Is it correct to translate ‘Quel jeu doit-on jouer vis-à-vis des autorités de Californie?’ as ‘What game must we play with the California authorities?’
This question came up for consideration by a United States District Judge recently. He certainly felt competent to answer the question with the help of a bilingual dictionary (I think I could work twice as fast if I had the self-confidence about legal translation that some judges have). I can’t really judge this French, though.
bq. 10/02/2005 : John Garamendi, vs. Altus Finance S.A., et al. – Order Denying MAAF’s Motion to Preclude the French Phrase “Quel jeu Doit-on Jouer Vis-a-Vis Des Autorities De Californie?” as Used in Mr. Simonet’s Notes From Being Translated as “What Game Must We Play With the California Authorities?” [Motion 12] Case No. CV 99-2829 AHM (CWx)
Eugene Volokh writes that French will never rise to the importance of Yiddish in court opinions. Here is a paper on that subject by Volokh and Judge Alex Kozinski
bq. The more likely explanation is that Yiddish is quickly supplanting Latin as the spice in American legal argot. As recently as 1970, a federal court not only felt the need to define “bagels”; it misdefined them, calling them “hard rolls shaped like doughnuts.” All right-thinking people know good bagels are rather soft. (Day-old bagels are rather hard, but right-thinking people do not eat day-olds, even when they are only 10 cents each.) Weve come a long way since then.
(Thanks to Chris Durban. Netlex blog (French)