rupture caractérisée de l’égalité devant les charges publiques

09:27 May 16, 2010 

I think I used "clear" or something like that....and the other translator had delivered "breach of equality in terms of public spending" ....but I suggested Chris's original phrase to the rereader

15:34 May 15, 2010 

Duly reprimanded!!

This is the correct (somewhat lengthy) link:

http://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/conseil-constitutionne...

Search for the phrase, then go to the English version and the translated phrase appears on pages 5 and 7.

Décision n° 2007-555 DC du 16 août 2007

11:45 May 15, 2010 

While I agree that the Conseil Constitutionnel's own translation should be respected, that respect should not be uncritical. They use translators who can make mistakes. Indeed, though the links that Hazel gives don't work, I have looked at the general website and find various errors or examples of poor expression in the English version, (even though in general it is not at all bad):
"as determined by Article 10 **(indent 1)** of the Constitution";
"The decisions of the Council are binding ... . No appeal **lies against** them";
"12 questions **to begin for**";
to which I would add "equality **before public burden sharing**".

11:05 May 15, 2010 

I understand the argument about the word 'patent'. However, I would bow to the superior knowledge of the Conseil Constitutionnel and if this body translates the exact phrase in question, who am I to argue?

10:16 May 15, 2010 

"Blatant" indicates that whatever it is applied to is offensive and excessive - best avoided as Tony explains below. Something that is "patent" is obvious, perhaps so obvious that it is undeniable, so it is a little stronger than "clear" and is often used in rhetorical argument. To use "patent" in this context could lead to a challenge that the breakdown was not as obvious as all that. So, I think that "clear" is the best word here, as it is morally neutral and does not invite challenge.

08:07 May 15, 2010 

Blatant, I believe, can have a pejorative connotation whereas patent is just the obvious choice!

05:26 May 15, 2010 

I'm afraid I have to disagree there, Chris.

The term 'blatant' implies very strongly a judgement by the writer which would be totally out of place in this sort of document; the same goes for other words like 'flagrant', which need to be used very carefully indeed in any sort of 'official' document, where a more neutral tone is usually required.

02:13 May 15, 2010 

I hardly see a difference, if any, between using "blatant breach" and "clear breach" here. Either is definitely acceptable IMO.

13:23 May 14, 2010 

"Blatant" would patently not be the right register for the context!

09:58 May 14, 2010 

it means blatant or, as Hazel's suggestion puts it, patent.

09:01 May 14, 2010 

I've just tumbled that it's not technical, this is just a gap in my general French !!

08:50 May 14, 2010 

what about "caractérisée" ?!