Christopher Schröder Jun 1, 2020:

Fair point Deane if there is potential for ambiguity or confusion (but I can’t see that here). But in general I am often appalled by the rubbish put out by Scandi authorities. Like when the Swedish government recently consistently mistranslated korttidsarbete as short-term working...

Michael Ellis May 29, 2020:

Based on my experience of bidding when I was in industry, I look at it from the viewpoint of the prospective tenderer, who I assume to be the client for the translation. He wants to know what he has to do in terms he is used to, before committing to the tender.
If the Purchaser has a particular form of TA plan he requires tenderers to use, he should say so e.g. "TA-plan enligt IFS (Trafikverkets interna föreskrifter om Säkerhet vid arbete på väg)", which I would translate as
" A Traffic Managemant plan in accordance with IFS (the Transport Administration's internal regulations on safety when carrying out roadworks)."
Let's agree to disagree on our approaches, and leave peterlcph to chose what he feels fits the context better.

Deane Goltermann May 28, 2020:

@Dangerous Your comment is a pretty dubious contention when the tender/procurement documents state the language of interpretation is Swedish, and all Swedish laws and regs will apply to the procurement -- that is, for design, engineering, and all. Who else but TRV and other appropriate Swedish authorities should these tenderers look to for guidance on how to comply with requirements for building in Sweden and have a chance to win the contract?

Michael Ellis May 28, 2020:

Approaches to the problem Deane,
Our approaches to the problem are different. I always try to find what the usage is in UK (or USA if directed). I have translated many Trafikverket and similar tender documents using this approach, with no pushback from British, French and other clients. I admit that finding what the originator uses is often helpful, but I am always wary of Swenglish as I know it can annoy, or cause a sneer in, clients, and I think you assumption that "non-Swedish tenderers should want to use TRV terminology" is possibly dangerous.

Nice to tangle with you again, Deane, I hope you are keeping safe in the face of Covid-19.
Michael

Deane Goltermann May 28, 2020:

@Chris Right, not only simply because I do it...

The idea is, when TRV or another government agency has a set of procurement documents referencing TRV terminology for building whatever, my inclination is to use the Eng TRV terms, regardless. When the procurement is published in Swedish, with an Eng translation, the non-Swedish tenderers should want to use TRV terminology. This will also affect the translation back to Swe for the actual submission. My presumption is this asker is doing similar procurement docs, as the Swe term here is pretty context specific. Still, context is important.

I did a series of these docs for rock tunneling around Stockholm for about 10 different projects over 12-15 mos. And was actually uncomfortable with this suggestion when I first found it. But the customer (with their own construction guy doing a (pretty strict) QC review) accepted this.

The other side of this issue is the TRV does update itself regularly and may change things on you, so you always have to double check. I did so quickly this time around, but a more thorough check should be done by the asker when they get these suggestions. Which is what I always expect when giving a suggestion

Christopher Schröder May 27, 2020:

traffic management plan would be what I'd expect to see in the UK

Matt Bibby May 27, 2020:

"Traffic coordination plan" comes up a fair amount on Google, in case that helps.