Glossary entry (derived from question below)
English term or phrase:
previous applicants need not apply
French translation:
candidats passés (sont priés de) s\'abstenir
English term
previous applicants need not apply
Oct 29, 2013 15:37: Odile Raymond changed "Level" from "PRO" to "Non-PRO"
Oct 29, 2013 23:42: Nicolas Roussel changed "Visibility" from "Visible" to "Squashed"
Oct 30, 2013 13:30: Yana Dovgopol changed "Visibility" from "Squashed" to "Visible"
PRO (1): Daryo
Non-PRO (3): mchd, GILLES MEUNIER, Odile Raymond
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
candidats passés s'abstenir
sur le modèle de:
Pas sérieux s'abstenir.
Académies cherchent candidats, vieillards s'abstenir -
[http://www.lemonde.fr/livres/article/2011/02/10/academies-ch...]
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 8 days (2013-11-07 13:55:34 GMT) Post-grading
--------------------------------------------------
"La société parisienne: esquisses de moeurs par un jeune provincial
par Marie-Benigne-Esther Letissier
... précieuses listes bien connues de tous les candidats passés , présents et futurs, contenant les noms des bourgs et bourgades , chefs-lieux d'arrondissements ...
[http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=4BoPAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA220&lpg...]
| neutral |
Christophe Delaunay
: "Candidats passés"? Passés par où/par quoi? La moulinette?....Sorry mais ...c'est français, ça?
3 days 4 hrs
|
|
j'ai bien vérifié: un des usages de "candidats passés" correspond à ce contexte (=candidats qui nous ont déjà contacté dans le passé)
|
France
Experienced - Proactive - Meticulous
Native in: French (Variant: Standard-France)
Works in: Spanish to French, English to French, French
Merci de ne pas repostuler.
| Merci, Christophe ! I think this would be a good solution in many business situations. In my particular instance, it wasn't the best fit for my context. |
| Merci, Christophe ! This would I think be a good solution in many business contexts, but wasn't the best fit in my particular case. |
| agree |
Platary (X)
: Assez juste et naturel.
3 hrs
|
|
Merci Adrien...je crois aussi. Concis sans être inutilement agressif :)
|
Si vous avez déjà postulé à cette offre, merci de ne pas renvoyer votre candidature
| @ Daryo: I don't entirely agree with your point; as W/A has said, it <i>may</i> not be for the same job offer. But this expression is very commonly found in cases where a job is being re-advertised, since no suitable candidate was forthcoming the first time round. |
| Merci, Melodie ! Although this might work in certain specific contexts, as others have said, it could be too restrictive in others. |
| neutral |
writeaway
: only if it's for the same job offer. That's not always the case. We don't have any specific context, just generalities.
4 mins
|
| disagree |
Daryo
: "previous" is there because the candidate is already known to the company from replying to some other job advert - so it's never "déjà postulé à cette offre"
3 hrs
|
Canada
les candidatures déjà en banque ne doivent pas être resoumises
Si vous faites partie de la banque de candidature
| Merci, Lorraine ! From the variety of answers, it seems that there is no single standard expression in FR, as there is in EN. I feel sure this version might be used in some circumstances, but wasn't the best solution in my case. |
| neutral |
writeaway
: maybe a bit too Canadian. devoir changes the meaning .
17 mins
|
|
banque de candidatures est très courant en français
|
|
| neutral |
Christophe Delaunay
: "resoumises"? :-o ...oui, j'avais bien compris...mais je trouve que ce n'est pas du plus bel effet en français (et en général, tous les "re"- quelque chose)
2 hrs
|
|
'previous' voulant dire déjà soumises :-)
|
France
Certified translator-English/Chinese →FR
Native in: French (Variant: Standard-France)
Works in: English to French, Chinese to French, French
Inutile de repostuler si vous avez déjà posé votre candidature
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2013-10-29 18:01:49 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
OK!
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 4 days (2013-11-03 08:49:14 GMT) Post-grading
--------------------------------------------------
My pleasure!
| Thanks, Odile, for the moment! I am slightly concerned, however, that there are very significantly fewer instances of this on Google than the equivalent expression in EN. So I don't know if it is just that a 'standard' formula is simply not used in FR — or if we simply haven't found it yet... |
| Merci, Odile ! From the variety of answers, it seems that there is no single standard expression in FR, as there is in EN. I feel sure this version might be used in some circumstances, but wasn't the best solution in my case. |
| agree |
Sandra C.
: pas mal :) "inutile de postuler si vous avez déjà posé votre candidature". le "re-" est peut-être redondant...
4 mins
|
|
merci ! Il y a sans doute d'autres options.//Cela me semble moins naturel, mais peut-être...
|
|
| agree |
FX Fraipont (X)
9 mins
|
|
Merci, FX !
|
|
| agree |
writeaway
: j'ai déjà vu cette formule utilisée dans des annonces de jobs sur Proz.
21 mins
|
|
merci, writeaway
|
|
| agree |
GILLES MEUNIER
30 mins
|
|
merci, Gilles
|
|
| neutral |
MelodieR
: suite aux explications de Tony, la formulation "Inutile de" est peut-être un peu trop directe pour s'adresser à des candidats potentiels, je pense qu'il faut enrober un peu.
39 mins
|
|
merci, MelodieR. Légèrement péjoratif à mon oreille ; il ne s'agit pas de ménager ceux qui n'auraient pas compris que leur candidature ne convient pas.
|
|
| agree |
Lorraine Dubuc
: La beauté du français c'est qu'il est possible de formuler une idée de nombreuses manières.
3 hrs
|
|
merci, Lorraine
|
Discussion
I feel sure many of your inventive suggestions would be usable in avrious contexts; the answer I chose was the one that fitted best in my slightly non-standard situation.
The same post/job can stay unchanged for years (same job description same requirements etc....), but during that time the job could be advertised many many times - due to staff moving to other jobs, leaving the company etc...
The "basic unit of activity" for a HR department is one job advert, NOT one job/post. In that sense "previous applicants" are "previous" from applying to "previous vacancies/job adverts" (whether for the same post or not). So "previous applicants" can never be those who applied to "cette offre" "; "l'offre" is not the job/post to be filled but the current job advert/vacancy. Another way of looking at it would be to ask if you can be a previous applicant to the current job advert?
A previous applicant for the same post, yes. But "cette offre" is the current job advert, not the post.
The case of someone sending multiple applications in reply to one and same job advert is something else – different from being a "previous applicant".
It wouldn't usually refer to people seeking to 'cheat' by submitting multiple applications.
It is in the same sort of register as « Pas sérieux s'abstenir »
S'il s'agissait vraiment de "repostuler" comme le propose Odile, est-ce que ça ne serait pas précisé (need not apply again)?