関係代名詞の先行詞の決定：こんな英語の先生はまあいない

Moneyball, The Art of Winning an Unfair Game, Michael Lewisより。

Me: Consider the following passage: "a ruptured nerve in his elbow, that he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm" What did he crush each time he moved his arm, a ruptured nerve, or his elbow?

ChatGPT:

In the passage, "a ruptured nerve in his elbow, that he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm," the phrase "that he crushed" refers to the ruptured nerve.

The structure implies that the nerve was crushed each time he straightened his arm, not the elbow itself.

あなた:

What makes you believe so? On what grounds can you tell it's the nerve and not his elbow?

ChatGPT:

The reasoning is based on grammatical structure and the meaning of the words in the sentence. Here's the breakdown:

1. Relative Clause Reference:

   • The phrase "that he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm" is a relative clause that provides additional information about something mentioned earlier in the sentence.
   • Relative clauses usually refer to the most recent noun, which in this case is "a ruptured nerve."

2. Context and Logic:

   • The sentence mentions a "ruptured nerve" in the elbow. It’s logical that if something is being crushed each time he moves his arm, it would likely be the nerve, as it is both physically vulnerable (due to being ruptured) and sensitive to movement.
   • The elbow, as a joint, isn't something one typically "crushes" by merely straightening the arm. The crushing action is more plausibly affecting the nerve.

3. Meaning of the Words:

   • The word "crush" implies pressing or squeezing something delicate. The nerve, especially a ruptured one, fits this description, whereas the elbow, a bone and joint, does not.

These points make it clear that the "ruptured nerve" is the object being crushed each time the arm is straightened, not the elbow itself.

Me: You said, "Relative clauses usually refer to the most recent noun". By "the most recent," do you mean the noun that has appeared most recently, i.e., the newest noun?

ChatGPT:

Yes, by "the most recent noun," I mean the noun that has appeared most recently in the sentence, i.e., the newest noun. In this case, the relative clause "that he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm" is most likely referring to "a ruptured nerve," which is the newest noun before the clause begins. This is a common grammatical pattern in English, where a relative clause typically modifies the nearest preceding noun.

あなた:

<form class="w-full" aria-haspopup="dialog" aria-expanded="false" aria-controls="radix-:r8c:" data-state="closed">

How can you tell "a ruptured nerve" is the newest noun? Why not "his elbow"?

ChatGPT:

You're right to question this. Let's clarify the reasoning by breaking down the passage:

• "a ruptured nerve in his elbow": This phrase contains two nouns—"nerve" and "elbow."
• The phrase "in his elbow" functions as a prepositional phrase that modifies "nerve," indicating the location of the nerve.

In terms of grammatical structure, the noun "nerve" is the primary subject of the phrase, and "elbow" is part of the prepositional phrase that describes the location of the nerve.

• When I referred to "the most recent noun," I was considering the primary noun that the relative clause is modifying. In this case, "nerve" is the most recent primary noun, even though "elbow" is the last noun mentioned in the prepositional phrase.

So, the relative clause "that he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm" most logically refers back to the "ruptured nerve" rather than "elbow." This is because the nerve is the main subject in the phrase, and the crushing action would more naturally apply to the nerve, especially since it’s described as ruptured and sensitive.

あなた:

Then, what if I wanted to say that it was in fact his elbow that was crushed every time he straightened his throwing arm? How should I modify the original sentence "a ruptured nerve in his elbow, that he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm" so that the verb "crush" pins on "his elbow"?

ChatGPT:

To make it clear that the elbow is being crushed each time he straightens his throwing arm, you can revise the sentence to emphasize "elbow" as the subject of the action. Here’s how you might rewrite the sentence:

• "He crushed his elbow each time he straightened his throwing arm, aggravating a ruptured nerve."
• "A ruptured nerve in his elbow, which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm."

In these versions, the structure makes it clear that the elbow is what’s being crushed. The first sentence directly states "his elbow" as the object of "crushed," while the second version explicitly links the crushing action to the elbow by using "which."

あなた:

What if I revised the second version by eliminating the comma before "which", so that it now reads "A ruptured nerve in his elbow which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm"? Does the "which" still modify "his elbow"? How is my revised second version differ in meaning from the original second version?

ChatGPT:

どちらの回答がお好みですか？

お客様の選択は ChatGPT の改善に役立てられます。

 

ChatGPT

回答 1

By eliminating the comma in the revised version—"A ruptured nerve in his elbow which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm"—the meaning and grammatical structure change slightly.

Key differences:

1. With the Comma (Non-restrictive Clause):

   • "A ruptured nerve in his elbow, which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm."
   • The clause "which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm" is a non-restrictive relative clause. This means it provides extra information about the nerve, but it isn’t essential to identifying which nerve is being discussed. In this case, "which" can refer to either the nerve or the elbow, though "nerve" is the more logical interpretation.
   • The comma makes it clear that this is additional information about the nerve/elbow, and it's not necessary to define or limit which part of the body is being crushed.

2. Without the Comma (Restrictive Clause):

   • "A ruptured nerve in his elbow which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm."
   • The clause "which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm" is now a restrictive relative clause, meaning that it is essential to the meaning of the sentence. It limits or defines which nerve or which elbow is being discussed.
   • Without the comma, the "which" refers more strongly to the noun closest to it: "elbow." This version implies that the elbow is what is being crushed each time he straightens his arm, making it clearer that the action of crushing is tied to the elbow.

Summary of Differences:

• With the comma: The clause is extra information and "which" most likely refers to the nerve.
• Without the comma: The clause is essential information and "which" more likely refers to the elbow due to its proximity.

Thus, by removing the comma, you're making it more explicit that his elbow is the part being crushed.

ChatGPT

回答 2

When you eliminate the comma before "which," as in "A ruptured nerve in his elbow which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm," the sentence's meaning and structure change subtly. Here's how:

1. Without the Comma:

   • "A ruptured nerve in his elbow which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm":
     • Here, "which he crushed" becomes a restrictive clause (or defining clause). A restrictive clause provides essential information that defines or identifies the noun it follows.
     • In this structure, "which" could logically still refer to "nerve" because it's closer to that noun, and the sentence is read as if specifying a particular nerve that is being crushed.
     • The absence of the comma suggests that the clause is integral to understanding the specific nerve in question, and "which" would likely still be understood to modify "nerve," not "elbow."

2. With the Comma:

   • "A ruptured nerve in his elbow, which he crushed each time he straightened his throwing arm":
     • The comma before "which" turns the clause into a non-restrictive (or non-defining) clause. This type of clause adds extra information about the noun but doesn’t define it.
     • Here, "which" could still refer to "nerve," but with the comma, the sentence more clearly separates the description of the nerve from the action of crushing, making it a comment on the whole preceding idea, which could include the elbow.

Key Differences:

• Restrictive (no comma): The clause is essential, directly tying the action of crushing to the nerve. "Which" more likely refers to "nerve."
• Non-restrictive (with comma): The clause adds additional information and is less tightly bound to the preceding noun. "Which" could more broadly refer to the elbow and the whole situation, but "nerve" is still the most likely reference.

Conclusion:

If your goal is to make it clear that the elbow is what’s being crushed, you’d need to rephrase the sentence more directly, as simply removing the comma doesn’t shift the meaning in the way you might intend. For instance, you could write:

• "He had a ruptured nerve in his elbow, and each time he straightened his throwing arm, he crushed his elbow."

This version directly attributes the crushing action to the elbow, avoiding ambiguity.

</form>

ヒアラブル

US2022358187(SONOS INC [US])
[0103] In some instances, the headphone device may take the form of a hearable device.
【００８０】
  場合によっては、ヘッドフォンデバイスは、ヒアラブルデバイスの形態をとってもよい。

Hearable devices
ヒアラブルデバイスは、

may include those headphone devices (including ear-level devices) that are configured to provide a hearing enhancement function while also supporting

playback of media content (e.g., streaming media content from a user device over a PAN, streaming media content from a streaming music service provider over a WLAN and/or a cellular network connection, etc.).
メディアコンテンツの再生（例えば、ＰＡＮを介してユーザデバイスからメディアコンテンツをストリーミングすること、ＷＬＡＮおよび／またはセルラーネットワーク接続を介してストリーミング音楽サービスプロバイダからメディアコンテンツをストリーミングすることなど）

もサポートしながら、聴覚強化機能を提供するように構成されたヘッドフォンデバイス（イヤレベルデバイスを含む）を含んでもよい。

In some instances, a hearable device may be implemented as an in-ear headphone device that is configured to playback an amplified version of at least some sounds detected from an external environment (e.g., all sound, select sounds such as human speech, etc.)
場合によっては、ヒアラブルデバイスは、外部環境（例えば、すべての音、人間の声などの選択音など）から検出された少なくともいくつかの音の増幅バージョンを再生するように構成されたインイヤーヘッドフォンデバイスとして実装されてもよい

嵌合

US9469871(CORPOROS INC [US])
[0025] As seen in FIG. 2C, syringe 30 and containment element 20 with sample collector 10 may be coupled to point-of-care nucleic acid amplification and detection apparatus 100 by mating of (male or female) luer lock 22 of containment element 20 with (female or male) luer lock 102 of apparatus 100 . Syringe 30 may contain liquid L (e.g., water, buffer and/or colorimetric or other dye solution) for eluting sample S from sample collector 10 into apparatus 100 via depression of plunger 34 . Luer lock 102 of apparatus 100 (and/or the syringe or other alternative delivery device for delivering sample S) optionally may comprise a one-way valve that prevents backflow during nucleic acid amplification and detection.

US2020405395(SPINE ALIGN LLC [US])
[0037] Some embodiments include a fiducial system comprising a probe assembly comprising, and a trackable dynamic reference frame coupled or integrated to a probe shaft. Some embodiments include a moveable post with trackable marker that is slidably positioned in the probe shaft. Some embodiments include at least one probe tip extrusion tab configured and arranged to engage a mating portion of an implantable mating screw. Some embodiments include a spring-loaded plunger movable positioned in the probe shaft, and configured to be actuated against a surface of the mating screw, elevating the moveable post with trackable marker to a triggered state defined by mating of the probe assembly with the mating screw.

 

Me: Translate the following: 嵌合凸部と嵌合凹部は嵌合している。

 

ChatGPT:

 

The fitting projection and the fitting recess are engaged.

 

あなた:

How about, "The fitting projection and the fitting recess are mated with each other"?

 

ChatGPT:

Yes, "The fitting projection and the fitting recess are mated with each other" is also a valid translation. This phrasing is slightly more formal and technical, making it well-suited for patent or engineering contexts where precise descriptions of how parts interact are required. Both translations convey the same idea, but "mated with each other" emphasizes the complementary nature of the two components.

 

あなた:

How about, "The fitting projection and the fitting recess are fitted with each other"?

 

ChatGPT:

"The fitting projection and the fitting recess are fitted with each other" is another acceptable translation. This phrasing emphasizes the process of the parts coming together, which can be suitable depending on the context. However, it is slightly less common in technical and patent language compared to "mated with each other" or "engaged."

If you want to describe a secure and precise connection, "engaged" or "mated" might be preferred, but "fitted" is still clear and conveys the correct meaning.

 

有する、備える、具備、含む、成る: provided with, comprise

Me: Compare the following two sentences:

1. This device is provided with a member A and a member B.
2. This device comprises a member A and a member B.

Do they basically mean the same thing? In what situations is one more appropriate than the other?

ChatGPT:

The two sentences are similar in meaning but have subtle differences in tone and implication, particularly in legal or technical contexts like patent writing.

1. "This device is provided with a member A and a member B."

• Meaning: This phrase suggests that the device has or is equipped with member A and member B. It implies that these components are part of the device but doesn't necessarily indicate whether they are essential to its function.
• Usage: This wording is more descriptive and is often used in general explanations or descriptions. It might be more appropriate when you want to describe the presence of components without specifying that they are integral to the device's structure or operation.

2. "This device comprises a member A and a member B."

• Meaning: "Comprises" is a stronger term that implies member A and member B are essential and integral parts of the device. In patent language, "comprises" is often used to indicate that the device includes these members as part of its structure or function, but it also leaves room for additional components.
• Usage: This wording is more precise and is commonly used in legal or technical documents, especially patents. It is appropriate when you want to define the essential components of the device in a way that can withstand legal scrutiny.

Summary:

• Use "is provided with" when you want to describe the device in a more general or descriptive manner, without necessarily implying that the components are essential.
• Use "comprises" when you need to precisely define the components that make up the device, especially in legal or technical contexts where the inclusion of those components is important for the understanding or enforcement of the document.

In patent writing, "comprises" is often preferred because it clearly establishes the elements that are part of the invention while allowing for the possibility of additional, unspecified elements.

 

あなた:

Consider a pipe. The pipe is composed of two pipe members joined together. In this case, which of the following is more appropriate as a description of the pipe? 1. The pipe is provided with two pipe members. 2. The pipe comprises two pipe members.

 

ChatGPT:

In this case, "The pipe comprises two pipe members." is more appropriate.

Explanation:

• "Comprises" indicates that the two pipe members are essential components that make up the pipe. This phrasing clearly communicates that the pipe consists of these two members, which are integral to its structure.

• "Is provided with" would imply that the pipe has or is equipped with two pipe members, but it doesn't necessarily convey that these members are fundamental to the composition of the pipe. It could be interpreted as the pipe having additional components or being equipped with the two members in a less integral way.

Since the pipe is composed of these two members, and they are essential parts of its structure, "comprises" is the more precise and accurate term to use in this context.

名詞の数、全体、個別、集合的

Me: Translate the following into English, assuming that the word 動き pins on both 目標物 and 基準物: この装置は目標物と基準物の動きを追跡する。

 

ChatGPT:

 

The device tracks the movement of both the target object and the reference object.

 

あなた:

Why did you use the singular "movement", rather than a plural "movements"? When 動き refers to both the target object and the reference object, isn't it logically more accurate to use the plural "movements"?

 

ChatGPT:

You're correct that using "movements" in the plural could be more precise when referring to the motion of both the target object and the reference object, especially if their movements are independent of each other.

However, in English, "movement" can also be used as a collective noun to refer to the general motion of multiple objects together, particularly when their movements are being tracked as part of a single process or system. This is why I chose the singular "movement."

If you want to emphasize that the device is tracking separate or independent motions of the target and reference objects, then "movements" would indeed be more accurate. The translation would then be:

"The device tracks the movements of both the target object and the reference object."

 

Me: Translate the following: この装置は物体の3次元の動きを予測する。

 

ChatGPT:

The device predicts the three-dimensional movement of the object.

 

あなた:

Why did you use the singular "movement" rather than the plural "movements"? Since 3次元 means three dimensions, such as length, width, and height, 3次元の動き is the plural "three-dimensional movements", isn't it?

 

ChatGPT:

どちらの回答がお好みですか？

お客様の選択は ChatGPT の改善に役立てられます。

 

ChatGPT

回答 1

In this case, even though the phrase "3次元" refers to three dimensions (length, width, and height), the noun "動き" is describing the motion of an object in three-dimensional space as a single, unified motion. In English, "three-dimensional movement" typically refers to the overall motion of an object within that space, rather than multiple independent movements along each axis.

If the sentence referred to multiple distinct motions of the object in different directions or phases, then using "movements" might be appropriate. However, since "動き" in this context refers to the object’s general motion in 3D space, the singular "movement" captures the idea of the object moving as a whole within those dimensions.

So, in English, "three-dimensional movement" is commonly used to describe the overall motion of an object in 3D space, rather than implying multiple separate motions.

ChatGPT

回答 2

The phrase "3次元の動き" refers to movement within three dimensions—length, width, and height. However, in English, "three-dimensional movement" is typically treated as a singular concept, representing the overall motion in all three dimensions as a unified action. This is why I used the singular "movement."

If you were referring to multiple distinct movements within the three-dimensional space (e.g., separate motions along each axis), then "three-dimensional movements" in the plural would be appropriate. However, in the context of predicting how an object moves within 3D space, "movement" is commonly used to describe the total or combined motion across those dimensions.

So, the translation "The device predicts the three-dimensional movement of the object" is standard in English, reflecting the idea that it is a single movement occurring within a three-dimensional space.

 

Me: Referring back to your first translation, "The device tracks the movement of both the target object and the reference object", is it better to say "The device tracks a movement of both the target object and the reference object" in the context of a patent claim if the word "movement" has no precedent?

ChatGPT:

In the context of a patent claim, precision in language is crucial, and the choice between "a movement" and "the movement" can significantly impact the scope of the claim.

• "The movement": This implies that there is a specific, previously defined movement being tracked. It suggests that "movement" has been mentioned or specified earlier in the claim or in the patent description.

• "A movement": This is more general and introduces the concept of "movement" for the first time. It does not require any prior definition and could imply any type of movement that the device is capable of tracking.

If the word "movement" has no precedent and you are introducing the concept for the first time, "a movement" would be more appropriate. This phrasing would generally be broader and more flexible, which can be advantageous in patent claims as it may cover a wider range of potential implementations.

So, in the context of a patent claim, it is indeed better to say:

"The device tracks a movement of both the target object and the reference object."

This phrasing introduces the concept of "movement" in a broad and undefined manner, which is often preferable when seeking to maximize the scope of the patent claim.

リアルタイムで

US9300811(MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC [US])
[0008] According to various embodiments described herein, notifications pertaining to status information can be provided to participants. For example, a participant can be notified upon reaching real time in the conference call. Following this example, an indication can be transmitted from a server (e.g., communications server, replay server, etc.) to a computing device of the participant when the participant reaches real time in the conference call. Further, the indication can cause the computing device to output a notification that signifies that the participant is at real time in the conference call. By way of another example, a participant can be notified when a disparate participant reaches real time in the conference call. Moreover, when at real time, a participant may be permitted to participate in the conference call.

立ち上がり

US8502403(NEW WORLD GENERATION INC [CA])
[0212] In a further embodiment, the generators can be designed to operate at higher than their rated load to accommodate wind gusts that occur beyond the normal operating range of the turbine.
【００９０】
  さらなる実施の形態では、発電機は、タービンの通常の動作範囲を超えて起こる突風を受けるように、これら発電機の定格負荷よりも高いところで動作するように設計されることができる。

For example, the generators can be designed to withstand a torque demand of 120% above the rated load in order to control the rotor speed and avoid over-speeding caused by a wind speed that is temporarily above the normal speed range of the turbine.
例えば、これら発電機は、ロータの速度を制御し、タービンの通常の速度範囲を一時的に超えた風速により引き起こされる超過速度を避けるために、定格負荷を超えた１２０％のトルクの需要量に耐えるように設計されることができる。

The controller is programmed to allow a torque demand of 120% from the electrical generators when the rotor speed exceeds a predetermined set value, or the rate of ramp-up of the rotor speed exceeds a predetermined set value. 
ロータの速度が所定の設定値を超えたとき、又はロータの速度の立ち上がり（ramp-up）速度が所定の設定値を超えたとき、制御装置は、電力発電機から１２０％のトルクの需要量を与える（＊許容する）ようにプログラムされる。

US7484096(ENERGY ABSORPTION SYSTEM [US])
 In this way, the light car's energy is absorbed by a single bay, such that no bay to bay transition effects will be experienced with the corresponding high deceleration spikes.
この様に、軽量乗用車のエネルギーは１つのベイで吸収されるので、対応する高減速度の立ち上がり波形を伴うベイからベイへの転移現象は起こらない。

After the second bay, the third (more rearward bay) collapses.
第２ベイの後、第３（更に後方のベイ）が潰れる。

Finally, the first (forward) bay collapses.
最後に、第１（前方の）ベイが潰れる。

In this way, the first bay collapse only at the end of an impact by the heaviest design vehicle. 
この様に、第１ベイは、最重量設計車両による衝突の最後になって潰れる。

As such, the first bay acts as a sled, which resists rocking of the support members and further minimizes the stopping distance of lighter weight vehicles through momentum (mass) transfer. 
この様に、第１ベイは、支持部材のロッキングに抵抗し、更に運動量（質量）移動により軽量車両の停止距離をできる限り短くする、そりとして機能する。

EP4346997(PRESIDIO MEDICAL INC [US])
[0052] Not to be limited by theory,
【００２６】
  理論によって限定されるものではないが、

the propagation of action potentials in electrically excitable tissue, e.g., neural tissue,
電気的に興奮可能な組織、例えば神経組織における活動電位の伝播は、

leads to refractory periods on the order of milliseconds for sodium channels, typically between about 1 ms and about 20 ms, or between about 2 ms and about 5 ms for the combined absolute and relative refractory periods,
ナトリウムチャネルではミリ秒オーダ、典型的には、約1ミリ秒と約20ミリ秒との間、または絶対不応期と相対不応期とを合わせると約2ミリ秒と5ミリ秒との間の不応期をもたらし、

thus very low frequency AC current waveforms with

half periods meaningfully greater than this refractory period (e.g., greater than about 1 ms, 1.5 ms, 2 ms, 2.5 ms, 3 ms, 10 ms, 30 ms, 50 ms, 100 ms, 300 ms, 500 ms, 1000 ms, 2000 ms, 5000 ms, 6000 ms or more)
したがって、この不応期よりも有意に長い(例えば、約1ミリ秒、1.5ミリ秒、2ミリ秒、2.5ミリ秒、3ミリ秒、10ミリ秒、30ミリ秒、50ミリ秒、100ミリ秒、300ミリ秒、500ミリ秒、1000ミリ秒、2000ミリ秒、5000ミリ秒、6000ミリ秒またはそれ以上を超える)半周期を有し、

and have sufficiently low differential rates (e.g., rise and fall-times) to not induce action potentials
活動電位を誘発しないように十分に低い微分速度(例えば、立ち上がり時間および立ち上がり時間)

を有する非常に低い周波数のAC電流波形も、

can also be used to create tissue blockade or attenuation, and will be perceived by electrically excitable tissue as a direct current stimulus.
組織の阻止または減衰を作り出すために使用されることが可能であり、電気的に興奮可能な組織によって直流電流刺激として知覚される。