ユーザの利便性：ofは帰属、所有

この技術は、移動体を使用するユーザの利便性を向上させる。

ChatGPT:

A natural and accurate English translation of
この技術は、移動体を使用するユーザの利便性を向上させる。
would be:

"This technology improves the convenience for users of mobile objects."

---

Alternative phrasings depending on tone and clarity:

✅ Slightly smoother:

• "This technology enhances convenience for users of mobile objects."

✅ If you want to clarify "移動体" (depending on context):

• "This technology improves convenience for users operating mobile vehicles."

• "This technology enhances user convenience in the use of mobile platforms."

---

Notes:

• 利便性 → "convenience" is standard.

• 移動体 → "mobile objects" is a literal translation, but depending on the field (e.g., robotics, transport), it can be more naturally rendered as:

  • "mobile platforms"

  • "mobile devices"

  • "mobile bodies"

  • "moving vehicles"

  • "mobile robots"

Let me know what kind of 移動体 is involved, and I can suggest the best phrasing for your context!

あなた:

Why not "convenience of users"?

ChatGPT:

Great question, Yuki! Both "convenience for users" and "convenience of users" are grammatically possible, but they differ subtly in meaning and naturalness, especially in technical or formal writing.

Let’s break it down:

---

✅ "Convenience for users" — Preferred

This phrasing is used when you’re describing something that benefits the users — that is, convenience provided to them.

• It answers the question:
  👉 "Whose convenience is being improved by this technology?"
  ✅ "The users' convenience — provided for them."

Examples:

• "The app improves convenience for customers."

• "The technology enhances convenience for operators of the system."

This construction is very common and natural in technical documentation, marketing, and patents.

---

⚠️ "Convenience of users" — Less natural / slightly ambiguous

This structure implies that users themselves possess convenience as a quality, which can sound a bit abstract or odd.

• It could imply:
  👉 "Users are inherently convenient people" (which is likely not what you mean!)

• Or at best:
  👉 "The inherent level of convenience that users experience" — which sounds more analytical or indirect.

It’s not wrong, but it’s less idiomatic in contexts where you're describing a product, system, or method that makes life easier for users.

---

🔁 Comparison:

<button class="hover:bg-token-main-surface-secondary text-token-text-secondary pointer-events-auto rounded-lg px-1 py-1 opacity-0 transition-opacity duration-200 group-focus-within:opacity-100 group-hover:opacity-100"></button>

Phrase	Meaning / Nuance	Preferred?
convenience for users	Benefit provided to users	✅ Yes — clear and natural
convenience of users	The convenience possessed by users	❌ Less natural, slightly awkward

---

✅ Your sentence:

"This technology improves the convenience for users of mobile objects."

This is the idiomatic and precise way to express what the Japanese sentence means.