não estavam a ter interlocutor

15:46 Feb 10, 2013 

Thank you for all the contributions and discussion; this was exactly what I needed to get my thoughts straight. In the end, my decision was informed by the following:
- What is the most straight-forward way of getting the main idea across?
- What would be the easiest for non-native speakers to understand?
- What fits best with the neutral register of the article?

I think in a different article with a different audience I would have preferred to go with something including ‘dialogue’ or the idea of ‘requests unheeded’ but, in this case, I simply used ‘realising they were not being heard’. I’ll have to remember that there is something to be said for going with one’s instinct lol!

I hope you all have a great day!

11:56 Feb 6, 2013 

Thanks for your input; I really appreciate it. I think ‘unheeded’ is a good option because it captures the idea that the doctors were heard but no action was taken. Along the same lines, I wonder if ‘disregarded’ or ‘ignored’ could work?

08:18 Feb 6, 2013 

We spoke with one voice on the Palestinian problem. And yet, our united voice went unheeded. We spoke with one voice on Iraq, on the embargo against the Iraqi people. And again, our united voice went unheeded. We therefore have to realise that persistence is needed at times when our policies may be able to bring about practical results which do not in turn foster new crises.

20:26 Feb 5, 2013 

:-)

20:24 Feb 5, 2013 

If they did not get a response, they were not being heard, i.e. their message did not get across to the authorities or whoever the recipients were in this case. (not physically heard, if you know what I mean). Good Luck!

20:15 Feb 5, 2013 

Yes, Marlene, I know what you mean. I started to think about how the idea of dialogue is implicit in “being heard”, i.e. we normally expect to be heard within an exchange rather than in a one-sided situation. The thing is, I started to question this translation when I considered that perhaps the doctors took action not necessarily because they hadn’t been heard but because they hadn’t received any responses. That is, they could reasonably assume that someone in the Government had read their letters but the problem was the lack of response and/or the lack of dialogue. Of course, it could also be argued that they were angry about not feeling heard, even though they had technically been heard. But, when we stop and think about it, we feel we have been heard because someone actually responds to us. I think you get the idea of how I got myself into this mess! lol

19:56 Feb 5, 2013 

Please, see the ref. below. In a dialogue (ex. a discussion), you may still not be heard, that is, your message may not be heard or taken into consideration.

Dialogue

Listening to understand: Hear their words; learn their meaning. What is the person saying? What ideas do they want to get across? What are they feeling now? What is important to them? What does this mean for them? What is not being heard? Why? What is their truth? How can I connect with them? What can I learn from them? What have I been missing? What are we all missing? How can this new information change my point of view? WHO IS NOT BEING HEARD? What are the inconsistencies, dilemmas, and paradoxes? What new frame of reference can provide coherence? Concentrate on direct observation, stick to the facts, dismiss your old thoughts and assumptions, stay in their moment, hear their story, and defer interpretation. Listen without resistance as you notice your own resistance. Notice how you are reacting. Be still; stay silent inwardly and outwardly

http://www.emotionalcompetency.com/dialogue.htm

19:45 Feb 5, 2013 

“Not being heard” is, without a doubt, very common in English. The question, though, is whether this is really the best translation for “a ter interlocutor”. Your suggestion was the first thing that came to my mind as well, but I wanted to open this up for discussion to see how other people approached it. Any thoughts on the idea of dialogue/exchange/negotiation?

19:30 Feb 5, 2013 

Dec 5, 2012 – The need for Aboriginal voice in public policy making was highlighted, with participants firmly stating, “We are not being heard!” They saw ...

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jeph/2012/130945/

19:15 Feb 5, 2013 

My initial thoughts included something along the lines of either not being heard or there being a lack of negotiation/dialogue. What I felt was that the first option flowed better while the second was perhaps closer to the original. In posting this question, I wanted to see if anyone else could come up with a better solution or, failing that, which approach other translators preferred.

19:05 Feb 5, 2013 

interlocutor
n substantivo masculino
cada uma das pessoas que participam de uma conversa, de um diálogo