0

I'm looking for better wording in a translation for an App where you can send and receive money as well as request and pay it. So under transactions, there are 4 categories: money sent, money received, money requested and money paid (meaning fulfilled requests). I think that "paying" could be confused with sending money.

Also, I'm thinking of splitting the 4 categories into in and out. Table of categories

What do you think? Any ideas for better wording?

I'm not a native speaker.

P.S: I know this intersects with UX, if you think it would be better suited there feel free to let me know.

| improve this question | | | | |
  • Do you have ambiguity between 'sent' and 'paid'? I think your table of categorization is good enough. – BiscuitBoy Sep 14 '16 at 13:15
  • I don't get the distinction at all. From the payer's perspective, any and all money sent is money paid. You have fulfilled the request immediately. If I request money from you, and you send it over, you have spent that money that very second. It has been paid. No two ways about it. Whether or not I have received it, or acknowledged receiving it, is irrelevant. It has been paid. – RegDwigнt Sep 14 '16 at 13:22
  • Thanks @BiscuitBoy, if nothing better comes up I will use it. – Claas M. Sep 14 '16 at 13:25
  • @RegDwigнt: I don't quite understand what you mean, sorry. Money sent is not requested by the other user, you can send it without anybody requesting it, and when it's "send" as a reaction to a request, I call it paying. – Claas M. Sep 14 '16 at 13:28
  • You could use Charged in place of Paid. It's beyond the scope of your question, but it might actually be better to change your other term—instead of just Sent (which happens with all transactions) you could use Gifted or similar. You could also make your sub-categories match on both sides, for example "Received-Invoiced & Received-Grant; Sent-Invoiced & Sent-Grant" where Invoiced means "in response to a request" and Grant means "without a prior request". (Also, I don't necessarily think this question is off-topic here, but you might get better/different answers at UX.) – 1006a Sep 14 '16 at 14:09
0

Charged would be a possible alternative term for your scheme:

charge verb

[WITH OBJECT]

  1. Demand (an amount) as a price from someone for a service rendered or goods supplied. ‘the restaurant charged $15 for dinner’ [WITH TWO OBJECTS] ‘he charged me 2 euros for the postcard’ [NO OBJECT] ‘museums should charge for admission’
    1. 1 Record the cost of something as an amount payable by (someone) or on (an account) ‘they charge the calls to their credit-card accounts’

(Oxford Living Dictionaries)

This could potentially replace either Requested or Paid.

One other possible alternative term would be Billed, which is a near-synonym for charged (See Oxford bill verb, definition 2).

I think there is a stronger implication with charged that the money has actually changed hands, whereas with billed it sounds more like the request has been made but the money has not yet been handed over, so overall I would prefer charged for your purposes.


[Aside: Unfortunately, I think there's going to be some ambiguity for any scheme that relies on single words, since virtually all of these terms could be from the point of view of either pay-er or pay-ee. There is also be some ambiguity between outstanding requests (requests that have been made but not yet honored) and settled requests for the above suggestions.

Is it possible to use multi-word categories? Something like Money Sent, Money Sent-on-Request, Money Received, and Money Received-on-Request would be more clearly understandable, I think.]

| improve this answer | | | | |
0

If I understand your question correctly:

It would clearer if you gave the two parties different names instead of referring to both as users, e.g., you could call the one on the "in" side "Party A" and the one on "out" side "Party B". Note: For simplicity, in what follows, I consider Party B to be singular rather than plural, but that implies no loss of generality.

If you did that:

  • For requested you could say, "Money requested by Party A and fulfilled by Party B".

  • For received you could say, "Money received by Party A from Party B".

  • For sent, you could say, "Money sent by Party A to Party B".

  • For paid, you could say, "Money paid by Party A to Party B".

There appears to be an obvious issue with the wording of the requested element. It seems to me that it should read "Money requested by Party A from Party B" rather than "Money requested by Party A and fulfilled by Party B" ... because "fulfilled* in this context implies received.

| improve this answer | | | | |

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.