Can't figure out why the author said it this way... (not your normal 未満 vs 以下 issue)

[Warren Smith]

Zr:3％未満、Mo:3％未満、Nb:3％未満、Ta:3％未満、Cr:1％以下 (ただし、1％を除く。) 、Mn:3％未満、Ni:3％未満、

 

What is the difference between that and "未満"?

 

This appears several times in the document, but is quite mysterioius to me.

 

Anybody have any ideas?

[Matthew Schlecht]

On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 12:56 PM Warren Smith <Warren...@comcast.net> wrote:

Zr:3％未満、Mo:3％未満、Nb:3％未満、Ta:3％未満、Cr:1％以下 (ただし、1％を除く。) 、Mn:3％未満、Ni:3％未満、

 

What is the difference between that and "未満"?

I would say that 1%未満 would be equivalent to 1％以下 (ただし、1％を除く。)

Curious that it only seems to be employed with the Cr specification.

My call would be that they might be making damn sure to avoid any hint of overlap with other published art with a scope that encompasses Cr: 1％.

There are different views among translators concerning whether 以下 means < or ≤

Matthew Schlecht, PhD
Word Alchemy Translation, Inc.
Newark, DE, USA
wordalchemytranslation.com

[Warren Smith]

Thanks, Matthew. I think you are likely right about the motivation.

 

Actually the entire claim is more interesting than this, given the mixture of 以下and 未満:

 

質量％にて、V:15~25％、Al:2.5~5％、Sn:0.5~4％、O:0.20％以下、H:0.03％以下、Fe:0.40％以下、C:0.05％以下、N:0.02％以下で、更に、Zr:3％未満、Mo:3％未満、Nb:3％未満、Ta:3％未満、Cr:1％以下 (ただし、1％を除く。) 、Mn:3％未満、Ni:3％未満、Pd:3％未満およびSi:3％未満....

 

In nondiscrete measurements (measurements of noncountable units), there is no difference between 以下and 未満 (despite the difference being important in countable units). So this mixture of words is quite odd.

 

---

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Honyaku E<>J translation list" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to honyaku+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/honyaku/CALnYxcx9sQpb7tFtNzE-Fqafimds8HULMZJoLtSwT59Bjcy0og%40mail.gmail.com.

[John Stroman]

Warren,

In chemical patents 以下 and 以上 should be translated as "less than or equal to" and "greater than or equal to" (often abbreviated as ≥ and ≤ in front of a number. 未満 is more specifically "less than" (abbreviated as < in front of a number), and 何々を超える is often used for "greater than " (abbreviated as  > in front of a number), and "more" can be used instead of "greater." 

I don't disagree with Matthew because sometimes the authors' writing is sloppy, and MT output usually gives "more than" and "less than," but given the context of a patent, I always  prefer more literal renderings. Trouble is, < and > can be interpreted by hair-splitters as exclusive of the number rather than inclusive.

John Stroman

----------------

On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 12:56 PM Warren Smith <Warren...@comcast.net> wrote:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Honyaku E<>J translation list" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to honyaku+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/honyaku/ACF988C35D304CE6BEB3BD12D335F7D0%40WarrenSmithDell.

[Warren Smith]

Personally, my preferred translations for 以下 and 以上 are "no greater than" and "no less than," as I find "less than or equal to", etc, to be unwieldy given the introduction of a conjunction. But that is just my style and I would not nay say other stylistic choices.

 

While I would argue over lunch that, when applied to continuous measurements, 以下 is functionally identical to "less than" (because "equal to" never actually exists in continuous values), I have a strong bias towards literal translation (at least in patents), so, like you, I go with what the author wrote and leave my personal opinions of out it. (If the author wants to use 以下"" instead of "未満", that is his business, not mine!)

 

Thanks for the note.

 

W

 

---

From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Stroman
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2022 1:57 PM
To: hon...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Can't figure out why the author said it this way... (not your normal 未満 vs 以下 issue)

 

Warren,

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/honyaku/CAJVTx97%3Djg0RVZ%2B9ny_%2B4nSAScvQ59_u5VuAcH66ALe5Z2QZ_A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Herman]

On 5/20/22 10:48, Warren Smith wrote:
> Thanks, Matthew. I think you are likely right about the motivation.
>
> Actually the entire claim is more interesting than this, given the
> mixture of 以下and 未満:
>
> 質量％にて、V:15~25％、Al:2.5~5％、Sn:0.5~4％、O:0.20％以下、H:0.03％以
> 下、Fe:0.40％以下、C:0.05％以下、N:0.02％以下で、更に、Zr:3％未満、

> Mo:3％未満、Nb:3％未満、Ta:3％未満、Cr:1％以下(ただし、1％を除く。) 、

> Mn:3％未満、Ni:3％未満、Pd:3％未満およびSi:3％未満....
>
> In nondiscrete measurements (measurements of noncountable units), there

> is no difference between 以下and 未満(despite the difference being

> important in countable units). So this mixture of words is quite odd.
>

I can't really speak to the exact motivation of the author, but I am not
sure that your statement that "in nondiscrete measurements there is no
difference between 以下and 未満" is correct.

For example, 0.03％以下 could arguably include 0.031%, or even 0.039%,
whereas 0.03％未満 probably would not.

Herman Kahn

[Warren Smith]

The artificts of the quantification process don't make the underlying value
discontinuous, so I think I stand my original argument on this.

That being said, when I was a process engineer I saw lots of hanky-panky
around this exact thing: remeasuring and rounding so as to be in spec.

W

-----Original Message-----
From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Herman
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2022 4:46 PM
To: hon...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Can't figure out why the author said it this way... (not your
normal 未満 vs 以下 issue)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Honyaku E<>J translation list" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to honyaku+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/honyaku/caa16c8c-c03a-1728-5b34-db154a83fb
60%40lmi.net.

[Herman]

On 5/20/22 15:30, Warren Smith wrote:
> The artificts of the quantification process don't make the underlying value
> discontinuous, so I think I stand my original argument on this.
>

I was not implying that the value becomes discontinuous.

I am saying, for example, if the 0.03% is 0.03 grams out of 100, and the
quantification assumes use of a scale measures down to 0.01 grams, then
0.0399 g (as measured by some other hypothetical more accurate scale)
would fall within the specified 0.03以下, but not within 0.03未満, so in
this case, 0.03未満 = 0.02以下.

Herman Kahn

[John Stroman]

Warren, 

I just noticed something

> 質量％にて、V:15~25％、Al:2.5~5％、Sn:0.5~4％、O:0.20％以下、H:0.03％以
> 下、Fe:0.40％以下、C:0.05％以下、N:0.02％以下で、更に、Zr:3％未満、
> Mo:3％未満、Nb:3％未満、Ta:3％未満、Cr:1％以下(ただし、1％を除く。) 、
> Mn:3％未満、Ni:3％未満、Pd:3％未満およびSi:3％未満....

All the values followed by 以下  are less than 1% (except Cr, which is further qualified as excluding 1%, so it would also be a value to the right of the decimal point). The minimal value of Sn is 0.5%, and I assume from the list that the value of Sn is either easy to determine accurately at 0.5% or covered by the 以下 after O. That makes me think that perhaps from a technical standpoint it is very difficult to measure such small percentages accurately, and when they fall below 1%, these elements could actually be considered trace elements or contaminants depending on your context. Regardless, the authors may be presenting not only a measured numerical value but also hinting at the degree of accuracy of the measurement by writing in this manner. Do they mention limits of quantitation elsewhere, or is it considered common technical knowledge for persons skilled in the art?

John Stroman

----------------

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/honyaku/336ba8a4-75f9-9e16-5271-284f8245c9da%40lmi.net.