Common Mistake 6 in IT and FA Translation - Avoiding Ambiguous Dependencies

1. Example 1:

Looking at the original text, "want to change the state" modifies "service." However, in the translated text, the infinitive "to modify" is used, which gives a nuance like "choosing a service to change the state." As it stands, there is a risk that the original meaning may not be accurately conveyed to the reader, so it is necessary to utilize the possessive relative pronoun "whose" to clarify the relationship between "service" and "state."

* Regarding "want to change," if you would like to use "want," it is also possible to say "a service whose status you want to modify." However, in technical writing, there is a tendency to avoid pronouns like "you" as much as possible, so the above suggestion of "a service whose status is to be modified" is recommended.

2. Example ②:

The term "the invited folders" is a direct translation of "the invited folders", but in this context, "the invited folders" means "the folders that the user has been invited to." However, using "the invited folders" does not accurately convey that meaning, so it is necessary to revise it to clearly indicate "the folders that the user has been invited to" by using "to which."

3. Example ③:

The phrase "the user account for accessing" translates the Japanese "the user account for accessing" using a prepositional phrase, conveying a nuance similar to "the user account for access." While this conveys some meaning, using the structure "preposition + relative pronoun + to + base form of the verb" ("with which to access") clarifies the modifying relationship between "account" and "access," resulting in a more readable sentence.

* It is also possible to change "with which to" to "by which to".

4. Example ④:

Here, similar to the example of "3", "can absorb" is translated as "for absorbing" using a prepositional phrase. While this is not a mistranslation, the relationship between "can absorb bending stress" and "relatively long beams" is unclear, resulting in a confusing sentence. Additionally, using "for absorbing" makes the meaning of "can" ambiguous. Therefore, it is necessary to use "over which" to clarify the relationship.

5. Example 5:

The text before revision has no grammatical errors and its meaning is consistent with the original. However, the preposition is at the very end of the sentence, making it difficult to read and visually unappealing. Depending on the reader's interpretation, there is also a risk of misreading it as "folders access". While this style may be used in general writing or novels, it is unnatural in technical writing, so it is advisable to avoid it if possible.

* "will be permitted" can also be changed to "is to be permitted."

This time, we introduced three ways to use relative pronouns to clarify dependencies within sentences.

・Preposition + Relative Pronoun (e.g., "in which", "from which")

・Preposition + relative pronoun + to + base form of the verb (e.g., "with which to")

・Relative pronoun 'whose'

These grammatical structures are relatively advanced, but from the perspective of clarifying dependencies and improving readability, they are very useful. In particular, the structure "preposition + relative pronoun + to + base form of the verb" can be very helpful in technical writing once you become accustomed to using it, so please give it a try.