Chainy:

sudanglo:Obviously, one can translate the meaning into Esperanto - alt-riskaj pruntoj, pruntoj al ne-kreditinduloj, and so on, but in so doing one loses the instant recognizability.

I think those suggestions (alt-riskaj pruntoj, pruntoj al ne-kreditinduloj) are very good. Much easier to understand than 'subprime'!

I like those suggestions too (as well as my own suggestion of "kreditaĉi", ekz. "pruntoj al kreditaĉuloj").

Of course, one might ask if altriskaj pruntoj applies to the borrower, lender, or both

Amike,
Paul

Chainy:I've come across this expression in Russian (субстандартные ипотечные кредиты = subnormaj hipotekaj kreditoj) as a way of translating 'subprimes'. But I have the impression that in Russian they usually add the American expression in brackets just to make it clear.

Interesting. Polish doesn't have (as far as I know) a direct equivalent for субстандартный : you have to say something like "niskiej jakości" or "o niskim standardzie" (niski = низкий) - neither of which would really work for describing a loan.

Amike,
Paul

sudanglo:

but presumably they are copying the American pronunciation

With Google Translate you have the option to hear the pronunciation of the translated expression in the target language.

If you look at the cases where languages have used the term subprime in the translation of subprime loan, they generally don't say something that sounds like subprajm (but the Japanese apparently do).

The pronunciation in Google Translate is not very reliable for foreign words, because their pronunciation is often just generated automatically from their spelling. For example, the Swedish translation of "subprime loan" is "subprime-lån", which is an acceptable translation, but people would laugh at you if you pronounced it like that automatic voice does, [subprime-lån] instead of [subprajm-lån].

Subprime simply means the mortgage holder pays a higher interest rate (fixed or variable) than someone with better credit -- in other words, "subprime" means you don't get the best ("prime") interest rate.

According to Investopedia: The interest rate that commercial banks charge their most credit-worthy customers. The prime interest rate, or prime lending rate, is largely determined by the federal funds rate, which is the overnight rate which banks lend to one another

According to the last part of that definition, all mortgages in the UK would be subprime (much higher interest rates than LIBOR - the London interbank overnight lending rate).

Seems to me that the core meaning of subprime is less than best, anyway. And with loans this is determined by the perceived risk of default on capital and/or interest.

However because of this link, sub-prime effectively refers to the perceived riskiness of the loan (dodginess of the borrower).

Let me put the general question. If something is less than the best available it is sub-what in Esperanto? (In other words what is the Esperanto root for top in class?)

Don't all shout out 'subprima' in unison.

sudanglo:However because of this link, sub-prime effectively refers to the perceived riskiness of the loan (dodginess of the borrower).

That's true, but with an asterisk. Yes, it refers to the riskiness of the loan. But it also means that the loan has very unfavorable conditions. The so-called subprime loans weren't just loans to dodgy borrowers. They had some very unfavorable conditions that kicked in after a couple of years. I believe it was common for the interest rates to shoot up, required monthly payments would double, or some such. They were unfavorable loans by their very structure, not just unfavorable in the sense that the interest rates were high and the borrowers were dodgy.

Let me put the general question. If something is less than the best available it is sub-what in Esperanto? (In other words what is the Esperanto root for top in class?)

Don't all shout out 'subprima' in unison.

Perish the thought! I'd say that a relatively generic Esperanto word for top of the class would be "optimuma". Wells has "optimuma" in his dictionary but I don't know if I've really heard it in use.

Therefore less than the top of the class would be "sub-optimuma". But I'm anxious to hear other ideas.

It seems to me that in Esperanto we seldom really speak of a generic "best". We tend to be more specific.

I think it boils down to this.

The use of subprima makes it clear what our reference is, to speakers of many different languages, even if the speakers of those languages don't precisely understand the term, but just have a vague notion.

Using a descriptive term, instead, pins down a specific meaning, but loses all the associations of reference. We are no longer sure what territory we are in.

However, because of the way Esperanto insists on preserving regularity, then when we use subprima we have either introduced a word with a restricted meaning or 'prima' as a word with a more general meaning (and I believe a useful one).

A supposed conflict between the meanings of primo and prima makes us hesitate, but I think this is resolvable and more apparent than real.

New Deal, on the other hand is a far tougher nut to crack. We can't, as the national languages do, just adopt the term in unchanged form and pronounce it according to local phonological preference.

We seem forced to forego a rule 15 solution, and in so doing we are stuck with expressions that are not immediately evocative. Only later in any text will it become apparent what the reference is for our preferred meaning-based translation.

Even then, there is a problem since we have no word in Esperanto that seems to match in meaning 'deal/bargain', just as 'top/best' lacks a ready equivalent.

erinja:

sudanglo:However because of this link, sub-prime effectively refers to the perceived riskiness of the loan (dodginess of the borrower).

That's true, but with an asterisk. Yes, it refers to the riskiness of the loan. But it also means that the loan has very unfavorable conditions. The so-called subprime loans weren't just loans to dodgy borrowers. They had some very unfavorable conditions that kicked in after a couple of years. I believe it was common for the interest rates to shoot up, required monthly payments would double, or some such. They were unfavorable loans by their very structure, not just unfavorable in the sense that the interest rates were high and the borrowers were dodgy.

If you're not planning on spending a lot of time in a house, an ARM/balloon is not a bad deal at all - a lot of people with perfect credit took out these kinds of loans with the idea that they would flip the house and pay off the loan before the higher rate kicked in. The only time that kind of loan becomes "unfavorable" is if you can't flip the house before the rate resets (and get stuck with the higher payment and an underwater house in a down market).

Subprime refers to the rate, not the type of the loan (fixed, variable, etc.) The reason someone is offered a subprime (i.e. higher) interest rate is because they are perceived as a higher credit risk and thus the lender wants a higher return on investment for taking on a riskier lender.

That said, there was a huge market for subprime loans because these mortgages were then resold and repackaged (MBS) in such a way that the riskiness of the loans was difficult for investors to determine. Even if investors realized the risk involved, many of them either planned to flip their investments before the underlying loans became uncollectable.

Amike,

Paul