# utilisateur faunique



## vplasgirl

J'essaie de traduire la phrase suivante à l'anglais.

_*"Notre but est d'offrir des accès de qualité et sécuritaire aux villégiateurs et utilisateurs récréatifs et fauniques."*_

Contexte: Amélioration des chemins

Pour "faunique" WR donne "faunistic" un terme qui ne me semble pas appropriés dans le contexte. GDT suggère "faunal", mais encore "faunal user" ne semble pas correct.

J'ai traduit la phrase comme suit... (vos suggestions sont appréciées)

_*"Our goal is to offer quality and safe access to vacationers and recreational and (faunal) users."*_


----------



## Moon Palace

'Our goal is to offer quality and safe access to vacationers and recreational users, as well as to those who may be interested in the faunal wealth of the area'.


----------



## wildan1

_faunal_ isn't really used as an adjective for _fauna _in English

In this context would use _nature-lovers_


----------



## vplasgirl

I like nature lovers ... I was loosely considering _fauna enthousiasts_, but I think that nature-lovers is a much more recognized phrase. 

Thank you


----------



## JeanDeSponde

vplasgirl said:


> _*"Notre but est d'offrir des accès de qualité et sécuritaire aux villégiateurs et utilisateurs récréatifs et fauniques."*_


Si la rédaction de la phrase en français vous incombe aussi, alors nous pourrions également vous suggérer quelques améliorations!


----------



## Moon Palace

wildan1 said:


> _faunal_ isn't really used as an adjective for _fauna _in English
> 
> In this context would use _nature-lovers_



Sorry about this, I thought 'faunal' in a similar context could be used. But 'nature lovers' is a bit less specific than _fauniques_, isn't it? It encompasses flora too for that matter. 
I am thinking of a recent walk on the island of Ré - and a beautiful one it was   -, and what was worth seeing was not so much nature itself, but precisely the fauna that was concentrated there, especially birds. 

Could we say something like 'people who are interested in fauna'? or even 'fauna lovers'?


----------



## JeanDeSponde

C'est le problème de _villégiateurs fauniques_ en français. Les faunes étaient les divinités romaines des bois, semblables au satyres des Grecs.
_Satyr-like_ ?...


----------



## vincent7520

The whole sentence is not very French and is truly ugly 

"villégiateur" is not French at all !!!…
I read "faunal" for the 1st time ! … 
"sécuritaire" is used for "sécurisé" (the latter being way too emphatic for vacations…) 
This must have been written either by someone from an other French speaking community than France (Canada ?…) or by one of those young commercial agents, some of which write as they speak 


Moon Palace proposition seems best. However he differenciates _"vacationers" _from  "_those who may be interested in the faunal wealth of the area"._
My suggestion is to suppress "as well as to those" altogether :
*"Our goal is to offer quality and safe access to vacationers and recreational users who may be interested in the faunal wealth of the area".*
Other ideas ?… 

PS. Please don't be distracted by JeanDeSponde suggestion  !!!…
*"Faune"* here means _*"animals"*_ as opposed to plants : _*"la faune et la flore"
*_


----------



## Moon Palace

vincent7520 said:


> PS. Please don't be distracted by JeanDeSponde suggestion  !!!…
> *"Faune"* here means _*"animals"*_ as opposed to plants : _*"la faune et la flore"
> *_



Well, in fact, I don't think JDS  was so wide of the mark, and the more I think about it, the more I am convinced we have omitted a detail: 

'les villégiateurs et les utilisateurs' are both to be associated with 'récréatifs et fauniques' since the path is probably secured for both those who want to take a stroll and observe the fauna or just enjoy the walk, but also for the fauna who need to be protected from vandals or disrespectful walkers (some paths have fences on each side, not so much to prevent animals from escaping, but also to prevent human beings from entering their area). 

Hence I would go even further: 
_*
Our goal is to offer safe quality access both to users of the path that may enjoy its faunal wealth or enjoy the recreation, and to the fauna who have chosen it for their habitat. 

*_I know it is much more specific than the original, but the sentence to me conveys all these meanings.


----------



## JeanDeSponde

Moon Palace said:


> _*
> Our goal is to offer safe quality access both to users of the path that may enjoy its faunal wealth or enjoy the recreation, and to the fauna who have chosen it for their habitat. *_


Wow.
Indeed a deeper understanding of the French (?) original sentence.
I fully agree with MP. 
And I've been for a walk in the Ile de Ré too.


----------



## wildan1

Just to repeat: I really don't think anyone really uses _faunal_ in English, and without this thread, would have no idea what it meant if I read it in a tourist brochure!

_lovers of nature, bird-lovers, appreciators of wildlife,_ etc. but please, not "faunal"


----------



## vincent7520

Moon Palace said:


> Well, in fact, I don't think JDS  was so wide of the mark, and the more I think about it, the more I am convinced we have ommitted a detail:
> 
> 'les villégiateurs et les utilisateurs' are both to be associated with 'récréatifs et fauniques' since the path is probably secured for both those who want to take a stroll and observe the fauna or just enjoy the walk, but also for the fauna who need to be protected from vandals or disrespectful walkers (some paths have fences on each side, not so much to prevent animals from escaping, but also to prevent human beings from entering their area).
> 
> Hence I would go even further:
> _*
> Our goal is to offer safe quality access both to users of the path that may enjoy its faunal wealth or enjoy the recreation, and to the fauna who have chosen it for their habitat.
> 
> *_I know it is much more specific than the original, but the sentence to me conveys all these meanings.



*
WATCH !!!… We are all going too far *on this sentence for the very reason that in the 1st place it has very little meaning in French !…
_"utilisateurs récréatifs et fauniques" _refer to the same group (not to two different kind of users. En français on ne définit pas "un animal" comme  "utilisateur" : ça n'a pas de sens parce qu'un animal n'a pas de libre-arbitre. An animal cannot be a "user" because it has no free will -or is not supposed to have-)
_"des accès de qualité et sécuritaire"_ is simply not french  (noun + adjective is not a proper gramatical form).
Therefore, if I had to translate such nonsense (sorry …) I would keep a (very) low profile and I really think that your 1st proposition is best (may be with deleting _"as well as to those")_


----------



## JeanDeSponde

wildan1 said:


> Just to repeat: I really don't think anyone really uses _faunal_ in English, and without this thread, would have no idea what it meant if I read it in a tourist brochure!


Then welcome to the club,Wildan. _Faunique_ is rather funny in French as well...
MP's explanation is the right one, but not the one we spontaneously thought of at the first (and second) reading...
Maybe _quality and safe access to both paying and wildlife guests_?


----------



## wildan1

JeanDeSponde said:


> Then welcome to the club,Wildan. _Faunique_ is rather funny in French as well...
> MP's explanation is the right one, but not the one we spontaneously thought of at the first (and second) reading...
> Maybe _quality and safe access to both paying and wildlife guests_?


I get the joke, Jean, and wish it would work in English. But the figurative sense of _" la flore et la faune ", _meaning all kinds of unusual people and their quirky ways and looks, doesn't transfer--_flora and fauna_ is really a sort of scientific or geographic term in English--and always meant literally.

I'm trying to find something clever--hard to do when it is still hump day over here... (Maybe I should ask the pope!)


----------



## Cath.S.

_So what about: _
_Our goal is to offer quality and safe access to vacationers and both recreational users and nature lovers ?_


----------



## Moon Palace

vincent7520 said:


> *
> WATCH !!!… We are all going too far *on this sentence for the very reason that in the 1st place it has very little meaning in French !…


I don't think so, as I explained above. 


> _"utilisateurs récréatifs et fauniques" _refer to the same group (not to two different kind of users. En français on ne définit pas "un animal" comme  "utilisateur" : ça n'a pas de sens parce qu'un animal n'a pas de libre-arbitre. An animal cannot be a "user" because it has no free will -or is not supposed to have-)
> _"des accès de qualité et sécuritaire"_ is simply not french  (noun + adjective is not a proper gramatical form).


'villégiateurs' is hardly ever used in French. The sentence is indeed very specific, and not the kind either of us would use in our every day conversations. 
Ce sont les deux noms 'villégiateurs' et 'users' qui sont à la fois 'récréatifs' et 'fauniques'. 
Sinon, il y aurait un ajout de déterminant entre les deux noms. Or, le seul 'aux' est distributif, et la sécurité et la qualité s'appliquent aux deux, aussi bien aux utilisateurs humains qu'aux "utilisateurs" fauniques. 

Je suis d'accord, c'est peu courant. Mais il faut partir de la réalité du terrain et l'associer à la phrase: c'est tout à fait ce qui se fait dans les communes désireuses de préserver les réserves fauniques et laisser les promeneurs en profiter également. Faune et promeneurs sont protégés les uns des autres. 

De plus, dans le domaine écologique, l'animal est un utilisateur. Voir un exemple ici.

I hope this is helpful.


----------



## vplasgirl

WOW! So much discussion over a sentence. Truly, I'm enjoying. But to redirect the discussion to its proper context, the sentence in question is a quote in a press release announcing a new maintenance approach for forestry roads. These roads are used by the forest industry, but they also lead to several cottages, outfitters, and a great many lakes. During forest harvesting season, the roads are well maintained by the forestry industry, but alas are let go off season making for treacherous driving conditions for recreational users.

According to GDT, Villégiateur is a word meaning owner of a vacation resort. However, I've seen it translated to "vacationer" elsewhere, and the two have very different meanings. So I asked the source of the article to explain what they mean by Villégiateur, and it turns out to be cottagers!

I'm a little stumped now by the difference between a recreational user and a cottager.

Thanks for the lively and informative discussion.


----------



## JeanDeSponde

MP's point is that paths can be used by humans, but also by wildlife.
_Utilisateurs faunique _would *not* mean _fauna lovers_, but *real* fauna - i.e. animal users!


----------



## Cath.S.

> _*"Notre but est d'offrir des accès de qualité et sécuritaires aux villégiateurs et utilisateurs récréatifs et fauniques."*_


Toutes considérations esthétiques mises à part, voici comment je comprends cette phrase.
Il existe trois catégories d'utilisateurs :
1. les villégiateurs, c'est-à-dire des vacanciers, qui restent un certain temps sur les lieux ;
2. des utilisateurs récréatifs, c'est-à-dire des gens qui viennent y passer une journée, ou quelques heures pour s'amuser ;
3. des utilisateurs « fauniques », c'est-à-dire des gens qui viennent y passer une journée, ou quelques heures afin d'observer ou d'étudier la faune.


----------



## floise

_De ce fait, aucun exemple concret n'a été
 donné afin de montrer que les *utilisateurs fauniques* ont été
 consultés lors des différents projets.
_
_De plus, le gouvernement et les autochtones pourraient ouvrir des terrains de piégeage à droits exclusifs dans ces réserves et ainsi augmenter leurs sources de financement. Ainsi, on éviterait de surtaxer *les utilisateurs fauniques* tout en satisfaisant l'ensemble des trappeurs québécois._

Moon Palace,

I don't think 'les utilisateurs fauniques' are animals.

I agree with Wildan1; faunal is not a word that's commonly heard.

floise


----------



## JeanDeSponde

egueule said:


> [...]
> 3. des utilisateurs « fauniques », c'est-à-dire des gens qui viennent y passer une journée, ou quelques heures afin d'observer ou d'étudier la faune.


Stricto sensu, _faunique_ = qui concerne la faune - _la richesse faunique du continent africain_ (Hachette)
Le sens de "observateur de la faune" paraîtrait logique, mais va à l'encontre de sens du mot.
Maintenant, l'usage trouvé par Floise est clair - et diablement technocratique...


----------



## Cath.S.

JeanDeSponde said:


> Stricto sensu, _faunique_ = qui concerne la faune - _la richesse faunique du continent africain_ (Hachette)
> Le sens de "observateur de la faune" paraîtrait logique, mais va à l'encontre de sens du mot.
> Maintenant, l'usage trouvé par Floise est clair - et diablement technocratique...


= _les chasseurs_, _pêcheurs_ ou je n'ai rien compris ?

Enfin, avant de la tuer, il faut bien l'observer, hein (non, non, je ne tiens pas à tout prix à avoir raison ).


----------



## JeanDeSponde

egueule said:


> = _les chasseurs_, ou je n'ai rien compris ?


J'y avais pensé et allais le proposer, mais l'exemple de Floise, qui oppose les trappeurs (qui payeraient des droits) aux utilisateurs fauniques (qui ne seraient donc pas surtaxés) est clair à ce sujet, je trouve.


----------



## vplasgirl

Moon Palace said:


> I don't think so, as I explained above.
> 'villégiateurs' is hardly ever used in French. The sentence is indeed very specific, and not the kind either of us would use in our every day conversations.
> Ce sont les deux noms 'villégiateurs' et 'users' qui sont à la fois 'récréatifs' et 'fauniques'.
> Sinon, il y aurait un ajout de déterminant entre les deux noms. Or, le seul 'aux' est distributif, et la sécurité et la qualité s'appliquent aux deux, aussi bien aux *utilisateurs humains qu'aux "utilisateurs" fauniques*.
> 
> Je suis d'accord, c'est peu courant. Mais il faut partir de la réalité du terrain et l'associer à la phrase: c'est tout à fait ce qui se fait dans les communes désireuses de préserver les réserves fauniques et laisser les promeneurs en profiter également. Faune et promeneurs sont protégés les uns des autres.
> 
> * De plus, dans le domaine écologique, l'animal est un utilisateur. Voir un exemple ici.*
> 
> I hope this is helpful.



Je commence à réaliser que la phrase en français porte à confusion puisque "utilisateurs fauniques" suggère que c'est l'animal qui est utilisateur. Ce n'est pas du tout ce que veux dire le rédacteur! C'est l'utilisateur enthousiaste de la faune. Oy!


----------



## vplasgirl

JeanDeSponde said:


> J'y avais pensé et allais le proposer, mais l'exemple de Floise, qui oppose les trappeurs (qui payeraient des droits) aux utilisateurs fauniques (qui ne seraient donc pas surtaxés) est clair à ce sujet, je trouve.



Si je comprend bien, "utilisateurs fauniques" veut dire chasseur??? Si c'est le cas, c'est tout à fait bien dans ce contexte.


----------



## JeanDeSponde

C'est bien le problème d'un texte pas clair dans une langue : comment le traduire ?...
On le prend comme on veut, mais _utilisateur faunique _n'est compréhensible que de son auteur.

Bon, allez, je vais aller villégiaturiser dans mon lit...


----------



## vplasgirl

egueule...I'm more and more confused as well. So I need to deconstruct the sentence and get to what the person being quoted actually means:

Villégiateurs - Cottagers. 
Utilisateurs récréatifs - Boaters, fishermen.
Utilisateurs fauniques - Chasseurs ou observateurs de la faune (I think he means both.)


----------



## Cath.S.

Ce sont clairement des chasseurs, pêcheurs et trappeurs :
http://www.ftgq.qc.ca/fr/publications/ftgq_express/ftgq_express-sept02.pdf.

Promenons-nous dans la langue de bois, tant que le loup n'y est pas...


----------



## vplasgirl

Merci, egueule! 

Maintenant que nous sommes d'accord que l'expression est bien française, je crois que je vais traduire par hunters.


----------



## vincent7520

God !…

Isn't there someone out there to say that this sentence is simply _"du n'importe quoi" ????…_ 
Not only does is sound clumsy, but it has no meaning at all, period.

So far 6 intelligent persons all mastering French and English quite well made various interpretations of words that are barely used when they are in the dictionnary. Others are not French such as those that are only used by profesionals for their own purposes as _ "villégiateur"_ (meaning someone or a group of people who build or is responsible for a "villégiature" the latter term becoming outfashioned !!…). Moreover we happen to understand that this word is misused (if such a thing may happen!…) as the writer intended to mean "_cottager" !!!…_
Then we realize that _"faunique",_ although it is in Hachette, could mean either the animal (fauna) or animal watchers or hunters or again tourists who like to spend time in the wild… and so on and so on … 
Then again we have to discuss the status of _"user" _ and we need to have a somewhat philosophical discussion to determine wether an animal can be a user depending on various points of view (for instance, as ecology is a human concept how does it apply to animals as beings of a different nature ? that is : what is the status of the nature of animals ??… - that is a _true_ philosophical question, but not very relevant here)
Not to mention the _*"accès de qualité et sécuritaire"*_ !!!!…
This getting off the wall or technocracy at its best !!!!…
Even when I try to pronouce the whole sentence with my best Quebec accent (which is very poor !!…) I get to nothing. 
If a "writer" (?!) is foggy no translation will make it clearer.
So far most of the interpretations given here could be right !!… 
That shows how fantastic people can be when challenged with a linguistical problem , alas, not real answer can be given for the simple reason that a misuse in language cannot be a linguistic riddle to solve
My answer at this time of the night is simple : my bed, my pillow, my eiderdown. And I am the user of the three !!!… 
Night night ! …


----------



## Moon Palace

vplasgirl said:


> According to GDT, Villégiateur is a word meaning owner of a vacation resort. However, I've seen it translated to "vacationer" elsewhere, and the two have very different meanings. So I asked the source of the article to explain what they mean by Villégiateur, and it turns out to be cottagers!
> 
> I'm a little stumped now by the difference between a recreational user and a cottager.
> 
> Thanks for the lively and informative discussion.



Villégiateur is indeed someone who is staying in a house on vacation. See here. As you will see, the word is said to be archaic and not much used. 

This sentence uses words which are quite uncommon, and makes use of them in an even more unusual way. 
Although I have thoroughly studied Floise's examples - and I agree with JDS's comment on how technocratic they are - I still maintain that '_utilisateurs fauniques'_ could mean both users: human beings along with animals. Two examples cannot turn a use into a rule. 
It could be _utilisateurs de type faunique_, which would be more logical as in _utilisateurs francophones / politiques..._, or _utilisateurs dont le but est faunique. 

_Last but not least, I don't see the point in making such a clear difference between '_récréationnel' _and _'faunique'_ if it is to be seen only from the humans' point of view. And if they had been so different from '_villégiateurs'_, I do believe another article would have been included before '_utilisateurs'. 

_Of course, this is how I see the sentence, but I can't see any linguistic reason why this could be absolutely disclaimed by only looking at the sentence. Only more context could help. If you can ask the source of the article, maybe we would have a clear-cut answer.


----------



## vincent7520

Moon Palace said:


> Villégiateur is indeed someone who is staying in a house on vacation. See here. As you will see, the word is said to be archaic and not much used.
> 
> Thank MP  to contribute to my list of oldfashioned and strange words : I'll use "villégiateurs" next time for those vacationners who stay in the same place.
> I went to fast on that one, sorry …
> 
> However, the basics of my argument remains the same : there is no way we could provide a consensual and correct translation when the original text is barely readable… although it is not some hermetic poetry, but a only simple administration or public relation text !!!…
> 
> May you all have a good day !


----------



## Cath.S.

MP said:
			
		

> Last but not least, I don't see the point in making such a clear difference between '_récréationnel' _and _'faunique'_ if it is to be seen only from the humans' point of view.


I do: the latter may be hunters or anglers, and have different needs as far as access is concerned than those who just want to breathe some fresh air.
And I still find the idea of _utilisateurs fauniques_ being animals really far fetched, since in every single text where you find the phrase on the Internet, it designates human beings.


----------



## vincent7520

are we still arguing about this technocratic nonsense ???!!!…
I'll stop here !… D:


----------



## Moon Palace

egueule said:


> I do: the latter may be hunters or anglers, and have different needs as far as access is concerned than those who just want to breathe some fresh air.
> And I still find the idea of _utilisateurs fauniques_ being animals really far fetched, since in every single text where you find the phrase on the Internet, it designates human beings.



I see your point, egueule, and I admit it may well be human beings only. Yet, what bothers me is that contrary to the other examples found on the internet, we are not in exactly the same context, and the sentence is much worse in its wording (cf the use of _villégiateur'_). Hence my reluctance to ignore the other possibility, all the less so as it does also make sense in this wider context. 
Now I believe we have been exploring all the nuts and bolts of this phrase, and I personally have said all I could and wanted to. 
Cheers to you all 
MP


----------



## Topsie

_*"Notre but est d'offrir des accès de qualité et sécuritaire aux villégiateurs et utilisateurs récréatifs et fauniques."

*_ Our aim is to offer safe access to holidaymakers, hunters, nature-lovers, wildlife enthusiasts as well as any other two-legged or four-legged animals who use them for recreational or professional puroposes! 

Blast! I forgot "qualité"...


----------



## Cath.S.

Topsie said:


> _*"Notre but est d'offrir des accès de qualité et sécuritaire aux villégiateurs et utilisateurs récréatifs et fauniques."*_
> 
> Our aim is to offer safe access to holidaymakers, hunters, nature-lovers, wildlife enthusiasts as well as any other two-legged or four-legged animals who use them for recreational or professional puroposes!
> 
> Blast! I forgot "qualité"...



But why do you discriminate against snakes, spiders and centipedes?


----------



## Topsie

egueule said:


> But why do you discriminate against snakes, spiders and centipedes?


Not to mention birds, bees, butterflies, wasps, ants, beetles, earthworms....


----------

