French term
susvisés n'étant pas décédés
Etant ici précisé que ledit codicille s'avérant caduque, les légataires nommés dans le testament et les codicilles un et deux susvisés n'étant pas décédés.
Jun 22, 2024 06:52: Tony M changed "Level" from "PRO" to "Non-PRO"
PRO (1): Daryo
Non-PRO (3): Charlie Bavington, Rob Grayson, Tony M
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
United States
Six languages into flawless English
Native in: English
Works in: German to English, French to English, Spanish to English, and 4 more.
...above are not deceased
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 9 hrs (2024-06-22 23:35:50 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
You didn't ask for the whole sentence, but just to clarify, I suggest something like 'since the heirs named in the will and codicils 1 and 2 above are not deceased'.
| ah right ! Yes that is more like it |
| Thank you all ! Still not happy about the whole sentence ! Have asked for some clarifications ! |
| Merci beaucoup pour tous vos commentaires et pour votre aide. |
| Bonjour voici l'explication - merci beaucoup à tous pour votre aide: Dans le testament au codicille n° 3, Mme xx nommait xx, xx et xx comme légataires, en cas de prédécès des autres légataires nommés aux codicilles un et deux. Ces derniers n’étant pas décédés à ce jour, le codicille trois, nommant xx, xx et xx, est donc caduque/nul, du fait de la survivance des légataires nommés aux deux autres codicilles précédents. |
| agree |
writeaway
: Yes, but not sure this is a pro-level question (also agree with Charlie)
18 mins
|
| neutral |
Charlie Bavington
: Essentially, yes, of course, but use of "étant" does imply some kind of cause & effect (possibly outside of the snippet posted) so I'd expect the full sentence to include an "as" or "because" or similar & the answer should reflect that, I feel.
42 mins
|
|
The asker didn't request a translation of the whole sentence.
|
|
| agree |
AllegroTrans
: Agree with Charlie, so slight rewording needed; also agree with TonyM that the question is badly parsed but that doesn't matter too much and is to be expected...
46 mins
|
| neutral |
Mpoma
: Endorsement of m'learned friends comments. ... "***SINCE*** the above..." or a thousand other formulations. The asker is an Italianophone and using the gerund (is that what it is?) may be as unintuitive as it is to an Anglophone who knows no French.
1 hr
|
|
I've provided a translation for the whole sentence, even though it wasn't asked for.
|
|
| agree |
Andrew Bramhall
: P..S. Can anyone explain to me what AMM is on about below? Yes Liz, like your ironic comment, ditto yours to AMM below his " answer"!
2 hrs
|
| agree |
liz askew
: What could be clearer?
3 hrs
|
| disagree |
Tony M
: Asker is parsing it wrongly! The 'susvisés' refers to Codicils 1 and 2, not to the légataires. Yes because everyone is translating it as if 'suvisées' and 'décédés' referred to the same thing, or at any rate, failing to clarify.
7 hrs
|
|
I didn't say it did! The codicils are not part of the question, and the asker hasn't parsed anything wrongly.
|
|
| agree |
ph-b
: Answers the question as asked, but a bit of explanation wld have been welcome (e.g. your whole sentence in E), especially for a CL5 answer.
19 hrs
|
| disagree |
Daryo
: Could be a part of the correct translation, but it doesn't help much Asker to understand **the whole sentence**. The question is the result of a wrong parsing, THAT needs fixing FIRST.// "susvisés" are neither dead nor alive, being clauses in a will!
1 day 7 hrs
|
|
It's not wrongly parsed.
|
Greece
Fr/Eng Caption Writer - Transcriber
Native in: French 
Works in: English to French, Greek to French, French to English, and 6 more.
above- mentioned/ specified/ indicated/ stated/ referred
| disagree |
AllegroTrans
: Codicils don't die, the legatees named in them can; and "not having been deceased" is grammatically unsound
5 mins
|
|
I agree, the legatees can die.
|
|
| disagree |
Emmanuella
: Un codicille est un document
7 mins
|
|
the legatees named in the will, and the above-mentioned......
|
|
| disagree |
Andrew Bramhall
: Your answer would have been right if the question were "how do you translate 'ci-dessus mentionné';
1 hr
|
|
Indeed
|
|
| disagree |
Daryo
: Mainly on a point of method: the question was asked in the wrong way, presenting two fragment of two different "units of meaning" as a non-existing "unit of meaning": there is NOTHING "susvisés" that's either dead or alive - **read the whole sentence**
1 day 7 hrs
|
Austria
Retd.T&I, Barrister & Austro-Advokat
Native in: English (Variants: British, Scottish)
Works in: Spanish to English, English to Spanish, French to English, and 6 more.
(one + two of the parties) as aforesaid not having died (pre- or post-deceased)
Etant ici précisé que ledit codicille s'avérant caduque, les légataires nommés dans le testament et les codicilles(,) un et deux susvisés n'étant pas décédés.
It being specified > added for clarification > here that such Codicil has been voided* by virtue of the Beneficiaries** named in the Will and the Codicils, one of the former plus two of the latter as aforesaid not having died (pre- or post-deceased).
*turns out / proves to have lapsed
** Legatees of bequests or devisees of land includes buildings
*** read conjunctively = and, rather than disjunctively = or
legatees of bequests and/or devisees of land & buildings
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2024-06-21 17:01:00 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
*** one of the former plus two of the latter vs. one of the former or two of the latter
USA: The most important distinction to know is that PRE-deceased situations are very different than POST-deceased situations. When I refer to “PRE” and “POST” I am talking about when the person died in relation to the decedent (E&W: deceased)
The purpose of a Will Clarity Statement is to provide additional clarification and guidance to the Executors, Trustees, and family members
http://www.queensprobate.com/2017/04/estates-within-estates/
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/french-to-english/law-contracts/2437928-etant-ici-précise.html
| neutral |
liz askew
: I think you have seriously overcomplicated the matter!
38 mins
|
| neutral |
Emmanuella
: Pourquoi faire compliqué ?
52 mins
|
| disagree |
AllegroTrans
: No, this is about codicils one and two, read it again please
2 hrs
|
| disagree |
Tony M
: I would make the same point as A/T
5 hrs
|
| agree |
Daryo
: Agree that you got the gist of the whole sentence right, but you also did overcomplicated it.
1 day 6 hrs
|
[legatees named in the will and in the aforementioned codicils I and II] not being deceased
get the parsing right, and then this sentence is crystal clear, absolutely nothing wrong with it:
Etant ici précisé que ledit codicille s'avérant caduque, les légataires nommés dans le testament et les codicilles un et deux susvisés n'étant pas décédés.
EFFECT:
[Etant ici précisé que] ledit codicille s'avérant caduque,
CAUSE:
les légataires nommés dans le testament et les codicilles un et deux susvisés n'étant pas décédés.
further "slicing":
les légataires nommés dans le testament et les codicilles un et deux susvisés n'étant pas décédés.
the whole of:
"les légataires nommés dans le testament et les codicilles un et deux susvisés"
is the subject of:
"n'étant pas décédés".
Implied:
These "codicils I and II" were applicable only in case the legatees named in them died before the person leaving the will. As they are still alive at the time of death of the person living the will, these "codicils I and II" have become pointless - "expired" / past their useful existence.
IOW the dispositions of "the said codicil" serve no longer any purpose (are figuratively "mort et enterré"), while the person(s) named in the codicil are very much alive.
Etant ici précisé que.. = having clarified that ... having in mind that ...
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/legatee-heir-beneficiary-...
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 8 hrs (2024-06-22 23:06:09 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
The [ ] in my proposed translation are there only to make it visually clear that the whole of [...] is the subject, obviously not to be used in the final text.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 9 hrs (2024-06-22 23:22:51 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
oops
les légataires nommés (dans le testament et les codicilles un et deux susvisés) n'étant pas décédés
| disagree |
ph-b
: Blah blah blah - go back to Mpoma's post in the discussion. It's the 2nd post starting from the beginning, two days ago.
6 hrs
|
|
Blah blah blah ....
|
|
| neutral |
AllegroTrans
: I am quite sure Mpoma has understood this and has correctly modified the parsing to his satisfaction
1 day 20 mins
|
|
Probably - but it doesn't show here. Anyone reading answers at some point in future would be under the impression that "susvisés n'étant pas décédés" makes sense as "one unit of meaning".//"Still not happy about the whole sentence ! etc ...?
|
Discussion
Merci de ne pas tronquer les messages.
"les légataires [nommés dans le testament et les codicilles un et deux susvisés] n'étant pas décédés.
Seems blindingly obvious to me, and definitely needs to be clarified first.
When the wording of a question (/ the "term to translate") is the result of a wrong parsing of the ST "answering the question as asked" is NOT the right way to proceed.
Maybe it got effectively eclipsed by Andrew's not entirely uncharacteristic remonstrance?
In fact, although "s'avérant" should, in ordinary language, be in the indicative here (to make more sense), it'd be wrong, IMHO, to say that using the present participle here is "wrong". This is a kind of "notary's narrative use" of the pres. part. in the first part, which kind of "balances" the tense of the explained consequence against the tense of the reason, i.e. "n'étant pas".
That said, it's comes across as quite exotic (for those who don't engage with the notarial mind every day), but I have seen notaries write like this quite a bit. And it is rare that a notary makes a drafting mistake or has rubbish knowledge of French grammar.
But it did feature in the Q, so needs to feature in the A.
As far as I can see, all of the current suggestions seem to miss this point!
When a beneficiary dies after Will is probated but before the distribution of an Estate, that person is known as a “post deceased beneficiary” A post deceased distributee is a person who dies after another person who did not leave a Will.
Beneficiary Dies After Will Probated - NYC - RK Law PC
Post-deceased means the next of kin died after the decedent.
https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/post-deceased
Asker: the first gerund/present participle, i.e. "s'avérant", should really be in the indicative. But the sense is clear enough. The second, i.e. "n'étant pas" carries with it, in French, a causal meaning (as mentioned by Charlie Bavington). It's quite idiomatic and very common in French.