feignent – English Translation – Keybot Dictionary

Spacer TTN Translation Network TTN TTN Login Deutsch Français Spacer Help
Source Languages Target Languages
Keybot      11 Results   6 Domains
  www.pc.gc.ca  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Pour se tirer d’affaire, il arrive que les ours feignent une attaque : ils chargent, puis battent en retraite au dernier instant. Les ours peuvent aussi réagir de manière défensive en jappant, en grognant, en claquant des mâchoires et en pliant les oreilles vers l’arrière.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine pc.gc.ca as primary domain
Bears may bluff their way out of an encounter by charging and then turning away at the last second. Bears may also react defensively by woofing, growling, snapping their jaws and laying their ears back.
  2 Hits www.tlaxcala.es  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
La Maison Blanche savait depuis des mois qu’un coup d’État se préparait au Honduras, mais aujourd’hui les porte-parole du Département d'Etat feignent une innocence surprise. L'actuel ambassadeur des USA à Tegucigalpa, Hugo Llorens, le sait très bien: le 12 Septembre 2008 , il est arrivé dans le pays, et neuf jours plus tard, le général aujourd’hui putschiste Romeo Vásquez déclarait à la station de radio HRN qu’on était venu lui demander de « virer le gouvernement du président Manuel Zelaya Rosales » (www.proceso.hn, 21-9-08).
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine tlaxcala.es as primary domain
The White House knew for months that a coup was being prepared in Honduras, even though now State Department spokespersons feign a surprised innocence. The U.S. ambassador in Tegucigalpa, Hugo Llorens, knew it very well: on September 12, 2008, he arrived in the Central American country and, nine days later, the current coupist general Romeo Vásquez declared on the radio station HRN that they had sought “to overthrow the government of president Manuel Zelaya Rosales” (www.proceso.hn, 9/12/08). He added: “We are a serious and respectful institution, which is why we respect Mr. President as our Commander-in-Chief and we subordinate ourselves as dictated by law.” Just like Pinochet before rising against Salvador Allende. Any resemblance is just the work of reality.
  scc.lexum.org  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
En d’autres termes, les appelants font valoir que les caractéristiques particulières du syndrome de la douleur chronique et des états médicaux qui y sont associés — telles la persistance de la douleur après le délai normal de guérison de la lésion qui l’a causée au départ et l’absence apparente de symptômes physiques expliquant la douleur constante dont se plaint une personne — sont à l’origine de l’opinion courante erronée — allant jusqu’à un stéréotype social déplorable — voulant que les personnes souffrant de douleur chronique n’aient pas de problème de santé, mais feignent leur mal, souvent afin d’obtenir des avantages pécuniaires, ou que leur douleur soit imputable à leur faiblesse de caractère plutôt qu’à la lésion qu’elles ont subie.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain
Iacobucci J. went on to identify four contextual factors which may be referred to in order to determine whether the challenged legislation demeans the essential human dignity of the affected person or group.  These factors are: (1) the presence of pre-existing disadvantage, vulnerability, stereotyping or prejudice directed at this person or group; (2) the correspondence, or lack thereof, between the ground upon which the differential treatment is based and the actual needs, characteristics and circumstances of the affected person or group; (3) the ameliorative purpose or effect of the legislation upon a more disadvantaged group; and (4) the nature of the interest affected by the legislation.  This list, of course, is not exhaustive, the goal of the analysis in each case being to determine whether a reasonable and dispassionate person, fully apprised of all the circumstances and possessed of similar attributes to the claimant, would conclude that his or her essential dignity had been adversely affected by the law.  For the same reason, not all factors will be relevant in each case.  The enquiry always remains a contextual rather than a mechanical one: Lavoie v. Canada, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 769, 2002 SCC 23, at para. 46.
  csc.lexum.org  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
En d’autres termes, les appelants font valoir que les caractéristiques particulières du syndrome de la douleur chronique et des états médicaux qui y sont associés — telles la persistance de la douleur après le délai normal de guérison de la lésion qui l’a causée au départ et l’absence apparente de symptômes physiques expliquant la douleur constante dont se plaint une personne — sont à l’origine de l’opinion courante erronée — allant jusqu’à un stéréotype social déplorable — voulant que les personnes souffrant de douleur chronique n’aient pas de problème de santé, mais feignent leur mal, souvent afin d’obtenir des avantages pécuniaires, ou que leur douleur soit imputable à leur faiblesse de caractère plutôt qu’à la lésion qu’elles ont subie.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Iacobucci J. went on to identify four contextual factors which may be referred to in order to determine whether the challenged legislation demeans the essential human dignity of the affected person or group.  These factors are: (1) the presence of pre-existing disadvantage, vulnerability, stereotyping or prejudice directed at this person or group; (2) the correspondence, or lack thereof, between the ground upon which the differential treatment is based and the actual needs, characteristics and circumstances of the affected person or group; (3) the ameliorative purpose or effect of the legislation upon a more disadvantaged group; and (4) the nature of the interest affected by the legislation.  This list, of course, is not exhaustive, the goal of the analysis in each case being to determine whether a reasonable and dispassionate person, fully apprised of all the circumstances and possessed of similar attributes to the claimant, would conclude that his or her essential dignity had been adversely affected by the law.  For the same reason, not all factors will be relevant in each case.  The enquiry always remains a contextual rather than a mechanical one: Lavoie v. Canada, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 769, 2002 SCC 23, at para. 46.