Found in conversation

[Allen165]

I'm translating a German text in which it is written that personal data can be "found" in a personal conversation, which sounds odd to me. Would you say that data can indeed be "found" in a personal conversation?

"Personal data can be found or recorded, among other things, in files, memos, on audiotapes, in personal conversations, on electronic data carriers, in videos, faxes, letter mail, e-mail, on the Web, etc."

I was thinking of replacing "found" with "revealed."

Thanks!

[5jj]

I'm translating a German text in which it is written that personal data can be "found" in a personal conversation, which sounds odd to me. Would you say that data can indeed be "found" in a personal conversation?

"Personal data can be found or recorded, among other things, in files, memos, on audiotapes, in personal conversations, on electronic data carriers, in videos, faxes, letter mail, e-mail, on the Web, etc."

I was thinking of replacing "found" with "revealed."

In that particular sentence, 'found' sounds fine to me, and 'revealed' wouldn't say quite the same thing.

What does 'among other things' refer to in the original? It might be worth considering:

"Personal data can be found or recorded in files, memos, personal conversations,videos, faxes, letter mail, e-mail (etc) and on audiotapes, electronic data carriers, the Web, etc." With 'etc', you don't really need 'among other things'.

[Allen165]

In that particular sentence, 'found' sounds fine to me, and 'revealed' wouldn't say quite the same thing.

What does 'among other things' refer to in the original? It might be worth considering:

"Personal data can be found or recorded in files, memos, personal conversations,videos, faxes, letter mail, e-mail (etc) and on audiotapes, electronic data carriers, the Web, etc." With 'etc', you don't really need 'among other things'.

You're right about "among other things," but it's in the original, along with "etc."

Thanks!

[5jj]

You're right about "among other things," but it's in the original, along with "etc."

I am not surprised. In the days, many years ago, when I used to translate from German into English, I was sometimes frustrated by the extra words that I was obliged to translate unecessarily. The German writers would insist that these words were necessary in 'good' German, and therefore must appear in 'good' English.

[Allen165]

I am not surprised. In the days, many years ago, when I used to translate from German into English, I was sometimes frustrated by the extra words that I was obliged to translate unecessarily. The German writers would insist that these words were necessary in 'good' German, and therefore must appear in 'good' English.

German is a more precise language than English, but it's also full of redundancies. Here's an example:

"Diese Haftung des Lieferanten wird auf den Maximalbetrag von [Betrag] begrenzt."

That sentence is from an actual contract. (The emphasis is mine.) If the liability is "limited" to a certain amount, then you don't need the word "maximum." Nevertheless, the person who proofread my translation, a German native speaker, wanted me to translate "maximal." So I did.

"This liability of the Supplier will be limited to the maximum amount of [amount]."

[5jj]

"Diese Haftung des Lieferanten wird auf den Maximalbetrag von [Betrag] begrenzt."
"This liability of the Supplier will be limited to the maximum amount of [amount]."

At least with that example we could say that we are try trying to make assurance double sure (Doppelt genäht hält besser, as our friends might put it) . With your original example, the doubling (u.a/usw?) just causes problems in English, and adds no extra assurance.