Kiwiland Bear Jul 19, 2012:

But it's not the part of your question! I gathered that's what the above dicsussion was all about, was it not?

Besides, expanding or extending definitions is nothing new in the legal "inventiveness" over there.

Susan Welsh (asker) Jul 19, 2012:

@Kiwiland Bear I think you misunderstood. The bit about "foreign agents" is part of the headline of the article being translated.

Kiwiland Bear Jul 19, 2012:

Sorry for joining a bit late... ... but I too would avoid using "foreign agents" and such in this case.

Quite apart from the reasons already voiced above, what if the above list is later extended to include other "suspect" or otherwise undesirable organisations? Or is it extended already?

Just as a wild (or not so wild) guess - they might include organisations with "No visible means of support" or whatever they decide to call it.

In other words, hard-wiring "foreign agents" into the title is just too restrictive and overly specific...methinks.

Mariusz Kuklinski Jul 18, 2012:

All is forgiven, Susan We had a good discussion :-)

Susan Welsh (asker) Jul 18, 2012:

foreign agents The headline of the article is "Депутаты сделают «иностранными агентами» и СМИ". Sorry if it confused people that I didn't put this in as context.

Oleg Lozinskiy Jul 18, 2012:

Though I fully agree with Rita - no doubt that the source context speaks about 'foreign agents regiister' and Russian Internet is now full wiith pieces of news speaking about the 'foreign agents list' which may be turned into 'foreign agents register' - I would rather support Sam and rns for the following reasons:

(a) To a Russian ear and perception 'foreign agent' = 'foreign spy', a traitor, a betrayer. And this unpleasant connotation is among reasons why there is so much fuss about the current legal innovation.

(b) The fact that the AUTHOR of the source text does NOT use 'foreign agents' in my view means that he/she intends to somewhat sooth public discussion by saying, what's the fuss? they will just do their financial reporting on a semiannual or quaterly rather than annual basis? They will not be send to jail. They will not be executed.

That's why I give my 'pro' to Sam and RNS

Mariusz Kuklinski Jul 18, 2012:

@ can use You have a deal :-) I didn't want to be a difficult customer, I just looked at it from the angle of someone who looks later for a term. Thank you, Rita for a good discussion.

RitaZ Jul 18, 2012:

Or, she can just use my answer and not submit it into the glossary.

Mariusz Kuklinski Jul 18, 2012:

@ Rita & Susan There's a systemic problem with equivalence of the source phrase and the target phrase on Proz. The system is not fuzzy. Because the winning entries are collected into a glossary, the latter should thus very closely correspond to the latter, otherwise someone who looks for, e.g. "organisations subject to particularly rigorous monitoring" will find "foreign agents register", which will be a wrong answer. So while Rita is right about the register, the matter of equivalence of the answer to the source phrase should not be taken lightly. In the interest of the future users of the glossary, I would be most comfortable if Susan put a new query, this time including "реестр" in the source phrase. I will be happy then to agree fully with Rita.

RitaZ Jul 18, 2012:

p.s. Let's stop arguing, we're saying the same thing over and over at this point :)

RitaZ Jul 18, 2012:

But, the word "register" is in the sentence :) She wasn't asking for the meaning of особо проверяемых. She was asking for a special term that register may be called. And what it's *called* everywhere is a register of organizations considered foreign agents.

Mariusz Kuklinski Jul 18, 2012:

@ Rita I understand your intention and I take into account the character of the register. Please note, however, that Susan did not include the word "register" into the source phrase. Had she done it, I would bave been among the first to agree with you.

RitaZ Jul 18, 2012:

Mariusz, I modified my reply to indicate why I disagree with your answer. And реестр «особо проверяемых» организаций is a "foreign agents" register/registry. However, if Susan decides to go with the literal translation, then Sam's would be more appropriate.

Mariusz Kuklinski Jul 18, 2012:

A remark to Anton and Rita You are perfectly free to disagree with my answer. Please note, however, that you criticise my comment to the answer. Now, regarding the answer, please?
Whatever your opinion! And regarding your answer to Sam, Rita, the source phrase refers to an organisation rather than to the register.