Literal translation 14:33 Sep 12, 2013
I would use "profit brought forward" because it is a literal translation of the Swedish, and not an English equivalent. This apparently perverse approach is because I once attended a seminar in London on financial translation, and the speaker (a highly regarded expert) said that a financial translation should sound like a translation, not an English version of the Swedish document. He gave an example – the word "turnover" he said occurs in English accounts but the equivalent word is not usual in various other countries. So "turnover" should never appear in a translation of foreign accounts. My feeling is that the same applies to "retained earnings". It is standard terminology in Anglo-Saxon accounting (based on "a true and fair view"), whereas Swedish accounting, like other countries, is based on prudential accounting, which for example allows hidden reserves - anathema to Anglo-Saxon accounting. Because of this fundamental difference it is safer to use literal translations from the Swedish rather than trying to produce an English version. Let me emphasise that I am no expert, and this is just a contribution to this interesting debate. |