Kitty Brussaard Jul 29, 2016:

:-) With these refreshing insights into the psychology of Dutch society and the people who form part of it - and, mind you, don't forget that 'we' Dutch people are also famous for the 'poldermodel' which strives to reach consensus among competing interests :-) - I think it's time to round off this discussion. After all, Michael's question has been answered to the best of our abilities and that was the 'inzet' of this discussion in the first place.

The only reason to further prolong this discussion - at the risk of annoying some of our colleagues even more - would be to provide Richard with some additional instances of entertainment to be enjoyed from the sidelines :-).

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 29, 2016:

:-) I am deeply disappointed in you, my son.

Richard Purdom Jul 29, 2016:

chacun sa merde It has been really enjoyable watching this from the sidelines!

I am fascinated how unregulated structures, from townships in Soweto to forums like this, always manage to set their own rules, as if we are incapable of operating outside some self-imposed framework.

Personally, I prefer the random nature and unexpected detours of such a discussion, and to really get this rant off my chest one of the reasons I couldn't stand living in the Netherlands for a second longer was the claustrophobic and stultifying predictability and homogeneity of everything, from the tautness of the prikkeldraad, to how many promilles my pension would have risen between 2035 and 2038, to how people interact, to what I could expect to find on the shelves of any speciaalzaak from Groningen to Den Bosch to Vlissingen... it lacks humanity for me, although I can understand the need for certainty and risk control in a country permanently under threat because of its geography... chacun sa merde, I suppose

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 29, 2016:

Although I see your point re trying to respond in the peer comment boxes (which I promise I will try to do, where possible), I would like to add:

If you restrict your comments re a particular answer to only that answer's peer comment box,

(1) only the answerer can join in the discussion, whereas others may wish to do so,
(2) nothing can get deleted/edited, as the peer comment boxes allow only a static, frozen "discussion", which isn't much of a discussion at all
(3) you really need to limit your comments to that one question, because anything else would be out of place in the relevant peer comment box. however, what if what you want to say sth that touches on several answers, or several answers/peers?

I'll try to use the peer comment boxes (to please those of you here I am upsetting by not doing so), even though I really don't see what is so problematic about discussing sth in the Discussion area instead. After all, does it really matter where we say what we say?

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 28, 2016:

I am not sure, Michael... ... you are the right person to explain these things.
It was, in fact, highly predictable you were the one who would question the question.

Nevertheless I will mention a few things:

This is what I should do:

- you may ask for further context in the D-box
- you may discuss here the 'meta aspects' of translation (don't name translation solutions)
- you should not offer here provisional or probable answers, especially you should not do so when other participants already offered an answer in the right place; it's no longer a level playing field
- in fact, I should never offer provisional or probable answers in the D-box, it limits other participants' chances.
- you should not justify here your own answer 'over the heads' (is this correct English) of the answerers who offered an answer in the right place
- if you wanted to justify your own answer you can do so through added notes: do it in a concise, precise, well-considered and to the point manner
- I should not post references in the D-box, trying to develop an answer in the process
- I could add many more things I should do, but I think it's nice beginning.


Still wonder what the official kudoz rules are in this respect.

Kitty Brussaard Jul 28, 2016:

@Michael I don't entirely agree with you on this one. Answers should be commented on first and foremost via the peer comment boxes. See also http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_answ/3.2#3.2.

As I already said below, with space in the peer comment box being rather limited, the discussion is sometimes continued in the D-box section. Although this is understandable in itself, and IMO also not really problematic if the answerer happily joins in so to speak, it can also be a sensitive matter as Barend already tried to explain. Further, it also happens that the peer comment phase is simply skipped and that the answer in question is being discussed and/or commented on - either implicitly or explicitly - directly in the D-box.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 28, 2016:

@Barend: If the Discussion area isn't for discussing the answers, what in god's name is it for? It's for discussing people's answers, potential problems, disagreements, etc.

Kitty Brussaard Jul 28, 2016:

Good point I agree with you on all counts. Answers should be posted as answers - unless further clarification by asker is still needed - and discussing other people's answers in the D-box is indeed probably not the nicest thing to do in most cases, although sometimes the limited space in the peer comment box is partly to blame for this too.

The same goes for cluttering up the D-box with references. I tend to do so myself too every now and then but I will try to keep an eye on these 'transgressions' going forward. Let's call it self-moderation :-)

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 28, 2016:

You are probably right that not everyone is amused by the off-topics.

Still wonder, however, if the participants who already offered an answer will be amused by the far greater number of entries suggesting and/or discussing either new answers or discussing, or even rejecting, the answers given (in the right place).

I can imagine these answerers might feel uncomfortable with it.
I know this feeling.

I also wonder whether it is according to the Kudoz rules to offer and discuss answers in the D-box.

I am sure it is not done to promote your own answer in the D-box.
The problem is, once you have given an answer you are more or less left to the other colleagues' tender mercies.
It's no level playing field.

Kitty Brussaard Jul 28, 2016:

Give a little, take a little ... As I already said directly below, I think it's important to keep in mind that the KudoZ forum is primarily intended as a platform which enables language professionals to exchange views on terminology-related matters. As a general principle, I feel that our posts should be in line with this.

I personally don't mind coming across an occasional off-topic post here and there. After all, we're all human beings and our type of profession tends to be a rather solitary one. At the same time I realise that we're all different and I can appreciate that not all of us like to have their inbox cluttered by dozens of D-box entries for a single question, particularly not if such entries are partly off-topic.

As in many other areas of life, I believe 'alles met mate' is the adagium here :-).

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 28, 2016:

Hi Jennifer, So happy to see you recovered your will to live again!

It's a pity you left Amsterdam.
Great people.
That is, most of them, if you see what I mean. :-)

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 28, 2016:

Thank you so very much, Kitty. You always have had such a fine eye for detail.
Must be related to your extensive reviewing experience.
It is just these small little things that I still fail to notice.

Since I love that one, even if I say it myself, I feel like forgiving myself for sharing this deeply rooted sorrow with my comforting colleagues. :-)

Jennifer Barnett Jul 28, 2016:

read while it lasts! a case of selective censorship

Kitty Brussaard Jul 28, 2016:

@Barend PS. There's actually still a few more there, besides my own faux pas. Don't rule out Joseph and Josephine :-)
[All in jest and at the same time with no intention whatsoever to question the actions taken by site staff - as I'm all for moderation as a means to remind us (and yes, this also includes myself) every now and then that we should try to keep this forum open, professional and 'digestible' for everyone]

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 28, 2016:

@Dear Kitty Since you love it, and I can imagine why, I will hereby forgive you for your youthful, but still reckless, behaviour.

Amen.

Kitty Brussaard Jul 28, 2016:

@Barend It may have been overlooked, it may have been left in on purpose, who knows ... I won't remove it myself - too attached to it :-) - but do feel free to bring this faux pas on my side to site staff's attention by submitting a support ticket.

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 28, 2016:

There is still one there. :-) I like it to be sure.
It's mild, subtle, ironical message.

However, since off-topicness (feel free to give answers in the D-box) seems to have been the criterium for removing (thankfully, our reputations have escaped from demise) the 'chit-chat', and Michelle Obama's beautiful speech, this last 'superfluous' message has to be removed as well.

My dear Kitty, would you be so kind as to remove this kind, but still off-topic, message. It's a shame, but our strict rules simply cannot tolerate such playful behaviour.

I am talking about this priceless entry:

@Michael

I've been called 'KB' by Freek - or perhaps I should say 'FF' - for as long as I can remember, so I'm completely used to it. In the same way as I'm also completely used to 'MB' (recently updated to 'MJWB'), 'BvZ', 'LvdV' etc.

Regardless of how we personally feel about being addressed in this way, it cannot be denied that Freek is at least very consistent in following this approach and also keeps abreast with any relevant developments (MB > MJWB) :-).

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 26, 2016:

Hello John I don't think your last entry is off-topic.
These types of observations are inevitable when you start discussing a translation question.

We are now on the same wavelength again. :-)
--> You excellenty explained what I and you were trying to say.

John Holloway Jul 26, 2016:

@ Barend: 'Translation is the most intimate ..' I must have communicated the thought poorly - and certainly only partially - as I, er, still find myself agreeing with myself but I agree with you even more. I think I see why. My 'test' isn't offered as the full test of translation quality - it's maybe a test of the last part of your statement - the authentic target language. One sees, for instance, translations in which the source meaning has been fully grasped and understandably expressed, but where the target language just doesn't quite feel and flow as it should. (Whoa! How off-topic are we now?)

John Holloway Jul 26, 2016:

@ Michael, 'The problem is the Dutch word..' ..mm, my first reaction - not fully thought through - is to doubt 'scope' for the first mention of 'inzet'. Isn't 'form' (which also reads and communicates easily as 'theory & ..') better? Second mention could remain 'scope'. Apologies all round for further lengthening the debate, instead of heeding Ms Brussaard's excellent advice.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 26, 2016:

this's what I have so far (I keep changing it) Dit voorwoord van maar enkele pagina’s geeft toch een theorie en inzet van de biografie, die kort moet zijn, iets over de tijd moet zeggen en mensen ziet als ‘too important to be treated as mere symptoms of the past.’
=
This preface, although only a few pages long, still manages to provide both a theory of biography, as well as say something about the purpose/function of biographical writing/biographies, which should be short/concise, must say something about the time period, and sees people as ‘too important to be treated as mere symptoms of the past’.

Pretty hideous, I know, but I think it is correct. Well, at least the first part (the part that relates to the KudoZ question). I haven't really finished with the rest (die kort moet zijn, iets over de tijd moet zeggen en mensen ziet als ‘too important to be treated as mere symptoms of the past.’), as I am not yet sure what it refers to/means. Slashes indicate I haven't yet chosen an option

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 26, 2016:

adjusted my interpretation Having had a closer look at it...

It might be the writer is rather too fluent in Dutch for us to easily understand (kind of playing with language)

...geeft toch een theorie en inzet van de biografie, (<--) die kort moet zijn, iets over de tijd moet zeggen en mensen ziet als ...

...does highlight an analysis of the biography and it's approach/method/how it works, it is necessarily brief, necessarily says something about an era and pictures people as persons rather than the results of linear time.

...inzet van de biografie, (<--) die kort moet zijn, iets over de tijd moet zeggen en mensen ziet als ...

The 'inzet' is:

- zij moet kort zijn
- zij moet iets over de tijd zeggen
- ziet mensen als mensen, als ‘too important to be treated as mere symptoms of the past

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 26, 2016:

@Richard: yeah, I agree, "application" is probably not correct. use/purpose/function/aim are much better

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 26, 2016:

Richard / Richard von Purdom / RvP :-) I like 'von' :-)

So we at least agree on this:


1) 'Once you fully understand it, you translate your best understanding into authentic target language'...

2) What is meant in this specific case?
My guess is, on the basis of the small part of the text I see, that it could (also) be about purpose/what a biography is used for.

Certainly biographies have a function in history as a science.
They may be used to get a better understanding of a certain period in history for example.

It is then up to Michael, who has the full context, to see whether it makes sense or not and how he should translate this understanding into English.

Richard Purdom Jul 26, 2016:

Barend von Zadelhoff 'Once you fully understand it, you translate your best understanding in authentic target language'...

yes, seen lots of attempts at that all over the place...and nobody is quite sure what was meant by 'inzet' here, native NL or otherwise. It's all a best guess.

'application' is not 'authentic target language' in any case, and a biography never has an 'application' as far as I can see

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 26, 2016:

This person is very fluent in Dutch:

"Dit voorwoord van maar enkele pagina’s geeft toch een theorie en inzet van de biografie, die kort moet zijn, iets over de tijd moet zeggen en mensen ziet als ...

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 26, 2016:

My estimation is the text (what we have seen from it) comes from a native Dutch speaker, not necessarily the lecturer.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 26, 2016:

@freek: Writing about Johan Huizinga's "’s Levens felheid’, Herfsttij der Middeleeuwen", the author of the reader wrote:

"Het tweede fragment dient als een voorbeeld van het beroemdste beeld dat Huizinga heeft geschapen: de volop (na)bloeiende middeleeuwse cultuur waarin alles zoveel feller was."

From this I deduce that he/she has to be Dutch. No sane English person would ever use those idiotic (Neder)brackets.

Incidentally, the title of this book has been translated as "The Autumn of the Middle Ages", and "The Waning of the Middle Ages". So what the author means with "de volop (na)bloeiende middeleeuwse cultuur" is anyone's guess.

(na)bloeiende = bloeiende en/of nabloeiende
(na)bloeiende = nabloeiende
??

I assume this "(na)bloeiende" refers somehow to this waning/autumn aspect, but god knows what he/she means here. This kind of bracket abuse ought to be made illegal ;-)

Kitty Brussaard Jul 26, 2016:

@Michael I've been called 'KB' by Freek - or perhaps I should say 'FF' - for as long as I can remember, so I'm completely used to it. In the same way as I'm also completely used to 'MB' (recently updated to 'MJWB'), 'BvZ', 'LvdV' etc.

Regardless of how we personally feel about being addressed in this way, it cannot be denied that Freek is at least very consistent in following this approach and also keeps abreast with any relevant developments (MB > MJWB) :-).

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 26, 2016:

Dutch.

That's the Dutch was formulated by a native speaker of Dutch, whether it was the lecturer or not.

freekfluweel Jul 26, 2016:

Is the lecturer Dutch or English... ...?
.
Well, anyway, Good Luck with it!

Kitty Brussaard Jul 26, 2016:

@Freek Indeed, I copy/pasted something from the D-box and not from the web. If the latter had been the case, I obviously would have provided the relevant link.

That being said, I'm afraid I don't really see why this would be relevant to bring up and push so hard on.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 26, 2016:

aha OK, I see what you meant. KB is our very own Kitty Brussaard, abbreviated.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 26, 2016:

@freek: I can assure you that it was written by a Dutch academic. It's just a quick 4 pages a lecturer put together to give to his/her students. It's obviously a mess, but people don't always have time to polish everything they write.

It's not classified, it's just sth a lecturer is using in his/her classes. No reason for it to be online.

No idea what you mean by "KB's re-copy/paste".

Don't you ever get garbage to translate? I do, all the time.

freekfluweel Jul 26, 2016:

@KB: so it cannot be googled... ... you copy/pasted something from the d-box not from the web...

Kitty Brussaard Jul 26, 2016:

@Freek There seems to be a misunderstanding. I was actually quoting one of Michael's older D-box entries in which he provided some additional context information :-).

PS. Apparently I was wrong in assuming that the course reader actually contains selected pages from various books and publications. It merely describes them.

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 26, 2016:

Whether the text is well-written or not, the translator's job is to understand what was meant to be said.

freekfluweel Jul 26, 2016:

@MJWB: the English is fine... ... the Dutch is not, and it is very doubtful that was ever written by a Dutch (academic)...

Also the Dutch source must be very classified because it's nowhere to be googled, despite KB's re-copy/paste...

A Reader it might be, but no one would ever say: 'de laatste bladzijden (7 - 21)...
.

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 26, 2016:

Translation is the most intimate act of reading.

Completely disagree with this, John:

"I think the test is always whether it 'reads' as if originally written - and as you would it expect it to - in English. The moment the translation forces you to pause to consider its meaning you're on thin ice."

This is the translation world upside down.

The very first and most important step in translation is understanding the source text.
Once you fully understand it, you translate your best understanding in authentic target language.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 26, 2016:

@freek: "dat er meer opvattingen van geschiedenis mogelijk zijn" =

that there are:
many different ways to look at history
many different perspectives on it
many different theoretical frameworks/approaches
etc.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 26, 2016:

The lecturer then says:

"Dit voorwoord van maar enkele pagina’s geeft toch een theorie en inzet van de biografie, die kort moet zijn, iets over de tijd moet zeggen en mensen ziet als ..."

The reason I thought application was an option, was that it could be that the author meant that Strachey's Preface, although very short ("maar enkele pagina’s"), still manages to provide a (complete) theory of Biography, as well as say sth about its application. I.e., the uses/applications/function of biography/biographies in general.

He might have meant that the Preface provides both (1) a theory of biography, and (2) info re the use(s)/application(s)/function(s)/scope/objective/intention … of biography/biographies in general. Any of these could be correct, in the sense that they would be what the author was thinking at the time. It would of course be nice to come up with a translation that "reads as if originally written", and which doesn't "force you to pause to consider its meaning". However, since the Dutch is neither of these, painting over it with an idiomatic English brush might just hide the original ambiguity and strangeness ("thin ice") of the source.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 26, 2016:

John, The problem is the Dutch word "inzet" used here could mean anything (well, not anything, but a large amount of different things), as shown by how many Dutch people here are puzzled. The word is often misused / abused / used in sloppy ways.

A bit more context: the short, 4-page document I am translating is a reader (so not really a full-blown reader in the form of a book, but just a few pages) with short descriptions of the excerpts students should study. The course/programme is called "Inleiding Geschiedwetenschap". In Week 2, the students will be looking at "Biografie". That is, biography/biographies in general, relating to the study of history. The excerpt in this section is the preface from Lytton Strachey's "Eminent Victorians". Some info on this book:

"Eminent Victorians is a book by Lytton Strachey (one of the older members of the Bloomsbury Group), first published in 1918 and consisting of biographies of four leading figures from the Victorian era. Its fame rests on the irreverence and wit Strachey brought to bear on three men and a woman who had till then been regarded as heroes and heroine." (wikipedia)

Kitty Brussaard Jul 26, 2016:

This is about a course reader which contains selected pages from various books.

[quote]

Quick outline:

"Reader Inleiding Geschiedwetenschap 20xx-20xx
Week 1
[…]
Week 2
Biografie
Lytton Strachey, ‘Preface’, Eminent Victorians (1918) v-vii.
Dit voorwoord van maar enkele pagina’s geeft toch een theorie en inzet van de biografie, die kort moet zijn, iets over de tijd moet zeggen en mensen ziet als ‘too important to be treated as mere symptoms of the past.’
[…]"

"Dit boek" is from the next section, titled "Wat is historiografie?"
[unquote]

John Holloway Jul 26, 2016:

@freek I understood that these were the last pages of the front matter/foreword
; )

freekfluweel Jul 26, 2016:

peculiar book and Dutch... "dat er meer opvattingen van geschiedenis mogelijk zijn ???

'De laatste bladzijden (7-21) geven de inzet van dit boek'

So this 'book' has 21 pages and the majority of 2/3 are 'last pages'...? What are the first 6 pages used for then...? This book is out of balance, page-wise that is...
.

John Holloway Jul 26, 2016:

Forced to agree with Richard. I think the test is always whether it 'reads' as if originally written - and as you would it expect it to - in English. The moment the translation forces you to pause to consider its meaning you're on thin ice. Googling the potential target phrase helps identify whether it's in common use. There are no matches, for instance for theory and application of book/biography, although these results do tellingly include references to the theory and application of the content of various books. 'Theory and scope of the book/biography' does, however, throw up some relevant results and usage, which indicate that 'scope' is in the realm of native English.

Richard Purdom Jul 26, 2016:

'application'? no way José!

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 25, 2016:

Thanks Barend, yes, my first translation was actually application, which is similar

theorie en inzet van de biografie
theory and application of the biography

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 25, 2016:

I did not look yet at this first use of 'inzet'.

'theorie en inzet van de biografie', might mean here, 'theory and use/function of the biography'


aanwenden - apply, use, employ

Kitty Brussaard Jul 25, 2016:

@Michael OK, dat maakt de zaken er enigszins duidelijker op, maar het blijft wat mij betreft nog steeds een behoorlijk wollig stuk.

Ik kan me op zich nog wel iets voorstellen bij de 'inzet' van een boek, artikel, rapport etc. Maar een voorwoord dat een 'theorie en inzet' geeft - in dit geval van de biografie (als vorm van geschiedschrijving) - of bladzijden die een 'inzet' geven van het betreffende boek ...? Behalve dat dit twee storende vormen van personificatie zijn, blijft 'inzet' voor mij een vage term, zeker in de eerste zin, maar misschien dat andere collega's je wel verder kunnen helpen.

Mijn 'inzet' houdt hier in ieder geval op :-). Succes nog!

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 25, 2016:

@Kitty: Nee.

Quick outline:

"Reader Inleiding Geschiedwetenschap 20xx-20xx
Week 1
[…]
Week 2
Biografie
Lytton Strachey, ‘Preface’, Eminent Victorians (1918) v-vii.
Dit voorwoord van maar enkele pagina’s geeft toch een theorie en inzet van de biografie, die kort moet zijn, iets over de tijd moet zeggen en mensen ziet als ‘too important to be treated as mere symptoms of the past.’
[…]"

"Dit boek" is from the next section, titled "Wat is historiografie?"

Kitty Brussaard Jul 25, 2016:

@Michael Nog even voor alle duidelijkheid: heeft het 'voorwoord' betrekking op 'dit boek' en is dit laatste dan de reader waar je het over hebt?

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 25, 2016:

I am sure you will find the answer to Joseph as well. :-)

I was in love with a Josephine once.

I will never forget, unfortunately. :-)

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 25, 2016:

it's amazing what you can find online these days! Just found this:

"U.S. Subject Index to Correspondence and Case Files of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1903-1959
COURT, GOVERNMENTAL & CRIMINAL RECORDS [View Image]
NAME: Margot Wdowiak [originally Baum]
OTHER: Lawrence Wdowiak, Elmo Wdowiak
CIVIL: 30 Jun 1942"

(http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?gl=36&uidh=000&... )

Lianne van de Ven Jul 25, 2016:

@Michael Aim, Michael, aim is the word. The aim of this book... - at least in En-Us. O, Kitty had dat al genoemd.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 25, 2016:

@Barend: Yes, I understand that much.

"de inzet van dit boek [is dat] er wordt duidelijk uitgelegd dat er meer opvattingen van geschiedenis mogelijk zijn, dat het niet een lange weg van Herodotus naar Ranke is."

But how best to translate "inzet"?

How about sth like:

De laatste bladzijden (7-21) geven de inzet van dit boek =
The last pages (7–21) contain the main themes of the book

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 25, 2016:

de inzet is:

er wordt duidelijk uitgelegd dat er meer opvattingen van geschiedenis mogelijk zijn, dat het niet een lange weg van Herodotus naar Ranke is

Barend van Zadelhoff Jul 25, 2016:

purport, line, thread, theme, perspective, might be options as well.

disagree with 'contribution', Michael.

Lianne van de Ven Jul 25, 2016:

Van Dale 4

fi­guur­lijk dat­ge­ne waar het om gaat
•
de in­zet van de dia­loog, de strijd, de ver­kie­zin­gen

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 25, 2016:

@Kitty: Yes, "thrust" was actually also on my shortlist, but since this is a reader ("Reader Inleiding Geschiedwetenschap") (talking about which books/articles will help the students to gain an understanding of "History Studies"), I was wondering whether the author meant "contributions", in the sense of:

De laatste bladzijden (7-21) geven de inzet van dit boek (onder de duidelijke tussenkopjes ‘Different Global Versions of History’; ‘‘Rise’ of the Discipline of History – a Tale too Triumphantly Told?’; ‘West and East in Historiography’; ‘Modern History in Perspective’): er wordt duidelijk uitgelegd dat er meer opvattingen van geschiedenis mogelijk zijn, dat het niet een lange weg van Herodotus naar Ranke is.

The last/final pages (7–21) contain the contributions of the book (under clear subheadings ‘Different Global Versions of History’; ‘‘Rise’ of the Discipline of History – a Tale too Triumphantly Told?’; ‘West and East in Historiography’; ‘Modern History in Perspective’), which clearly explain that more views of history are possible, and that it is not just one long road from Herodotus to Ranke.

In the sense of: what they have contributed to the field.

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 25, 2016:

@Lianne: I quoted it exactly as it appears in my text. That is, the tussenkopjes are actually in English.

It is kind of puzzling that the same word seems to mean different things.

Lianne van de Ven Jul 25, 2016:

@MJKB Would you please also provide the Dutch source for the other headers (second use). Words that come to my mind for the first (as far as the meaning goes) are: reach, scope, effort, intention. I am with Jennifer on that.

Kitty Brussaard Jul 25, 2016:

Eens met Natasha Dat is inderdaad ook een optie.

Natasha Ziada (X) Jul 25, 2016:

Of opzet voor de eerste zin. Verder eens met Kitty.

Kitty Brussaard Jul 25, 2016:

Insteek ... ... in the sense of focus/thrust/approach etc. is what comes to mind for 'inzet' as used in the second sentence.

In the first sentence, 'inzet' is perhaps used with the meaning of aim/goal/intent etc. Another option might be to read it as 'aanzet' (i.e. starting point).

Michael Beijer (asker) Jul 25, 2016:

hmm Thanks Arend!

I was thinking sth along the lines of "use/application" in the first sentence, and "contribution(s)" in the second, but am really not sure at all.