French term
une autre juridiction apparut pour codifier la saisie
Une autre juridiction apparut pendant la guerre pour codifier la saisie du « butin ». Son application fut limitée aux musées de l’Armée, de l’Aéronautique et de la Marine.
Il ne s’agissait pas de matériel présentant une valeur militaire, conquis en combattant ; mais d’armes anciennes n’ayant qu’une importance historique ou documentaire.
Merci Beaucoup,
Barbara
Non-PRO (2): AllegroTrans, Angus Stewart
When entering new questions, KudoZ askers are given an opportunity* to classify the difficulty of their questions as 'easy' or 'pro'. If you feel a question marked 'easy' should actually be marked 'pro', and if you have earned more than 20 KudoZ points, you can click the "Vote PRO" button to recommend that change.
How to tell the difference between "easy" and "pro" questions:
An easy question is one that any bilingual person would be able to answer correctly. (Or in the case of monolingual questions, an easy question is one that any native speaker of the language would be able to answer correctly.)
A pro question is anything else... in other words, any question that requires knowledge or skills that are specialized (even slightly).
Another way to think of the difficulty levels is this: an easy question is one that deals with everyday conversation. A pro question is anything else.
When deciding between easy and pro, err on the side of pro. Most questions will be pro.
* Note: non-member askers are not given the option of entering 'pro' questions; the only way for their questions to be classified as 'pro' is for a ProZ.com member or members to re-classify it.
Proposed translations
a different legal system reared its head to turn into hard law the grabbing
juridiction : ambiguous for a court or jurisdiction.
reared its head, implied: its ugly one
apparut: 'popped up' as opposed to the objective turn of phrase of appeared or made an appearance.
There are US Am Codes, so codify might work better in the States than on other English Common Law Countries. Query: 'turn into 'black-letter law' or 'legitimize the illegitimate seizure'.
The right-wing bias of the German justice system reared its head.
What is Black-Letter Law? Black-letter law refers to the concept that rules are generally well-known and free from doubt or dispute.
another authority got involved in making rules for disposing of / allocating the loot
another authority waded in to make rules for disposing of / allocating the loot
depending on the general intonation of the text.
authority as in "organ / institution of power"
the "normal" meaning of "une juridiction" as used in international treaties and in legal treatises make no sense whatsoever HERE.
It certainly wasn't another country's legal system (a "jurisdiction" other than the one of the Nazi Germany) that was asked for their opinion about dividing the loot!
The ONLY legal system involved was the one of the Nazi Germany.
So whatever this "autre juridiction" was exactly, it was part of / within the one and only "legal system" of the Nazi Germany.
The ONLY meaning of "une autre juridiction" that makes sense in this ST is "une juridiction" being either a military authority (not only a military court, possibly any other type of authority), of the same type as "une juridiction" in charge of trade and trade disputes, or a civilian authority or ...
Here probably some kind of "authority" in charge of museums.
neutral |
AllegroTrans
: How do you know this wasn't a special court, set up to adjudicate in favour of the looters? Have you researched? I think not
30 mins
|
Given the Nazis' modus operandi a "special court" would be extremely unlikely and would anyway also be "an organ of the state / a kind of authority" // BTW, how would you classify the FCA (Financial Conduct Authority)?
|
Discussion
From a purely linguistic standpoint it sounds like a legal authority was set up, with competence over the named museums, to set the rules for seizures of certain artifacts from those museums. But a glance at the history should make it easier to translate.
But this law would be more about allocating the loot. They didn't seem to encumber themselves with too many rules when it comes to just grabbing it ...
My guess would be that some kind of "authority" in charge of military museums decided to wade in and take from the loot for themselves the "historical" pieces of armament.