face, but the truth of the matter is quite obvious to anyone reading your stilted, bumbling attacks. the more you argue with me, in English, the more obvious it will become to our gentle readers that only one of us isn't great at English, and it ain't me. schoenmaker, blijf bij je leest
any way you swing it: "an automated work" and "an automated works" are both crap.
We all agree that 'werk' is not 'work' here. But a native speaker would have translated both 'werk' and 'werken' with 'works' (plural, and NO article!)
Although your second ref (http://www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sit... ) does look good, I can hardly find any evidence of the term "automated work(s)" being used in UK/US/AU English refs in the relevant context. Only in connection with Dutch stuff, which is worrying. That, and the fact that to my native ears it just sounds plain wrong.
"automated information system (AIS): 1. An assembly of computer hardware, software, firmware, **or any combination of these**, configured to accomplish specific information-handling operations, such as communication, computation, dissemination, processing, and storage of information.
2. [In INFOSEC,] any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission or reception of data and includes computer software, firmware, and hardware. Note: Included are computers, word processing systems, networks, or other electronic information handling systems, and associated equipment. [NIS]" (http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/fs-1037c.htm )
yes, hacking a router is also computervredebreuk, because a router is completely useless unless connected to a computer.
at the very end it says:
"Dit brengt met zich mee dat het netwerk van de buren ongetwijfeld onder de definitie valt. Er zal immers ongetwijfeld een pc aan het netwerk zijn gekoppeld wat de functie van opslag van gegevens wel vervult. De beantwoording van de vraag of de jongen daarmee daadwerkelijk computervredebreuk heeft gepleegd, is aan de feitenrechter om te beantwoorden." (http://legallife.nl/?p=1203 )
they say it has to be a thing that can: 1. store data 2. process data, and 3. transmit data
However, if "geautomatiseerd werk" X only satisfies e.g. 2 of the above, it will undoubtedly be connected to a second device ("geautomatiseerd werk" Y) that does meet the missing criteria. It seems the court will interpret things along these (in my opinion) sensible lines.
"BIJLAGE 3 PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL FRAMEWORK DECISION ON ATTACKS AGAINST INFORMATION SYSTEMS (EU COUNCIL)
Op 28 februari 2003 hebben de Ministers van Justitie van alle lidstaten van de Europese Unie een conceptvoorstel gedaan voor een strengere aanpak van cyber crime. Dit conceptvoorstel is neergelegd in het ‘Proposal for a Council Framework Decision on attacks against information systems’
[…]
Kernbegrippen in het conceptvoorstel zijn ‘information system’ en ‘computer data’.
Het conceptvoorstel geeft de volgende definities van beide begrippen:
• ‘Information System means any device or group of inter-connected or related devices, one or more of which, pursuant to a program, performs automatic processing of computer data, as well as computer data stored, processed, retrieved or transmitted by them for the purposes of their operation, use, protection and maintenance.’
• ‘Computer data means any representation of facts, information or concepts in a form suitable for processing in an information system, including a program suitable for causing an information system to perform a function’ "
automated information system (AIS): 1. An assembly of computer hardware, software, firmware, or any combination of these, configured to accomplish specific information-handling operations, such as communication, computation, dissemination, processing, and storage of information. 2. [In INFOSEC,] any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission or reception of data and includes computer software, firmware, and hardware. Note: Included are computers, word processing systems, networks, or other electronic information handling systems, and associated equipment. [NIS]
Some nouns that appear in the singular in Dutch are plural in English (and the other way around)... Ever heard of that...?
If a native speaker would have liked to use the noun 'werk/work', it would have been in the plural in English. Not so many ghits for 'automated work' (singular), that's weird...
• works: The operative part of a clock or other machine: she could almost hear the tick of its works synonyms: mechanism, machinery, workings, working parts, parts, movement, action informal innards, insides
• works [TREATED AS SINGULAR][chiefly British]: A place or premises in which industrial or manufacturing processes are carried out: he found a job in the locomotive works
• [COUNT NOUN] (usually works) [Military]: A defensive structure: just north of the fort were trenches and the freshly reconstructed patriot siege works
• (in combination or with modifier works) [chiefly British Activity]: Activity involving construction or repair: extra costs caused by additional building works
(oxforddictionaries.com)
We aren't talking about a watch or a machine here!
I know how to use the word "works" in English, thank you very much, and that still doesn't work. Also, the various refs using "automated works" are using it to denote the plural ("geautomatiseerde werken").
Changing "automated work" to "automated works", to refer to a single computer/automated system doesn't make it any better English.
If you really insist on a literal translation, then opt for "automated system", rather than "automated work", which means nothing to me, as a native speaker and somewhat of a geek. There is no need to translate "werk" as "work" in the context of computers/IT. "System" will do just fine.
Most likely a native speaker would have used 'automated works' .
If Ivo has to keep adding the word "computer" in brackets after the term "geautomatiseerd werk", it's probably safe to deduce that it is just a computer / computer system.
"On October 15th 2012, the Dutch Minister of Security & Justice (Ivo Opstelten) sent this letter (.pdf in Dutch) to the Dutch parliament expressing intentions to draft new cybercrime legislation in the Netherlands."
the PDF (referred to above):
"- Het op afstand binnendringen van geautomatiseerde werken (=computers) en het plaatsen van technische hulpmiddelen (waaronder software) ten behoeve van de opsporing van ernstige vormen van cybercrime;
- Het op afstand doorzoeken van gegevens die vanuit een geautomatiseerd werk (computer) toegankelijk zijn, ongeacht de locatie van het geautomatiseerde werk waarop die gegevens zijn opgeslagen en met inachtneming van de afspraken en regels over de internationale rechtshulp;
- Het op afstand ontoegankelijk maken van gegevens die vanuit een geautomatiseerd werk (computer) toegankelijk zijn, ongeacht de locatie van het geautomatiseerde werk waarop die gegevens zijn opgeslagen en met inachtneming van de afspraken en regels over de internationale rechtshulp."
If you really insist on a literal translation, then opt for "automated system", rather than "automated work", which means nothing to me, as a native speaker and somewhat of a geek. There is no need to translate "werk" as "work" in the context of computers/IT. "System" will do just fine.
"Onder geautomatiseerd werk wordt verstaan een apparaat of groep van onderling verbonden of samenhangende apparaten, waarvan er één of meer op basis van een programma automatisch computergegevens verwerken."
Sounds like a "computer system" to me. Or "computerised system". Or "automated system". But "automated work"??? Really? Is anyone really happy with that?
"computer systems" or "automated systems" but am not 100% sure
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
30 mins confidence:
geautomatiseerd werk / geautomatiseerde werken
computer system / computer systems
Explanation: JurLex:
binnendringen in een geautomatiseerd werk = to penetrate a computer system
in een geautomatiseerd werk versleutelde gegevens = encrypted data in a computer system
onder geautomatiseerd werk wordt verstaan een inrichting die bestemd is om langs elektronische weg gegevens op te slaan en te verwerken = 'computer system' is to be taken to mean a facility for the purpose of storing and processing data by electronic means
(plus my memory)
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 40 mins (2016-05-13 15:21:26 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 hr (2016-05-13 15:57:51 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
or "automated system" (nice an abstract/vague, and which can also nicely cover networks of computer/automated systems, which was one of the defs of a so-called "geautomatiseerd werk" I found somewhere online)
Michael Beijer United Kingdom Local time: 11:25 Native speaker of: English