Poor translations lead to a loss of precise language. In many cases, a solo or small lawyer tries to save costs for the client by using a non-lawyer to translate contracts. There are stories of people using secretaries to translate contracts (“She speaks Spanish, no matter what dialect”) or use computer programs. Even obtaining flat-rate translations of translation services can be problematic if they do not explain the range of potential translations that could result from a given legal formulation. A translator may be required to choose between three, five, ten or zero words in a foreign language for a particular legal term that the lawyer originally described in a legal contract. A translator who is not a lawyer cannot fully understand the goods or services described, the terms of custom use and use in the industry used or the importance of accuracy in that description. Unless they are taken into account in translation and the legal implications of word decisions are understood, the effects of the lawyer`s carefully crafted contractual language can be totally lost when translating into a second language. The reason is simple: if you expect to sue in a Chinese (or foreign) court, the staff of that court will not speak English. You won`t read English. Even if they read English, the Tribunal`s procedural regulations will require that the documents be translated into the national language. If you have already found that the party with whom you enter into a contract has no fortune outside of his own country and that discharge in the district court is faster than an arbitration procedure, why would you want an English-language contract to salt these foreign proceedings? The only language for the foreign court is his, and contracts that are in several languages will confuse the subject. A single contract in a single language (the jurisdiction that sees and imposes it every day) will make the procedure faster, cheaper and simpler – three words that make the customer happy. I think what may have confused you was the S at the end of “our.” Maybe if the English phrase was “Bobby is our dog,” we could have gone straight and correctly to “Bobby`s nuestro perro.” So I explain that “our” with an S at the end is a possessive pronoun, while “ours without the S is a possessive adjective.
In Spanish, for the first plural person, the same word works for both types of possessive. Here is the table in English (the possessive adjective is presented first, followed by the possessive pronoun): I clearly lack something about possessive concordance. If you intend to resolve the dispute in an arbitral tribunal where arbitrators usually conduct proceedings in English, then it is reasonable to have English as the official language of the contract. However, if the forum chosen is China`s local courts, because it is the only place where your manufacturer-seller has assets and your best potential to impose is to upset the threat that hangs over this familiar judicial system, then you should use the extra time and cost to make Chinese the official language of your contract. Some states have also adopted specific rules on translation. For example, Texas Rule of Evidence 1009 provides a general overview of the authorisation and intercess of foreign language translations as documentary evidence. Translation of a document into a foreign language is generally permitted provided that it is accompanied by an affidavit from a qualified foreign language translator, indicating the translator`s qualifications and that the translation is fair and correct.