French term
en termes de taux de change
This is about China, "la 6ème puissance économique mondiale en termes de taux de change."
Can a country be an economic power "in terms of exchange rates" and what does this mean?
Thank you!
| 5 +2 | at official or current exchange rates |
joehlindsay
|
| 3 +4 | in terms of exchange rate |
mimi 254
|
| 5 | in terms of exchange rates [plural] |
Rimas Balsys
|
| The Globalization of the Chinese Economy |
mohanv
|
Non-PRO (1): Julie Barber
When entering new questions, KudoZ askers are given an opportunity* to classify the difficulty of their questions as 'easy' or 'pro'. If you feel a question marked 'easy' should actually be marked 'pro', and if you have earned more than 20 KudoZ points, you can click the "Vote PRO" button to recommend that change.
How to tell the difference between "easy" and "pro" questions:
An easy question is one that any bilingual person would be able to answer correctly. (Or in the case of monolingual questions, an easy question is one that any native speaker of the language would be able to answer correctly.)
A pro question is anything else... in other words, any question that requires knowledge or skills that are specialized (even slightly).
Another way to think of the difficulty levels is this: an easy question is one that deals with everyday conversation. A pro question is anything else.
When deciding between easy and pro, err on the side of pro. Most questions will be pro.
* Note: non-member askers are not given the option of entering 'pro' questions; the only way for their questions to be classified as 'pro' is for a ProZ.com member or members to re-classify it.
Proposed translations
at official or current exchange rates
If you will google 'official exchange rate' and 'purchasing power parity', or look at the Wikipedia entry for 'purchasing power parity' on the link below it will explain why a country can be more or less of an economic power if it's real exchange rate is different from its official or nominal exchange rate.
In economics writing the term 'at official exchange rates' is very common, (more than 7 million hits on Google) and the most accepted way to express this.
'In exchange rate terms' would be understood and not incorrect, but at 'official exchange rates' is probably the way a professional economist would express this.
The real size of the Chinese economy is very different from the nominal size which is calculated using official exchange rates rather purchasing power parity values/
| agree |
rkillings
: or 'at market exchange rates'. In any case, 'at' is far preferable to 'in terms of'.
51 mins
|
| agree |
John Peterson
: This can resolve any ambiguity; re your discussion point I'm assuming some sort of exchange rate conversion has been used for comparability - which, for me, is what it is about. Whether it is the right exchange rate is another matter.
1 hr
|
|
I think what they are saying that no exchange rate adjustment has been made. For some kinds of economical analysis, the unadjusted rate is useful, for others, the PPP adjusted rate is more useful. I don't think that an exchange rate adjustment has been m
|
in terms of exchange rate
That's how i also understand it. When the exchange rate is taken into consideration, China is ranked nber 6
| agree |
Jennifer Forbes
: Alternatively, "in exchange-rate terms" or "from the exchange-rate point of view".
1 min
|
| agree |
lydiar
: I agree, but agree even more with Jenny's suggestions:)
15 mins
|
| neutral |
Jack Dunwell
: Can you explain what it means?
34 mins
|
| neutral |
John Peterson
: probably best to say something like "exchange rate-adjusted"/Re Juliebarba's remark, terms like the one here are frequently used to indicate that figures in national currencies have been adjusted for comparability (in terms of a common unit of account)
1 hr
|
| agree |
Julie Barber
: ref John's comments, I can't see why the translation needs changing
2 hrs
|
| agree |
swanda
3 hrs
|
| neutral |
joehlindsay
: This is not incorrect but the common term used in economics literature is 'at official exchange rates'.
3 hrs
|
in terms of exchange rates [plural]
Reference comments
The Globalization of the Chinese Economy
China, China is changing rapidly, in particular because
it has opened up to the world. Formally, that process
culminated in China’s accession to the WTO in 2001.
The real opening occurred at a dramatic speed. Exports
as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) grew from
4% in 1965, 6% in 1980, and 14% in 1989, to 24%
in 1994 (World Bank 1991 + 1996). In spite of that
large share, the absolute figures, about USD 300, ex-
ports/capita are still low (3% of the German value!)
because of China’s low GDP (in particular when meas-
ured in terms of exchange rates). Exports and imports
as a share of GDP increased from 33% in 1993 to
60% in 2003 (in comparison, Japan’s share grew from
14% to 18% during the same period; Schrooten
2004). Gross foreign direct investment increased from
1.2% of GDP in 1990 to 4.9% in 2001 (World Bank
2003b)
| Thanks Mohan! |
Discussion
It seems that the Purchase Power Parity factor used to adjust the Chinese currency had not been updated since the 1980s and had become grossly inaccurate. Further, Chinese statistics are considered to not be reliable, so it is difficult if not impossible to estimate many economic phenomena in China accurately.
Thus the writer of this French sentence acknowledges these issues, and carefully notes that the criterion used is the value of the Chinese economy at the official exchange rate, and not at PPP or using one of the other measures economists use to estimate economies. So the rate is not adjusted, and the reader should consider the size of the Chineses economy to be the size at the official rate adjusted by whatever the reader might deem appropriate, or just to understand that the amount is probably not exactly accurate.
What I was trying to say, in essence, is that I think the issue behind the translation is one of comparability. In this case, it boils down to choosing a country's currency as a reference point (e.g. the $US) and then producing comparable figures via conversions based on each country's dollar exchange rate. If it is simply about an exchange rate, then I can only assume than some (weighted) exchange rate (index) has been used (from memory I think the IMF is one organisation that produces these) to make the comparison.
So maybe something like "in terms of a weighted exchange rate (index)". Something tells me that China didn't become a "major economic power" - and won't sustain the export-led growth/low cost base that brought it there - by having a high exchange rate (which would dampen down demand for its exports) - which makes me think that it is about some sort of exchange rate adjusted/converted aggregate. It is possible that the aggregates have simply been adjusted/converted using, say, each country's dollar exchange rate to produce dollar value figures.
-6ème puissance écomonique mondiale en termes de taux de change
- 2nde après les Etats Unis en termes de pouvoir d'achat
Your comment clarifies it for me, thanks!