83,357
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{isdaanat|Termination Currency Equivalent|}} | {{isdaanat|Termination Currency Equivalent|}} | ||
A fabulous example of the English language getting the better of a committee of seasoned professional users | A fabulous example of the English language getting the better of a committee of its own seasoned professional users, [[ISDA]]’s remarkable “{{isdaprov|Termination Currency Equivalent}}” definition erodes the fabric in which the basic assumptions of people who share a common language are woven. | ||
They have managed to convolute to the point of incomprehensibility | They have managed to convolute, to the point of incomprehensibility, a concept well enough described by its own name. Who would labour under a serious doubt about this expression: | ||
:“one party must pay the other the amount in its ''termination currency equivalent''”? | |||
Failing that, how about this: | |||
:“one party must pay the other ''an equivalent amount in the termination currency''”? | |||
The idea of an amount in one currency of an amount expressed in another really | The idea of an amount in one currency of an amount expressed in another really oughtn’t to be ''that'' hard to master, but to see how hard someone with [[profound ontological uncertainty]] can make it, have a gander at this ==> | ||
===User guide=== | ===User guide=== |