[問譯]請問這句話這樣英翻中是否正確

看板translator作者 (習慣)時間13年前 (2010/09/16 22:30), 編輯推噓4(4推 0噓 35→)
留言39則, 6人參與, 最新討論串1/2 (看更多)
這是有關目前美國最新金融改革法案中有關保險監理的部分 主要在談新設立的聯邦保險監理機關（FIO）的職權 The FIO determine whether U.S. state insurance rules are pre-empted by international insurance agreement, but will have limited preemption power where state insurance laws conflict with international insurance agreements. 這一部分，我翻成：（主要是preempte不知怎麼翻） FIO可判斷美國各州保險監理法規是否已有國際保險條約預先規範， 但如果各州保險法規與國際保險規約相牴觸時， FIO將有限制性的權利替各州保險法規預先規範。 請板友指點迷津 感謝！！感謝！！ -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.231.68.123 ※ 編輯: Yyan 來自: 59.112.228.163 (09/17 00:29)
→
09/17 03:53, , 1F
為何感覺原文很怪? The FIO determine (?) whether [A]
09/17 03:53, 1F
→
09/17 03:54, , 2F
, but will have [B] where [C]?
09/17 03:54, 2F
→
09/17 03:56, , 3F
歐歐 FIO原來是機構，我眼殘別理我
09/17 03:56, 3F
推
09/17 09:49, , 4F
preempt=優先適用 (?)
09/17 09:49, 4F
推
09/17 13:11, , 5F
母法的地位吧。國際>聯邦>州，但聯邦似乎無力干涉州
09/17 13:11, 5F
→
09/17 13:24, , 6F
that's why it's "limited"
09/17 13:24, 6F
→
09/17 16:07, , 7F
rules跟law不同
09/17 16:07, 7F
→
09/17 23:39, , 8F
"FIO將有限制性的權利替各州保險法規預先規範"
09/17 23:39, 8F
→
09/17 23:40, , 9F
limited 是修飾 preemption power，譯為"FIO將可有限
09/17 23:40, 9F
→
09/17 23:41, , 10F
度的規範各州保險法" 可能比較好 (中文文筆自己修)
09/17 23:41, 10F
→
09/17 23:43, , 11F
這裡兩個preempt是我的話可能會採不同詞
09/17 23:43, 11F
→
09/17 23:44, , 12F
whether... are pre-empted by ... 可能翻成
09/17 23:44, 12F
→
09/17 23:45, , 13F
"...是否牴觸..."
09/17 23:45, 13F
→
09/17 23:45, , 14F
but will have limited preemption power where...
09/17 23:45, 14F
→
09/17 23:48, , 15F
=> "但也將有 (有限的) 能力在州保險法與國際保險條約
09/17 23:48, 15F
→
09/17 23:49, , 16F
相牴觸時，對州保險法加以規範"
09/17 23:49, 16F
→
09/17 23:50, , 17F
另："規範"這詞我一直感覺沒抓到關鍵，像隔靴搔癢
09/17 23:50, 17F
→
09/17 23:58, , 18F
a大:如preempt翻成"優先適用"那preemption power怎麼翻
09/17 23:58, 18F
推
09/18 00:35, , 19F
怎我看的跟妳們都不同??
09/18 00:35, 19F
→
09/18 00:36, , 20F
怎感覺是FIO的權力被限制
09/18 00:36, 20F
→
09/18 00:46, , 21F
我又眼殘了嗎 (⊙o⊙) 我感覺我對這段的理解沒錯呀
09/18 00:46, 21F
→
09/18 00:47, , 22F
但查了一下Federal Insurance Office Act
09/18 00:47, 22F
→
09/18 00:48, , 23F
裡面寫到FIO跟states之間都是說 state measures沒說
09/18 00:48, 23F
→
09/18 00:49, , 24F
state laws呀，我當初也覺得一個federal office有能力
09/18 00:49, 24F
→
09/18 00:50, , 25F
preempt 州"法" 會導致天下大亂吧 XD
09/18 00:50, 25F
→
09/18 00:50, , 26F
開頭掉了will. 重點在determine和preempt之別,FIO will
09/18 00:50, 26F
→
09/18 00:52, , 27F
establish and inform,但它本身不是regulator也不supervise
09/18 00:52, 27F
→
09/18 00:53, , 28F
所以實際preemption power是有限的.經調查FIO裁定某州規定
09/18 00:53, 28F
→
09/18 00:55, , 29F
受到國際條約先占/有所衝突,但FIO本身無真正管制執行這項裁
09/18 00:55, 29F
→
09/18 00:57, , 30F
量之權,主要是協調或有點諮詢.identify but not act upon
09/18 00:57, 30F
推
09/18 00:59, , 31F
看來limited被妳們誤當成limiting解釋了
09/18 00:59, 31F
→
09/18 02:20, , 32F
limited preemption powe翻成有限的規範能力應該沒錯呀
09/18 02:20, 32F
→
09/18 02:20, , 33F
"規範"與否是另一回事了
09/18 02:20, 33F
→
09/18 02:23, , 34F
重點是..這句才是重點
09/18 02:23, 34F
→
09/18 02:30, , 35F
打太快 重點是能力被限制 而不是規範能力
09/18 02:30, 35F
→
09/18 05:38, , 36F
能力被限制，被誰限制，應與此句無關
09/18 05:38, 36F
→
09/18 05:39, , 37F
只是"這能力是有限制的"而已~
09/18 05:39, 37F
→
09/18 06:26, , 38F
能力有限和能力有限制…意義相同嗎？ XD
09/18 06:26, 38F
→
09/18 10:38, , 39F
該項預先規範的權"力"便有所限制 意義不同吧
09/18 10:38, 39F
‣ 更多 Yyan 的文章
文章代碼(AID): #1CaYe6m1 (translator)
‣ 更多 Yyan 的文章
文章代碼(AID): #1CaYe6m1 (translator)