May 5, 2013 14:40
11 yrs ago
English term
France
Traductrice, 4 ans industrie automobile
Native in: French 
, German
Works in: German to French, English to French
of/for
English
Other
International Org/Dev/Coop
compte-rendu/ statistics
Beyond the logical membership of the ENP South Partner Countries and Eurostat for the EU, a question is how to involve EU Member States which may be interested. In order to keep future meetings of the EMES-WG flexible and focused it is proposed that at least one EU NSO attends. Based on a “variable geometry” approach, EU/EFTA countries may decide to participate [from time to time] based on their individual interest and commitment.
Are the prepositions ok? Shouldn't it be" to the UE" instead of "for the EU"?
And shouldn't it be "to th ENP..." instead of "of the ENP" ?
Are the prepositions ok? Shouldn't it be" to the UE" instead of "for the EU"?
And shouldn't it be "to th ENP..." instead of "of the ENP" ?
Responses
| 4 +1 | both are fine |
Tony M
|
| 3 +1 | de ... de la part de |
wendyjane
|
Change log
May 5, 2013 15:20: writeaway changed "Language pair" from "English to French" to "English"
Responses
+1
1 hr
Selected
both are fine
In EN, we say someone is a member OF something.
And it is logical FOR the EU to be a member of those groups.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 hrs (2013-05-05 18:22:22 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I understood it the other way round, sort of: Au-delà de l'adhésion logique de l'UE aux pays partenaires PEV-Sud et d'Eurostat...
I don't know the organizations concerned, so don't know if this makes sense; but purely from the language point of view, that's how I instinctively read it.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 hrs (2013-05-05 18:23:04 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
...et à l'Eurostat...
And it is logical FOR the EU to be a member of those groups.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 hrs (2013-05-05 18:22:22 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I understood it the other way round, sort of: Au-delà de l'adhésion logique de l'UE aux pays partenaires PEV-Sud et d'Eurostat...
I don't know the organizations concerned, so don't know if this makes sense; but purely from the language point of view, that's how I instinctively read it.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 hrs (2013-05-05 18:23:04 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
...et à l'Eurostat...
Note from asker:
| What do you think of : Au-delà de l'adhésion logique des pays partenaires PEV-Sud et d'Eurostat pour l'UE, la question qui se pose est de savoir comment impliquer les États membres de l'UE susceptibles d'être intéressés? Or does it mean the membership of EU to ENP South Partner Countries and Eurostat? I'm a bit confused... |
| Thanks a lot Tony!! |
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
Michael Lyman
: You could also revise it to: Beyond the EU's logical membership of the ENP South Partner Countries and Eurostat,
3 days 20 hrs
|
|
Thanks, Michael!
|
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
+1
49 mins
de ... de la part de
I think the first preposition is OK - outre l'adhérence conséquente des pays ... .
The 'Eurostat for the EU' I think means 'Eurostat on behalf of the EU' or 'Eurostat representing the voice of the EU' perhaps. The whole sentence meaning that steps to consider are 1) ENP South Partner Countries joining the EMES-WG, 2) Eurostat joining the EMES-WG to represent the EU, and then further consideration to be given to how to involve individual EU member states which may be interested. Would that make sense in the context of the rest of the document?
The 'Eurostat for the EU' I think means 'Eurostat on behalf of the EU' or 'Eurostat representing the voice of the EU' perhaps. The whole sentence meaning that steps to consider are 1) ENP South Partner Countries joining the EMES-WG, 2) Eurostat joining the EMES-WG to represent the EU, and then further consideration to be given to how to involve individual EU member states which may be interested. Would that make sense in the context of the rest of the document?
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
Carol Gullidge
: I guess you posted this while the question was still displayed as EN>FR
2 hrs
|
|
Yes, I did, and if I understand correctly it is techni, cally an EN>FR query, really, arising from interpreting the syntax of the EN source. Thanks for your agree.
|
Discussion