Common Mistakes in IT and FA Translation #6 - Avoiding Ambiguous Dependencies

1. Example 1:

When looking at the original text, "want to change the state" modifies "service". However, in the translated text, the infinitive "to modify" is used, resulting in a nuance of "selecting a service to change the state". This may not accurately convey the meaning of the original text to the reader, so it is necessary to use the possessive pronoun "whose" to clarify the relationship between "service" and "state".

※ If you want to translate "変更したい" using "want", it is also possible to use "a service whose status you want to modify". However, in technical writing, there is a tendency to avoid pronouns such as "you" as much as possible, so "a service whose status is to be modified" is recommended above.

2. Example 2:

"Invited folders" is translated as "the invited folders", but in this context, "invited folders" means "folders that the user has been invited to use". However, using "the invited folders" does not accurately convey this meaning, so it is necessary to use "to which" to clearly modify it to "folders that the user has been invited to use".

3. Example 3:

"The user account for accessing" is translated as "the user account for accessing" using a prepositional phrase, and has a nuance of "the user account for accessing". While this may convey the meaning to some extent, using "preposition + relative pronoun + to + infinitive" ("with which to access") to clarify the modifier relationship between "account" and "accessing" would make the sentence easier to read.

※ It is also possible to change from "with which to" to "by which to".

4. Example 4:

Here, as in the example of "3", "for absorbing" is translated using a prepositional phrase. It is not a mistranslation, but the relationship between "able to absorb bending stress" and "relatively long beam" is unclear, making the sentence difficult to understand. Also, using "for absorbing" makes the meaning of "able to" ambiguous. Therefore, it is necessary to use "over which" to clarify the relationship.

5. Example ➄:

The original text is grammatically correct and matches the meaning of the original. However, because the preposition is at the end of the sentence, it is difficult to read and does not look good. Depending on the reader's interpretation, there is a risk of misreading it as "folders access". In general writing or novels, this type of writing may be used, but in technical writing, it is unnatural, so it is recommended to avoid it if possible.

※ It is also possible to change "will be permitted" to "is to be permitted".

This time, we introduced three ways to clarify the dependency within a sentence using the following three relative pronouns.

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

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

・Relative pronoun "whose"

These grammatical structures are relatively advanced, but they are very useful for improving clarity and readability by clarifying dependencies. In particular, "preposition + relative pronoun + to + verb infinitive" can be very useful in technical writing once you get used to it, so please make use of it.