NL-vertaling van Archimate-begrippen et al

[Pascal Dussart]

(Question in Dutch about the Archimate-standard translation in that partical language)

Er is bij mijn weten geen officiële vertaling naar het Nederlands van de Archimate-standaard (of op z'n minst van de definities). (https://publications.opengroup.org/archimate-library/archimate-translations)

Heeft iemand weet van een officieuze vertaling die circuleert in de Nederlandstalige community? 

Alvast bedankt

--
Met vriendelijke groeten  - Best regards

Pascal Dussart

[Mastering ArchiMate]

Voor zover ik weet is er geen Nederlandse vertaling.

Ik weet uit mijn contacten dat er wel mensen zijn die een voorstel hebben gedaan voor een Russische…

De concepten (de namen van de concepten( zijn i.h.a. wel in meerdere vertalingen te vinden in tools (zoals BES).

Het zou niet zo moeilijk zijn voor mij om een Nederlandse vertaling te produceren van Update to the Free ArchiMate Metamodel PDF sheets published (nu beschikbaar in het Engels en het Russisch)

G

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ArchiMate" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to open-archimate-f...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/open-archimate-forum/CAHW7fKu_O4qNZDT%2Br8obZLM14yDyfrKXqZ%3Do%2BN356wxK8z%2BjCg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Pascal Dussart]

Het zou mooi zijn om de community toegang te kunnen geven tot een basis NL-vertaling van op één centrale plek, liefst op een min of meer "erkende" plaats. Zo krijgt de vertaling voldoende cachet om mee aan de slag te gaan. 

Is zo'n NL-vertaling van jouw Metamodel PDF iets dat je sowieso wil doen, van zodra je daar de tijd voor vindt? Kunnen we jou hier op één of andere manier bij helpen? 

--
Met vriendelijke groeten  - Best regards

Pascal Dussart

[Mastering ArchiMate]

Het kost me een aantal uren, schat ik zo. Heb wat andere prioriteiten die vóór gaan, maar nu ik weet dat er behoefte aan is zal ik hem in mijn achterhoofd houden. Het is waarschijnlijk sneller om hem zelf te vertalen dan een vertaling van een ander te checken.

G

[Jean-Baptiste Sarrodie]

Hi,

Sorry, but I can reply only in english ;-)

If you want, I can certainly manage to provide you the official template for glossary translation, up to you to translate it in Dutch. Then I'll submit it officially internally to the Open Group ArchiMate Forum to have it reviewed, updated if needed, and then published. If you're ok with this let me know and I'll manage it.

Regards,

JB

[Pascal Dussart]

Hey JB,

Your mastering of the Dutch language is outstanding :)  Thanks for chipping in. Really appreciate it. It would mean so much to our intended audience if there were some kind of stamp of approval by the OG on a localized version of the glossary.

--
Met vriendelijke groeten  - Best regards

Pascal Dussart

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/open-archimate-forum/fc4ecbe2-c1b9-4eb9-a6e8-3fa1da2b6f3dn%40googlegroups.com.

[Mastering ArchiMate]

In that case my sheets are not the best way to go as a start, because my explanations are somewhat practical and sometimes a bit opinionated, not OG-formal.

But if there is a formal translation sheet for the terms I can use that as a template of course.

OTOH, it would be fun to add a translation with my system.

G

[Mastering ArchiMate]

Looking at it, you will get an interesting discussion (maybe more) because Dutch has incorporated (and is incorporating( many Eglish words, especially in IT-related fields (to begin with: computer itself, but also words like ‘file’ ‘download’ etc.).

E.g. in pure ‘old’ Dutch, the term ‘business’ will be translated with ‘bedrijf’. Hence, ‘Business Process’, will become ‘Bedrijfsproces’.  But Dutch has changed and the term ‘Business’ has become a Dutch word, so ‘businessobject’ (instead of ‘bedrijfsobject’) is ‘common language’ under Dutch architects. 

Natural in Dutch:

- Bedrijfsfunctie (Business Function)

- Bedrijfsproces (Business Process)

- Businessobject (Business Object)

- Businessmodel (Business Model)

- Businesslaag (Business Layer)

What to choose?

G

[Pascal Dussart]

In our context the idea is to settle on Archimate's definitions in a number of other disciplines besides enterprise architecture. The majority of these disciplines - process management, risk management, organizational development, strategic planning... - are being executed by people who do not consider themselves architects (while in fact they do things architects do: they make abstractions, they design, they think about how to go from here to there..). Call me naive but our hope is this might actually help to align all those different worlds.

So we have to make it as easy as possible on these people. Did I mention we're in government btw? "Business" and especially the Dutch translation "Bedrijf" doesn't work that well here. You could come up with all kinds of arguments that it shouldn't matter, but it is what it is. Yes Dutch-speaking architects talk about "de business", and "het business object", but people representing other disciplines (the ones we, architects, actually work for)? Not so much. 

But I don't think it's a good idea to opt for something generic like "organisatie" instead of "bedrijf". It would serve both commercial and non-commercial contexts, but wouldn't we veer off too much from the original term "business"? In my experience, when talking to business people (in Dutch) about processes and services the prefix "business" is rarely used but when we're talking amongst architects we do say "applications service" in full. (I can't remember every hearing anyone saying "businesslaag", but then I'm not Dutch, I'm Flemish ;)

Because of all of this I'm inclined to go for the prefix "Bedrijf-". Makes sense?

--
Met vriendelijke groeten  - Best regards

Pascal Dussart

[Mastering ArchiMate]

On 16 Aug 2020, at 23:46, Pascal Dussart <pascal....@april10.be> wrote:

In our context the idea is to settle on Archimate's definitions in a number of other disciplines besides enterprise architecture. The majority of these disciplines - process management, risk management, organizational development, strategic planning... - are being executed by people who do not consider themselves architects (while in fact they do things architects do: they make abstractions, they design, they think about how to go from here to there..). Call me naive but our hope is this might actually help to align all those different worlds.

This is an often wished-for way to go, but it (kind of the philosophical approach of ‘logical positivism’) is almost certainly doomed to fail. The reason is that not labels or definitions, but ‘use’ define the meaning of words and phrases, c.f. Ludwig Wittgenstein (a.k.a. Uncle Ludwig), the engineer-philosopher. The assumption that using the same word or phrase is using the same meaning is mistaken, Uncle Ludwig calls that ‘bewitchment by language’.

Even simple words like ’not’ fall prey to this, as in “it is NOT true that two plus two equals 5” and “it is NOT true that it is raining”, the ’not’ in the first excludes it from being true in any circumstance, while the second opens up dimensions of time and space. One way analytic philosophy creates daisasters if they take the first (logical) one and apply it blindly in the real world.

See

Modeling GOFBF (shows that ‘business function’ in other approaches equals ‘role’ in ArchiMate)

Mapping #BPMN and #ArchiMate: About BPMN’s ‘Pool’ (linking BPMN and ArchiMate)

for how this can get pretty wild.

I tend to let different groups talk in their own language that covers the needs of their own field and make sure I have a mapping to my own. That way, I do not have conflicting models of that single organisation reality, but multiple coherent ones. So, you do have a single reality, but the use of terms and phrases differs in ech part of it so each part has its own languge. But by using smart patterns, I can make translation almost seamless.

Whatever you do, keep in mind that you cannot change their actual core behaviour and that their core behaviour drives their definition of terms and phrases.

Still, a Dutch translation is nice. I am going to look into it being rather wll positioned to provide one (but so are the BiZZdesign people who probably have a decent one in their tool (I don’t use Dutch))

Gerben Wierda
Chess and the Art of Enterprise Architecture
Mastering ArchiMate
Architecture for Real Enterprises at InfoWorld
On Slippery Ice at EAPJ

[Pascal Dussart]

A possible (partial) source for the Dutch translation: https://www.gemmaonline.nl/index.php/Toelichting_op_kennismodel

--
Met vriendelijke groeten  - Best regards

Pascal Dussart

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 10:01 AM Pascal Dussart <pascal....@april10.be> wrote:

The problems you mention with this approach are IMO not reserved to interdisciplinary  communication: even experts from the same discipline - "formally" using the same language - get meanings wrong every once in a while. So why not give it a go in an interdisciplinary approach? Using Archimate is just a means to end to settle on some common definitions without having to start the neverending process of coming up with definitions ourselves. ;)

In my experience having a mapping of your own is needed for architect-to-non-architect communication, where the architect is the one who tries to make it easy for the non-architect (not the other way around). But I believe a minimal set of agreed upon definitions won't hurt communication between members of non-IT-related disciplines either. One example: HR asks all other business divisions to come up with a list of processes. None of the business divisions ask what is exactly meant by a process so they come up with a list of which a non-trivial amount of entries are actually projects. At that point one cannot simply say "oh we'll just take the projects off of your list", because the business division has assigned personnel to what they believe are proper repeatable processes with permanent resources assigned to them. (reader: if you think this example is trivial, it is not)

Thanks for keeping the conversation going :)

--
Met vriendelijke groeten  - Best regards

Pascal Dussart

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ArchiMate" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to open-archimate-f...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/open-archimate-forum/4162D5F2-DAE8-4233-90BA-D942C6867FFE%40gmail.com.