This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Spanish to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents - Certificates, Diplomas, Licenses, CVs
Spanish term or phrase:constancia de residencia
Estoy traduciendo una **constancia de residencia**, un documento que certifica que una persona dada vive en una dirección específica. Quisiera saber cuál es la mejor forma de traducir el nombre del documento. Hasta los momentos he usado proof of residence, pero tengo una oración que dice:
La presente constancia tiene validez para acreditar el lugar de residencia de la ciudadana identificada por ante todos los órganos, entes e instituciones públicas o privadas
que había traducido como
This proof [of residence] is valid to prove/certify/provide evidence of the place of residence of the identified citizen before all public or private agencies, entities or institutions.
Creo que el verbo más adecuado sería prove, pero "this proof proves" es como redundante.
He evaluado: address proof, proof of residency, proof of residence, certificate of residence, record of residence. Algunos de estos términos he encontrado que se refieren exclusivamente a dirección fiscal, otros se usan principalmente en la India.
En concreto, quisiera saber cómo se llamaría este tipo de documento en el Reino Unido, específicamente en Inglaterra.
Explanation: "This proof of residence/address confirms that..." NB: The UK tends to use "proof of address": Documents that can be used as proof of address and identity ... https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/.../Address_and_ide... Documents that can be used as proof of address and identity ... letter from the relevant benefits agency confirming the right to benefits or state pension. Proof of ...
I only mentioned it to illustrate the fact that the first-answer-takes-priority idea is not site policy but actually the opposite, which may be news to some people here.
It seemed unfair to me, but above all surprising, because it is very unlikely that this would happen in ES-EN. You'd hardly ever get everybody agreeing with both answers; some people here would always agree with the first and not the second. But DE-EN is apparently different.
Another point on which there is general but not total agreement here is that you're allowed to change your mind or modify your answer in the explanation, including in a note you add later. In other words, what appears in the answer box is not necessarily taken to be your final answer. And people are not "allowed" to post an answer that has already been mentioned in someone else's explanation. There's nothing in the site rules or FAQs about this; it's just the general custom in this pair. Since there's a premium here on posting quickly (particularly since some people seem to feel that the first acceptable answer should even take precedence over a later better one), second thoughts are bound to occur.
There's even a fairly widespread feeling that it's not correct to post an answer that has already been suggested in the discussion area. I tend to follow this too, but I have to say there's no reason one should.
This "first past the post" ethos does sometimes militate against quality. What you sometimes find is that while you were collecting references to support your answer, or explaining it, someone has posted the same translation with little or no explanation, as the FAQ says. If I find this has happened, what I usually do is post my supporting material as a reference. According to the FAQ I should go ahead and post my answer, and if it's better explained than the first one (and both are right), the asker should choose it, but if I did I would feel I'd broken the "rules".
An experience which surprised and annoyed me some time ago was when I correctly answered a German-English question. I got four agrees. But some time later, another user posted exactly the same answer, with no more explanation than I had given (less in fact) and also got four agrees, from the same people. The question was closed automatically — and the other answer was chosen. I asked about this, and was told that when two answers have the same number of agrees, the later of the two is automatically chosen, on the grounds that people have had less time to post agrees to it so they're worth more.
Q: "1.32 - I was the first to provide the right answer to a KudoZ question and then [an]other user provided the same answer adding [a] few more explanations and received the points (instead of agreeing to my answer). Is this allowed?"
A: "Askers have the right to select the answers they consider most helpful to their questions. There is nothing wrong in taking the time to provide the best possible answer, including references and explanations, even if a term has been already suggested. Limiting this right would turn KudoZ into a race to post a term with little or no explanations, and it would discourage better researched and more complete answers." https://www.proz.com/faq/137464#137464
In the ES-EN pair there is quite a strong unofficial rule that you shouldn't do this, and if you inadvertently do, you should post an "agree" to the first answer. Many would say you should also delete ("hide") your own answer. This does indeed turn it into a race. When I am about to post an answer, I normally open the same question in a new tab just before doing so to check that the same answer has not been posted by someone else while I was preparing mine. Sometimes I forget.
There are formal KudoZ rules, which are quite strict on some things, particularly commenting on people's competence and insulting other users, and there are also FAQs which give a lot of further guidance on site policy. Then there are tacit "rules" or etiquette that regular contributors tend to observe. Since regulars tend to interact repeatedly with the same people, they tend to fall in with what seems to be the consensus on these things. Interestingly, I find that these are not entirely the same in all language pairs.
There is no site rule or guideline that says you can't post an answer someone else has already posted. On the contrary, it's actually encouraged:
When I first started contributing on this forum, I did get a bit upset about some comments that I felt were a bit harsh. In fact, I stopped contributing for about three years. However, it is a fantastic way to get help and help others and really find out interesting things about the way languages evolve in different parts of the world. You just need to ignore the comments that may seem somewhat aggressive... Also, remember that we cannot read "tones" in these messages so sometimes someone means no harm but it is read differently. Or people are too busy to expand on their ideas and they may sound a bit abrupt. I do hope my experience can help you feel a bit better and you continue to contribute to this forum as it is really useful to us all. All the best!
Proof of residence sounds a bit odd to me in this context, partly because I think there is a distinction to be made between an address and residence, to avoid confusion with the concept of tax residence.
For example, one may have a holiday home on the Costa del Sol, but work in the UK and spend less than six months of the year in Spain. Then you would have utility bills (water, electricity) which could be used as proof of the address in Spain (i.e. that you can be contacted there), but you would be resident in the UK for tax purposes.
To me at least, "proof of residence" could be taken to mean something that specifically proves where your taxes are filed. Proof of address would always just mean evidence that mail sent to you at that address would reach you, whether you spend the majority of your time there or not.
Then again perhaps I'm just oversensitive to the idea of residency, having just jumped through another round of Spanish paperwork, and having Brexit hanging over us expats in the EU.
David, thank you! I really appreciate all your comments. The question I have is: if someone, it just happens that is Neil here, but I have seen it in other questions, put answer xxx/xxx, I personally understand that both versions can be used. All I would like is that somebody says 'yes both versions are used in the UK' or not? It is confusing when you don't know what is used or not.
Hi Aida and no worries. It's just that if someone suggests something that you find ok and you didn't see that and posted later with something similar or identical ok to agree. I think you both are a great addition to this site and we try to help and also have fun with it with all the responsibility it involves
The standard is 'proof of address' in the UK, not proof of residence.
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
23 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +7
proof of residence/address
Explanation: "This proof of residence/address confirms that..." NB: The UK tends to use "proof of address": Documents that can be used as proof of address and identity ... https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/.../Address_and_ide... Documents that can be used as proof of address and identity ... letter from the relevant benefits agency confirming the right to benefits or state pension. Proof of ...
Example sentence(s):
"...can sometimes ask for a proof of residence to confirm your address"
peer agreement (net): +7