GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
17:03 Jan 21, 2016 |
Spanish to English translations [PRO] Tech/Engineering - Telecom(munications) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: Jennifer Levey Chile Local time: 20:21 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
4 +1 | radio beacon / radio beacon |
|
Summary of reference entries provided | |||
---|---|---|---|
International Telecommunications Union |
|
Discussion entries: 3 | |
---|---|
radio beacon / radio beacon Explanation: These terms are better differentiated in Spanish than they are in English, probably for historical reasons. radiofaro = a 'radio beacon' in the so-called fixed public radio service, commonly associated with aeronautical and maritime navigation systems. It is at a fixed, accurately-known position and serves a similar purpose to a traditional ‘light-house’ on the coastline, enabling navigators to establish their geographical position with respect to a known position. These radio beacons continuously transmit an ID signal, each on a specific frequency, similar in purpose to the flashing sequence of a lighthouse. radiobaliza = a 'radio beacon' in the so-called maritime or aeronautical mobile services, comprising a transmitter fitted to an aircraft, or ship (or associated life-rafts, life-jackets and other life-saving equipment), which continuously transmits an ID signal on one internationally-shared distress frequency which is (supposed to be) continuously monitored by the coastguards, ships' radio officers, etc. It is used to pin-point survivors in search and rescue operations (analogy with a pyrotechnic flare fired from a sinking ship), not for navigation. The problem in this ST is that both are (usually) translated as “radio beacon” in English. I suggest: radiofaro --> radio beacon (navigation) radiobaliza --> radio beacon (search & rescue) -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs (2016-01-21 20:26:33 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- Just to expand slightly on an earlier comment about 'historical reasons': Like many ‘modern’ technologies, the first developments were done by employees of UK/US companies, often working in almost complete isolation one from the other and with little or no regard for anything that was being done elsewhere. Having become the lingo of their respective specialisations (and, indceed, specific companies), the terminology adopted within whichever company's product ended up as the norm and later found its way into the international standards documents – including many cases where a particular term was found to have several quite different meanings, each depending on the context. However (for reasons perhaps best side-stepped here in the company of linguists, but not entirely unrelated to ‘hegemony’) no-one took it upon themselves to sort out the potential ambiguities. When the standards had to be translated, however, some effort was made to avoid the same problems. Hence the meaningful differentiation of ‘radio beacon’ in Spanish, which as it happens is seen in the French terms as well: radiophare / radiobalise. |
| |||||||||||||
Grading comment
| ||||||||||||||
Notes to answerer
| ||||||||||||||
|
33 mins |
Reference: International Telecommunications Union Reference information: I have found this glosssary very useful for telecom translations. It renders both your terms as "beacon", however. The link is unwieldy but I think it will get you there. http://www.itu.int/net/ITU-R/index.asp?redirect=true&categor... |
| ||
Note to reference poster
| |||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.