Glossary entry (derived from question below)
Japanese term or phrase:
乙 and 甲
English translation:
Party B and Party A
Added to glossary by
Harpreet Singh kapula
May 3, 2023 18:33
1 yr ago
37 viewers *
Japanese term
India
Translator IT/Technology JAPANESE To ENG
Native in: English 
Works in: Japanese to English
乙 and 甲
Japanese to English
Bus/Financial
Finance (general)
Japanese text: 第１条 （目的）乙は、本契約書に定める条項に従い、平成１８年４月１日（以下「事業譲渡日」という。）をもって、乙の事業の全部を甲に譲渡し、甲はこれを譲り受けるものとする。
My understanding: Article 1 (Purpose): Party B shall transfer its entire business to Party A in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. This transfer shall take effect on April 1, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the "Business Transfer Date"), and Party A shall accept the transfer.
My issue: 乙 and 甲 should we only use them as Party A and Party B or do we have to use the company name?
My understanding: Article 1 (Purpose): Party B shall transfer its entire business to Party A in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. This transfer shall take effect on April 1, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the "Business Transfer Date"), and Party A shall accept the transfer.
My issue: 乙 and 甲 should we only use them as Party A and Party B or do we have to use the company name?
Proposed translations
(English)
| 4 +1 | Party B and Party A |
ZT-Translations
|
| 3 | transferor and transferee |
Michael Hughes
|
Proposed translations
+1
10 mins
ZT-Translations
Brazil
Brazil
Works in field
Brazil
Trilingual translator and proofreader
Native in: Portuguese (Variant: Brazilian)
Works in: English to Portuguese, Portuguese to English, Japanese to Portuguese, and 3 more.
Related KudoZ points
:
4
Selected
Party B and Party A
I have worked with and seen contract translations that use Party A and B and do not refer to the company name for the entire duration of the contract, unless it specifically refers to them by their proper names and not as "Party A" or "Party B". Most contracts will usually mention that they will be referred as such, so the idea would be to go by this explanation at the beginning of the document.
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
David Gibney
: Many Japanese contracts start off with, "Egex Co Ltd (hereinafter referred to as Party A)"
5 hrs
|
|
Thank you! Indeed, this seems to be the norm for both Japanese contracts as well as contracts translated from Japanese to English and possibly other languages.
|
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thank you for educating me."
54 mins
Michael Hughes
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Native in English
United Kingdom
Japanese - English Translator with MBA
Native in: English 
Works in: Japanese to English, English, Japanese
Related KudoZ points
:
4
transferor and transferee
It’s true that the use of ‘Party A’ and ‘Party B’ is not all that common in English contracts, seemingly because they give no clue as to the role each side plays. The article at the link below suggests that it most frequently appears in English translations of contracts from East Asia actually!
It’s more common to use terms like ‘Lessor’ and ‘Lessee’, ‘Buyer’ and ‘Seller’ etc. In the context of your contract here, I suppose ‘Transferor’ (for 乙/Party B) and ‘Transferee’ (for 甲/Party A) might work.
That said, while it may not be very common in contracts that are produced from scratch in English-speaking countries, it seems to be very common in translated contracts - and I don’t think it’s a major issue if you decide to stick to Party B/Party A.
It’s more common to use terms like ‘Lessor’ and ‘Lessee’, ‘Buyer’ and ‘Seller’ etc. In the context of your contract here, I suppose ‘Transferor’ (for 乙/Party B) and ‘Transferee’ (for 甲/Party A) might work.
That said, while it may not be very common in contracts that are produced from scratch in English-speaking countries, it seems to be very common in translated contracts - and I don’t think it’s a major issue if you decide to stick to Party B/Party A.
Note from asker:
| Thank you for educating me. |
Discussion