mrrafe Jun 26, 2017:

Other suggestions A suggestion that occurred to me quite a while back, which I didn't think worth making but will mention now because you're asking, is to caption the document a contract "prepared by X," "drafted by X," "attested by X," etc., as the case may be. I.e., while I agree with you (05:50 19 Jun) that it might be cumbersome or impossible to specify the notary's role in this instance, I don't think that's enough to justify confusing EN readers by using of/by with the name of a non-party such as the notary. It creates an impression certainly not intended by the Greek author whose work we're trying to translate. if it's impossible to know what exactly the notary did relative to this particular document, then either "submitted by X" or just "X:" with no verb would at least signal the EN reader to speculate. What I would seek to avoid is by/of standing alone, because in EN they affirmatively create an impression - not arising in Greek - that Notary X is a party.

Finally, having spent literally days in formal civility training, I was in no way commenting on your "confidence level" and didn't even notice it. Moreover, I was ready to drop the discussion at 05:58 19 Jun had others not revived it.

Peter Close Jun 20, 2017:

mmrafe: Good morning (or Good evening, depending where you are). I think that the main reason why we are having this discussion is because you are trying to explain a situation or circumstances that do not exist in America in terms that an American person would understand. With the greatest of respect to you and your experience, I don’t personally think this is possible without explaining the differences in conditions and circumstances that apply in Greece. As I have said elsewhere in this discussion, one can never tell with Greek notaries when they are acting or have acted as notaries and when they are acting or have acted as plain lawyers, and since they always call themselves notaries even when they are not acting as notaries, it would be incorrect to assume that they have performed notarial acts unless this is clearly stated in any text referring to them. I accept the fact that you do not like the way that I have worded my answer, but, instead of criticising it, why don't you suggest a better answer that covers all bases in the circumstances concerned?

mrrafe Jun 20, 2017:

These analogies are inapt. In US, contract drafting by lawyers is not the least bit strange and yet as a matter of EN usage we nevertheless would think it bizarre to entitle it "Contract of/by Attorney Smith." Or, as to Kipling et al.: if lawyer-notary Anastos is also a house painter, and is hired to paint a house for Bouras in Athens, we wouldn't see a picture of Bouras' house in a New York EN magazine captioned "Anastos' house" or even "house of Anastos." (Likewise, if Van Gogh portrays a Polynesian woman, I hope it wouldn't appear in the museum as "Portrait of Van Gogh.") This is a question of acceptable EN usage and one needn't be in Athens to understand it. Never once in a lifetime of EN legal reading, writing, and editing have I seen or used the locution proposed here, however fine it may be in Greek. But of course no one can edit everyone, and that's the dispositive fact in this case.

Peter Close Jun 20, 2017:

To Ivi Roccou: (Continuation of discussion entry below): I am sorry, but the fact that Eliza and mmrafe do not like the phrase, “the contract of the notary, Maria X. …”, does not automatically render it syntactically incorrect or universally inappropriate.
Don’t forget that you never know with Greek notaries when they have acted as notaries or when they have acted as lawyers, and, since they always call themselves notaries even when they act as plain lawyers, it would be incorrect to assume that they have performed a notarial act when they may not have done. So, unless Eliza’s text clearly states that the notary had definitely attested to any of the contracts mentioned, it would be dangerous to assume that the notary had done so.

Peter Close Jun 20, 2017:

To Ivi Roccou: Good morning, I disagree that one needs to or even should classify the words “the contract of the Athens notary” in any way, especially because notaries in Greece do not only attest to contracts, but, often simply draft them or write them without performing any further action. With respect, it is not incorrect in English, to write, “the contract of the notary”, if those words are followed by the notary’s name (as was the case in Eliza’s text). The phrase, “the contract of the notary, Maria X Something-or-other”, is no different in structure from the phases, “the works of the Dutch painter, Vincent Van Gogh”, or, “the music of the German composer, Richard Wagner”, or, “the book of the British author, Rudyard Kipling”. The words, “the contract of the notary”, simply seem strange to an Englishman or American, because notaries perform far less tasks in most English-speaking countries than notaries do in Greece, but they do not seem at all strange to very many English speakers who are aware of what notaries do in Greece. (Continued above).

Ivi Rocou Jun 19, 2017:

I would use 'attested by' Good evening, in the following extract, one can see that the term 'attested by' should be used and the reason for it.


"45. In the first place, as regards the authentication of documents and agreements, the Commission submits that the notary merely attests the wishes of the parties, after advising them, and gives legal effect to those wishes. In carrying out that activity, the notary has no decision-making powers with respect to the parties. Thus authentication by a notary merely confirms an agreement previously entered into by the parties. The fact that authentication is mandatory for certain acts is not relevant, since numerous procedures are mandatory without being manifestations of the exercise of official authority."


http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN-EL/TXT/?uri=CELEX:...

Eliza Ariadni Kalfa (asker) Jun 19, 2017:

I appreciate the explanation of the Greek system, Paul, but I find it, forgive me, wholly irrelevant. I have said several times that I understand that the notary could have indeed drafted the contract. It is not the responsibilities of notaries or their status in Greece that I am objecting to, it is simply that the literal translation sounds unnatural in English. It is a linguistic issue, not a matter of how and why Greek notaries differ from other notaries. The various comments made to your answer, though giving points for 'peer agreement' are in fact different answers altogether. For instance, Vasilis' suggestion "by the notary" is not at all the same as "of the notary" and sounds much more natural in English (I think I may go with this, or with PROSGR's suggestion 'kept in file by the notary'), much like we shouldn't translate 'το τετράδιο της Χριστίνας' as 'the notebook of Cristina' but as 'Cristina's notebook' and we don't say 'a person who is a party of a contract' but 'a person who is a party TO a contract'. Prepositions matter.

Peter Close Jun 19, 2017:

mmrage & Eliza: What you need to realise is that notaries in Greece are first and foremost practising lawyers. They therefore do everything that a lawyer does and act as notaries simply as an additional profession over and above what they do as practising lawyers. Notaries in Greece are also a ‘closed profession’ in that you can usually only become a notary in Greece by buying a notary’s licence from another practising notary. Children of notaries who qualify as lawyers can therefore inherit their parents’ notary licences in the same way that they can inherit any other property.

Peter Close Jun 19, 2017:

mmrafe and Eliza: I have explained why I personally consider it difficult to translate the Greek words in any other way. As to mmrafe’s comment that I should not have rated my confidence as ‘5’, please note that I rarely do. Also, as to mmrafe’s comment that he has practised law for many decades in US English, all I can say is that it appears that he has not done so in Greece. If you both feel that you can express the meaning of the Greek words in the question better than I have done, please do so. I must now ask you both to excuse me, because I am presently working on two very long legal translations of my own and need to get to back to working on them.

Eliza Ariadni Kalfa (asker) Jun 19, 2017:

Peter, you said: "Greek notaries do not only witness or attest contracts. They also prepare all sorts of contracts and agreements" ----> No one is disagreeing with this. You also said: "If you were not to write “contract of the Athens notary”, you would then have to write, “contract prepared by/or written by/or witnessed by/or attested by the Athens notary”, because you would not know which condition would apply." BINGO. This is indeed the problem. But that doesn't make 'contract of the notary' correct in English either, just because the other solutions are cumbersome or because it's correct to say this in Greek. I agree with mrrafe that this does not sound natural in English (I've never ever come across it in legal texts, and cannot find it anywhere on... well, the whole Internet, when I do a search for the exact term, in quotes). To me, it sounds like the kind of bad English you get when you go for a too-literal translation. So, perhaps a better question would be: is there a way to preserve the ambiguity of 'of the notary' in English (the Greek phrase is helpful because you don't need to know whether they prepared it or attested to it) while not sounding so very awkward?

mrrafe Jun 19, 2017:

Peter, but the question is how to put this into EN. Having done EN legal writing for over 45 years, first as an attorney and then as a judge reading briefs and writing judicial opinions, in EN I have absolutely never seen "of" or "by" used to refer to someone that merely prepared a contract without entering into the contract themselves as a bound party. Perhaps you're using a common Greek idiom but it's not correct in EN legal writing. I would state that with a confidence level of 5+, except that as a courtesy I never use more than 3.

Peter Close Jun 19, 2017:

To Eliza Ariadni Kalfa:

If you were not to write “contract of the Athens notary”, you would then have to write, “contract prepared by/or written by/or witnessed by/or attested by the Athens notary”, because you would not know which condition would apply.

Peter Close Jun 19, 2017:

I am afraid that mmrafe is incorrect. Greek notaries do not only witness or attest contracts. They also prepare all sorts of contracts and agreements, especially contracts relating to the sale or acquisition of property, they write articles of association, amendments to articles of association, and do many other things that notaries in England do not normally do. I had commercial companies in Greece for over 35 years. I had many contracts prepared by notaries and also signed many others prepared by other people’s notaries.

Eliza Ariadni Kalfa (asker) Jun 19, 2017:

I'm inclined to agree with mrrafe that the notary is not a party to the contract and so you cannot say 'contract of the notary' because the fact that they drew up the contract does not make it theirs. mrrafe said "In EN, if someone (a lawyer or, presumably, an Athens notary) drafts a contract, we wouldn't call it a contract "of" or "by" that draftperson. In EN a contract would only be of or by the parties entering and bound by the contract." I agree. There are zero hits for "contract of the notary" from any reputable page on Google. If it really were used, there should be loads of hits, but there's nothing. My question though was whether attested to or prepared the contract is more appropriate, since as Peter pointed out, Greek notaries do prepare contracts. And it is unclear from the text which of the two it was in this case. If there are any Greek lawyers here who have heard this "συμβόλαιο X της συμβολαιογράφου X" used, do they usually mean that the notary drafted the contract or merely attested to its signing?