The Lease Clause That Says Four Things at Once
You are translating a 4,200-word Spanish residential lease (Spain, 2023) into English for a US law firm using it in a dispute. Deadline: 48 hours. Rate: USD 0.14/word. No subject-matter expert is available. Clause 11 reads: «El arrendatario podrá resolver el contrato si el arrendador no repara los desperfectos en un plazo de treinta días desde la comunicación fehaciente, salvo que la demora se deba a causas ajenas a su voluntad.» Clause 7 refers back with «dicha comunicación» and uses «el mismo», which has two possible antecedents. The instructing paralegal writes: “Keep it as literal as possible - we want to see exactly what the Spanish says.” A partner who does not read Spanish will rely solely on your English.
1. Identify the genuine ambiguities in clause 11 and state, for each, whether you resolve it, preserve it, or flag it - and why.
Read the worked answer
Inventory first, decide second. Four pressure points:
- «podrá resolver» - permissive, not mandatory. Render as “may terminate” or “is entitled to terminate.” Never “shall terminate.” The modal value is meaning, not style.
- «desde la comunicación fehaciente» - the clock starts at communication, not receipt, and fehaciente means evidenced/provable (certified letter, burofax). “Reliable communication” is a calque that means nothing to a US reader; “notice sent by a method providing proof of dispatch” is accurate. Preserve the dispatch/receipt distinction; do not silently assume receipt.
- «causas ajenas a su voluntad» - su is grammatically ambiguous between landlord and tenant, though context points to the landlord. Flag unless clause 7 confirms.
- «desperfectos» - damage/defects, not “repairs.”
The literalness request and accuracy point the same way here: preserve ambiguity rather than resolve it. But a calque the partner cannot parse transfers nothing, so the rule is literal where literal is intelligible, noted where it is not.
2. The paralegal replies: “Just pick the most likely reading and write it clean - the partner doesn't want footnotes.” How do you respond and what do you deliver?
Read the worked answer
Decline to resolve silently, but solve the stated problem.
Why: choosing a reading moves interpretive authority from the court to you. If the case turns on the notice date, a clean text with the wrong reading is worse than a clunky one with the right ambiguity. The partner's real objection is usually clutter, not accuracy - so separate the two.
What to offer, in one short email:
- A clean main text that is faithful and readable, with ambiguity preserved where the Spanish preserves it.
- Bracketed translator's notes at the four points only, or a one-page query memo kept out of the body.
- A written recommendation on each point, marked as recommendation, not translation.
What to avoid: guessing and staying quiet. Document the exchange and the decision. If the firm still insists on a resolved text, note in the delivery email which readings were adopted and that the source is ambiguous - that way the file shows who chose.
3. Clause 7 uses «el mismo» and «dicha comunicación.» How do you handle these across the whole document, given a 48-hour deadline?
Read the worked answer
«El mismo» is a Spanish pronoun with no clean English reflex. English needs an explicit noun, so you must name the antecedent - which means you must determine it from agreement, number, and nearby context. If context is decisive, name it and continue; if two readings survive, choose the nearest grammatical antecedent and flag it. A dangling “the same” is not an option; it is not English and it hides the problem.
«Dicha comunicación» should point to the specific notice defined in clause 11. Render it as “that notice” and make sure the noun is the identical one used in clause 11. If it is not, that inconsistency is itself a finding worth reporting.
System, not inspiration: with 4,200 words and 48 hours, build a five-line termbase before drafting - arrendador/arrendatario, resolver, desperfectos, comunicación fehaciente, plazo. Then run a consistency check for lessor/lessee creeping in alongside landlord/tenant. Cross-reference drift is the defect reviewers find first.