compriseとincludeの違い

What is the difference between "comprise" and "include"? Are they always interchangeable?

ChatGPT:

"Comprise" and "include" are often used interchangeably in everyday language, but they have different nuances and rules of usage, especially in technical or formal writing.

Key Differences

1. "Comprise" means "consist of" and implies completeness.

   • The whole is made up of the listed parts, and nothing else.
   • Example:
     • The committee comprises five members. (It has exactly five members.)
     • The machine comprises a motor, a gearbox, and a control unit. (These are all the essential parts.)

2. "Include" means "contain as part of a larger whole" and suggests incompleteness.

   • It implies that the listed items are just some of the components, but not necessarily all.
   • Example:
     • The committee includes five members. (There may be more than five members.)
     • The machine includes a motor and a gearbox. (There might be other parts as well.)

Are They Always Interchangeable?

No, they are not always interchangeable, especially when precision matters.

• If you mean the entire composition of something, use "comprise".

  • The package comprises a user manual, a charger, and the device. (These are all the components.)

• If you mean only some of the components, use "include".

  • The package includes a charger. (There may be other items as well.)

Common Usage Notes

• "Comprise" is used in an active form and does not require "of" (although "comprised of" is common in informal use, it is considered incorrect in strict formal writing).

  • ✅ The system comprises three modules.
  • ❌ The system is comprised of three modules. (Considered incorrect in formal writing.)

• "Include" is more flexible and can be used in passive voice.

  • ✅ The system is included in the package.
  • ✅ The package includes a user manual and accessories.

Summary

Word	Meaning	Implies Completeness?	Example
Comprise	Consist of	✅ Yes, all parts are listed	The car comprises an engine, a chassis, and wheels.
Include	Contain as part of a whole	❌ No, other parts may exist	The car includes a GPS system. (It has other parts too.)

In casual writing, the difference is often ignored, but in precise technical or legal contexts, choosing the correct word can be important.

あなた:

In patents, "comprise" is typically used as a non-limiting, "open" verb with virtually the same meaning as "include", particularly in claims, isn't it?

ChatGPT:

Yes, in patents, the verb "comprise" is generally used as an open-ended, non-limiting term, meaning "includes but is not limited to." This is a key distinction from its stricter meaning in general English, where it typically implies completeness.

"Comprise" in Patent Claims

• In patent claims, "comprise" does not imply that the listed elements are the only components present.
• It allows for additional unlisted elements, making the scope broader.
• Example:
  • A device comprising a motor, a battery, and a control circuit.
  • This means the device must have at least these three components, but it may also have additional ones.

"Include" in Patent Claims

• "Include" is also used in a non-limiting way, similar to "comprise."
• However, "comprise" is the preferred term in patent drafting because it has been consistently interpreted in case law as open-ended.
• Example:
  • A device including a motor, a battery, and a control circuit.
  • This would also be understood as open-ended, but "comprise" is the more standard choice in patents.

"Consist of" as a Limiting Term

• "Consist of" is used when the intent is to exclude any additional elements.
• Example:
  • A device consisting of a motor, a battery, and a control circuit.
  • This means the device must have only these three components and nothing else.

Summary

Term	Meaning in Patents	Limiting?
Comprise	Includes, but is not limited to	❌ No (open-ended)
Include	Contains as part of a whole, may have more	❌ No (open-ended, but less common than "comprise")
Consist of	Contains only the listed elements, nothing more	✅ Yes (closed/limiting)

Thus, in patent claims, "comprise" is almost always the preferred choice because it keeps the scope broad, making it harder for competitors to design around the claim.

測定装置：measurement, measuring

音圧測定装置

ChatGPT:

Sound pressure measurement device

あなた:

How about "Sound pressure measuring device"?

ChatGPT:

Both "sound pressure measurement device" and "sound pressure measuring device" are correct, but there is a slight nuance:

• "Sound pressure measurement device" emphasizes the function of the device as something used for measurement.
• "Sound pressure measuring device" emphasizes that the device itself is actively performing the measuring.

If the context is technical (such as in patents or product descriptions), "sound pressure measurement device" may be preferable since it aligns with standard terminology for instruments. However, if describing a device that continuously measures sound pressure, "sound pressure measuring device" could be suitable.

あなた:

Give me examples where "measuring device" or "measurement device" are preferable or more common.

ChatGPT:

Here are some examples where "measuring device" or "measurement device" is preferable or more common:

"Measuring Device" (when emphasizing the device’s active role in measuring)

1. Blood Pressure Measuring Device – A device that actively measures blood pressure.
2. Temperature Measuring Device – A thermometer or sensor that continuously or periodically measures temperature.
3. Gas Flow Measuring Device – A device that measures the flow rate of gas.
4. Distance Measuring Device – A laser rangefinder or ultrasonic sensor used for measuring distance.
5. Weight Measuring Device – A scale or load cell that actively determines weight.

"Measurement Device" (when referring to the instrument as a tool for measurement)

1. Sound Pressure Measurement Device – A device used for measuring sound pressure (commonly used in technical descriptions).
2. Vibration Measurement Device – A tool used to measure vibration levels.
3. Force Measurement Device – A device like a load cell that is used for force measurement.
4. Optical Measurement Device – A device that performs optical measurements (e.g., laser interferometers).
5. Radiation Measurement Device – A tool used to measure radiation levels (such as a Geiger counter).

General Guideline

• "Measuring device" is more common when referring to a device that is actively measuring something in real time.
• "Measurement device" is more common when describing a device used for measurement in a broader sense, often in technical, scientific, or engineering contexts.

For "sound pressure", "sound pressure measurement device" is more commonly used, as it refers to an instrument designed for the purpose of measuring sound pressure.

あなた:

Is the difference in nuance so slight or subtle as to be ignorable?

ChatGPT:

In most cases, the difference between "measuring device" and "measurement device" is subtle and can often be ignored without causing confusion. Many native speakers, even in technical fields, use them interchangeably. However, in formal, technical, or patent contexts, the distinction can be relevant:

• "Measuring device" → Slightly more active; emphasizes the device’s function of performing measurement.
• "Measurement device" → Slightly more neutral; emphasizes the device as a tool used for measurement.

That said, the difference is not critical in most practical situations. In technical documents, one term may be more conventional depending on industry standards, but in general communication, either would be understood. For "sound pressure measurement device", this phrase is more common in technical usage, but "sound pressure measuring device" wouldn't be incorrect.

 

（以下既出）

Measurement:
EP4102990(PEPSICO INC [US])
These examples further illustrate that this method can produce measurement results with nearly the same precision as a more complex, off-line density measurement apparatus and method.
これらの実施例は、この方法が、より複雑なオフライン密度測定装置及び方法とほぼ同じ精度で測定結果をもたらすことができることを更に示す。

US2020251886
[0034] In another aspect of the present disclosure, an elasticity measurement device includes
【００３４】
  本開示の別態様では、弾性測定装置は、

a shaft having a first end and a second end,
第１の端部及び第２の端部を有するシャフトと、

US10119816
[0017] According to some embodiments, the measurement apparatus comprises a compound rotational stage that includes an azimuthal rotational stage and an elevational rotational stage secured to the azimuthal rotational stage,
【００１６】
  幾つかの実施形態によると、測定装置は、方位回転ステージと、当該方位回転ステージに固定された俯仰回転ステージとを含む、複合回転ステージを備える。

Measuring:
US11289221(WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CO LLC [US])
[0008] An improved detection apparatus that is set forth in greater detail below is a flow and temperature measuring device in the form of a tube positioned parallel to a coolant flow stream
【０００９】
  より詳細に後述される改良された検出装置は、冷却剤の流れに平行に配置されたチューブの形態の流れおよび温度測定装置であり、

US11090848(TORAY PLASTICS AMERICA INC [US])
[0104] In order to determine whether the temperature of the barrel element is properly maintained for injecting liquid, the barrel element can include a temperature sensor well 22 .
【００８０】
  バレル要素の温度が液体の注入にとって適正に維持されているかどうかを判定するため、バレル要素は、温度センサウェル２２を有するのが良い。

Similar to the cooling channels and the injection ports, the temperature sensor well can be shown as dotted lines indicating that the well is inside the body of the barrel element.
冷却チャネルおよび注入ポートと同様に、温度センサウェルは、このウェルがバレル要素の本体内に位置していることを指示する点線として示されるのが良い。

The temperature sensor well can be configured to receive a temperature measuring device such as a temperature probe in order to determine the temperature of the barrel element near the site of injection. 
温度センサウェルは、注入部位の近くのバレル要素の温度を測定するために温度測定装置、例えば温度プローブを受け入れるよう構成されているのが良い。

WO2014209516(BOEING CO [US])
Advantageously, the device further comprises a normality system for adjusting an angle between the platform and the surface to be drilled.
【０００９】
  有利には、上記装置は、前記プラットフォームと穿孔対象の前記表面との間の角度を調節するための正規化システムを更に含む。

Preferably, the normality system comprises a pivot angle measuring device, a control unit coupled to the pivot angle measuring device,
好ましくは、上記正規化システムは、枢動角度測定装置と、当該枢動角度測定装置と接続された制御ユニットと、

US2018141143(KLINGELNBERG AG [CH])
[0003] In FIG. 1, a schematic view is shown of a prior-art gear-cutting machine 10 (e.g. a gear milling machine or a gear grinding machine) and a measuring device 20 (here in the form of a separate measuring device) of the prior art (e.g. a coordinate measuring device).
【０００２】
  図１では、従来技術の歯切り盤１０（例えば、歯切り用フライス盤又は歯車研削盤）および従来技術（例えば、座標測定装置）の測定装置２０（ここでは独立した測定装置の形式）についての概略図が図示されている。

 US2022390459(BECKMAN COULTER INC [US])
Chemiluminescence (emission) intensity can be measured using a Turner Designs (Sunnyvale, Calif.) model TD-20e luminometer,
【０１５０】
  化学発光（発光）強度を、Ｔｕｒｎｅｒ  Ｄｅｓｉｇｎｓ（Ｓｕｎｎｙｖａｌｅ，ＣＡ）のモデルＴＤ－２０ｅルミノメーター、

a BMG Labtech luminescence plate reader, or a charge-coupled device (CCD) camera luminometer, or any other suitable light intensity measuring devices.
ＢＭＧ  Ｌａｂｔｅｃｈルミネセンスプレートリーダー、又は電荷結合デバイス（ＣＣＤ）カメラルミメーター、又は他の任意の適切な光強度測定装置を用いて測定することができる。

so thatの繰り返し

Which is better concerning the use of "so that"? 1. The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed and the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing. 2. The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed, and the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing. 3. The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed, and so that the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing. 4. The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed and so that the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing. 5. The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed, and that the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing. 6. The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed and that the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing.

ChatGPT:

Here’s an analysis of each option regarding clarity, correctness, and fluency:

Key Considerations When Using "so that"

• "So that" introduces a purpose or result.
• If multiple clauses share the same purpose, one "so that" is usually enough.
• If multiple independent purposes/results exist, repeating "so that" is acceptable but can feel wordy.
• Using "and that" after "so that" is incorrect because "so that" already serves as a subordinating conjunction.

---

Analysis of Each Option

1. "The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed and the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing."

   • ❌ Incorrect → The second clause lacks an explicit "so that", making the structure unclear.
   • Better: "so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed and so that the brake is applied..."

2. "The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed, and the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing."

   • ✅ Acceptable → The comma before "and" separates the ideas, treating them as two results.
   • Slight issue: The second clause lacks an explicit connection to "so that," making the relationship weaker.

3. "The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed, and so that the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing."

   • ✅ Grammatically correct → The repeated "so that" makes each result explicit.
   • Slightly wordy → The repetition is not always necessary unless emphasizing separate purposes.

4. "The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed and so that the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing."

   • ✅ Best balance of clarity and conciseness
   • Correct structure → Both clauses clearly depend on "so that," avoiding ambiguity.

5. "The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed, and that the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing."

   • ❌ Incorrect → "So that" and "and that" do not work together in this way.
   • Fix: Remove "and that" or replace "so that" with "ensuring."

6. "The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed and that the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing."

   • ❌ Incorrect → "And that" cannot follow "so that."
   • Fix: Use "and so that" or just "so that" once for both clauses.

---

Best Choice

✅ Option 4:
"The control unit controls the vehicle so that the vehicle moves at a certain speed and so that the brake of the vehicle is applied at an appropriate timing."

• Clearly links both results to the control unit’s action.
• Eliminates ambiguity while avoiding excessive wordiness.

Would you like an even more natural version for readability? 😊

接合体

この接合体は、絶縁部材と、導通部材と、ろう材とを含む。

ChatGPT:

ChatGPT

This joint structure includes an insulating member, a conductive member, and a brazing material.

この接合体は、絶縁部材と、導通部材と、ろう材とを含む。

 

ChatGPT:

ChatGPT

This joint structure includes an insulating member, a conductive member, and a brazing material.

あなた:

How about "bonded body", "assembly", or "composite" instead of "joint structure"?

ChatGPT:

ChatGPT

Each alternative—"bonded body," "assembly," or "composite"—has slightly different nuances, so the choice depends on the specific context and intended emphasis. Here's an analysis:

1. "Bonded Body"

• Meaning: Emphasizes the result of bonding the components together.
• Suitability: Best if the focus is on the bonding process or the fact that the components are joined.
• Revised Sentence:
  • "This bonded body includes an insulating member, a conductive member, and a brazing material."
• Verdict: Suitable for technical contexts where the bonding process is key.

---

2. "Assembly"

• Meaning: Suggests a group of components brought together to form a functional unit.
• Suitability: Appropriate if the components are not permanently bonded and may be disassembled or if the focus is on the function of the combined parts.
• Revised Sentence:
  • "This assembly includes an insulating member, a conductive member, and a brazing material."
• Verdict: Use if the structure is modular or designed for assembly rather than permanent bonding.

---

3. "Composite"

• Meaning: Highlights that the result is a combination of materials forming a single entity, often with enhanced properties due to their combination.
• Suitability: Best if the focus is on the material properties or integration rather than the joining process itself.
• Revised Sentence:
  • "This composite includes an insulating member, a conductive member, and a brazing material."
• Verdict: Use for contexts emphasizing material integration or structural properties.

---

4. "Joint Structure" (Original)

• Meaning: Focuses on the design or functionality of the structure where the components are joined.
• Suitability: Appropriate for contexts where the mechanical or structural nature of the joint is important.
• Verdict: Best for engineering contexts emphasizing the connection itself.

---

Recommendation:

• Use "bonded body" if the emphasis is on the result of bonding.
• Use "assembly" if the focus is on the assembled components' function or modularity.
• Use "composite" if the focus is on material integration or performance.
• Stick with "joint structure" for general engineering contexts where the joint's design or function is key.

するステップ

Which is more common, conventional or better, "step for ...ing" or "step in which ..." particularly in the claims section of patents?

ChatGPT:

In patent claims, the phrase "step for ...ing" is more conventional and widely accepted than "step in which ..." when describing method steps.

Comparison in Patent Claims:

1. "Step for ...ing"

   • This is the standard phrasing in means-plus-function language (35 U.S.C. §112, ¶6 in U.S. patents).
   • It clearly defines the function of the step without specifying how the action is performed.
   • Example:
     • "A step for performing cold forming on a base material to produce a helical-shaped formed material."
     • "A step for transmitting data to a remote server."
   • This phrasing is more functional and widely used in patent claims.

2. "Step in which ..."

   • This phrase tends to be less common because it emphasizes the event happening within the step rather than the function of the step itself.
   • It can sound more descriptive than functional, which might be less ideal for method claims.
   • Example:
     • "A step in which cold forming is performed on a base material to produce a helical-shaped formed material."
     • "A step in which data is transmitted to a remote server."
   • This phrasing feels slightly passive and indirect compared to "step for ...ing."

Conclusion:

If you are drafting or translating a patent claim, I strongly recommend using "step for ...ing" because it aligns with conventional patent claim language, is functionally clear, and avoids unnecessary passivity.

Would you like further refinements based on a specific patent jurisdiction (e.g., USPTO, EPO, JPO)?

放置後測定

放置後測定工程

ChatGPT:

ChatGPT

The post-placement measurement step refers to a step in a process where measurements are taken after an object or material has been placed or left to rest for a specified period.

How about "post-storage measurement"?

ChatGPT:

ChatGPT

"Post-storage measurement" works well if the context implies that the object or material is being measured after a storage or resting period. It emphasizes the idea that the item has been kept or stored for some time before the measurement takes place.

Here's the revised phrasing:

"The post-storage measurement step"

This would be appropriate if "放置" specifically implies "storage" or "leaving the item in a resting state." However, if "放置" simply means "leaving" or "placing" without emphasizing storage, "post-placement measurement" might still be more accurate. The choice depends on the intended nuance.

 

 

US9725581(SK CHEMICALS CO LTD [KR])
[0080] (3) Maintenance of Reflectivity: maintenance of reflectivity was measured according to the following Equation 2.
【００７０】
  （３）反射率の維持率：下記式２により反射率の維持率（Ｙ）を求めた。

Y=R t /R 0 *100  [Equation 2]
［式２］
  Ｙ＝Ｒ^ｔ／Ｒ^０＊１００

[0081] said R0 is the reflectivity obtained by the measuring method of (1) Initial Reflectivity, and Rt is the reflectivity after storing at high temperature obtained by the measuring method of (2) Heat Resistance.
前記Ｒ^０は、（１）の初期反射率の測定方法で得られた反射率であり、前記Ｒ^ｔは、（２）の耐熱性の測定方法で得られた高温放置後測定された反射率である。

US2018087131(NIPPON STEEL & SUMITOMO METAL CORP [JP])
[0106] For the sample in Conventional examples 5 and 6, leaving the sample until the measurement of rest potential serves as an endurance test on vapor deposition material and coating material formed on the surfaces of the samples.
【００８２】
  自然電位を測定するまでの放置時は、従来例５および６の試料については、それぞれ、表面に形成した蒸着材およびコーティング材の耐久試験を兼ねるものであった。

 

 

プーチンは騙された？

プーチンは西側に嵌められた、ウクライナ東部を保護したという、この動画の内容が真実かどうか分からない。

しかし、領土拡大の野望やNATO拡大の被害妄想に憑りつかれたプーチンが突然ウクライナに攻め込んだというような話も眉唾かもしれない。

今日のウクライナは明日の台湾だという話もあるが、軍事作戦で台湾を占領ないし「奪還」して中国が得するのか？緩衝地帯としての役目もありそうだし、台湾や香港の優秀さや地位はすなわち中国の優秀さの証明になっている。単なる民族や国家の誇りなどで戦争するはずがない。有事が起こるとすれば外部からの扇動なんじゃないか？国家が多大な損害を伴う行動に出るには、普通はそれなりの理由があるはずだと思います。

結局宗教と言語で線を引かないとダメなんじゃないか？ウクライナ東部はロシアに属した方が良いんでは？

さらに結局は肉体的、精神的、金銭的強者（軍事産業や、「国際資本」とか）が弱者を搾取するのが世の常だと思わざるを得ません。

Understanding Aerodynamic Lift

揚力を生むのは翼形上の気圧の分布であり、その分布の生じる理由の説明としてベルヌーイの定理とニュートンの第3法則があるが、まだよくわからない点も多いらしい。

 

 

 

電動ラジコン飛行機用のエンジンサウンドシステム

バズリクソンズA2：第8週

一日着なかったので腕皺が少し薄くなったようです。

基板を搬送

US11279032(APPLIED MATERIALS INC [US])
[0003] Electronic device manufacturing systems, such as substrate processing systems, include multiple process chambers and load lock chambers.
【０００２】
  ［００２］  基板処理システムなどの電子デバイス製造システムは、複数の処理チャンバ及びロードロックチャンバを含む。

Such chambers are included in cluster tools where a plurality of process chambers are distributed about a transfer chamber, for example.
このようなチャンバは、例えば、複数の処理チャンバが移送チャンバの周りに分配されるクラスタツールに含まれる。

Electronic device manufacturing systems also include a factory interface and storage areas (e.g., front opening unified pods (FOUPs)).
また、電子デバイス製造システムは、ファクトリインターフェース及び収容領域（例えば、前方開口型統一ポッド（ＦＯＵＰ））を含む。

Electronic device manufacturing systems employ articulated robots or multi-arm robots, which are housed within the transfer chamber to transport substrates between the various process chambers and load lock chambers and are housed within the factory interface to transport substrates between the storage areas and the load lock chambers. 
電子デバイス製造システムは、多関節ロボット又は多腕ロボットを採用しており、これらロボットは、様々な処理チャンバとロードロックチャンバとの間で基板を搬送するために移送チャンバ内に収容され、収容領域とロードロックチャンバとの間で基板を搬送するためにファクトリインターフェース内に収容される。

US2023245862(LAM RES CORP [US])
[0032] FIG. 2 shows a plan view of the tool 100 .
【００３２】
  図２は、ツール１００の平面図を示す。

The tool 100 includes the FOUPs 104 , the EFEM and load lock 106 , the substrate processing chambers 109 , and power lock out and tag out panel 110 .
ツール１００は、ＦＯＵＰ１０４と、ＥＦＥＭおよびロードロック１０６と、基板処理チャンバ１０９と、パワーロックアウトおよびタグアウトパネル１１０と、を含む。

The tool has an overall footprint identified by dotted lines 220 .
ツールは、点線２２０によって識別される設置面積全体を有する。

The tool 100 further includes a substrate transfer module 222 for transferring substrates to and from the substrate processing chambers 109 . 
ツール１００は、基板処理チャンバ１０９へおよび基板処理チャンバ１０９から基板を搬送するための基板搬送モジュール２２２をさらに含む。

US11444521(BROOKS AUTOMATION INC [US])
[0032] The vacuum back end 1020 generally includes a transport chamber 1025 , one or more processing station(s) 1030 and any suitable transfer robot 1014 which may include one or more aspects of the disclosed embodiments described herein.
【００１２】
  真空バックエンド１０２０は、一般的に、搬送チャンバ１０２５、１つまたは複数の処理ステーション１０３０、および、本明細書で説明される、開示される実施形態の１つまたは複数の態様を含んでいてもよい任意の適切な移送ロボット１０１４を含む。

The transfer robot 1014 will be described below and may be located within the transport chamber 1025 to transport substrates between the load lock 1010 and the various processing stations 1030 .
移送ロボット１０１４は、以下において説明されるが、ロードロック１０１０と様々な処理ステーション１０３０との間で基板を搬送するために、搬送チャンバ１０２５内に位置していてもよい。

量子デバイス

量子コンピュータが使える「量子計算クラウドサービス」を理研が無償提供開始　国産超伝導量子コンピュータ初号機を公開　大阪大学や富士通、NTTなどと協力、2023年3月27日 13時17分、livedoor News

 

量子ビット、共振器、フィルタ

JP2022172189A 超伝導複合量子計算回路、国立研究開発法人科学技術振興機構

回路基板１は、一例としてシリコン等の誘電体基板である。回路基板１では、シリコン等の誘電体基板の基板表面Ｓ上に超伝導膜により回路素子の配線パターンＣＰ及び接地パターンＧＰが形成される。なお、回路基板１の材質がシリコンである場合、回路基板１は所定の温度よりも低い温度において備えられ当該シリコンは誘電体となる。

配線パターンＣＰには、量子ビット４と、量子ビット４の状態を観測する観測電極８と、超伝導共振器７と、キャパシター９とが含まれる。図１では、量子ビット４の一例として、量子ビット４－１～４－６が示されている。図１では、超伝導共振器７の一例として、超伝導共振器７－１～７－４が示されている。図１では、キャパシター９の一例として、キャパシター９－１～９－４が示されている。

トランプ政権は成功する

ホリエモン氏がトランプ政権の（特定の）政策が大成功すると発言したとヤフーニュースにありました。見出ししか見てませんが、私も同感です。

私の場合はほとんど根拠の無い直感ですが、例えばウクライナ問題にしても、トランプ氏の「ディール」の他にどうやって終結させるというんでしょうか？トランプ氏が当選してなかったらあと何年ダラダラ戦争が続いたことか。

パレスチナに関してもトランプ氏はアメリカがガザを統治するみたいなことを言っているらしく批判が多いようですが、あの破壊されつくした狭い土地にパレスチナの人々が戻って幸せになれるとは思えない。結局イスラエルが戦争に勝利したのは明白なので、はっきり言ってしまえばパレスチナの人々は勝者の言いなりになるしかない。

マスメディアや民主党は綺麗ごとを言っているようにしか思えない。

私はトランプ氏を応援するし、トランプ政権の下で米国と世界の多くの人々の生活は今までより悪くはならないと思います。

平面視が繰り返される場合

この装置は、基板と、平面視において基板と重なる半導体素子と、平面視において基板と重ならない絶縁部を有する。

ChatGPT:

How about:
"The device includes a substrate, a semiconductor element overlapping the substrate in a plan view, and an insulating portion that does not overlap the substrate in a plan view."

あなた:

It is not necessary to say "the plan view" the second time it is used?

ChatGPT:

Correct, it is not necessary to repeat "in a plan view" the second time（＊質問の意図とは異なる）. The phrase "does not overlap the substrate" is clearly understood to be in the same context.

A more natural revision would be:

"The device includes a substrate, a semiconductor element overlapping the substrate in a plan view, and an insulating portion that does not overlap the substrate."

This avoids redundancy while maintaining clarity.

あなた:

How about: "The device includes a substrate, a semiconductor element overlapping the substrate in a plan view, and an insulating portion that does not overlap the substrate in the plan view"?

ChatGPT:

Your sentence is grammatically correct, but the second "in the plan view" is unnecessary and makes the sentence slightly redundant. Since "in a plan view" is already established for the first overlap description, it is naturally understood that the second mention refers to the same view.

A more concise and natural revision would be:

"The device includes a substrate, a semiconductor element overlapping the substrate in a plan view, and an insulating portion that does not overlap the substrate."

However, if you prefer to explicitly mention "in a plan view" both times for precision, it is still acceptable:

"The device includes a substrate, a semiconductor element overlapping the substrate in a plan view, and an insulating portion that does not overlap the substrate in a plan view."

But typically, technical writing values conciseness, so the first revision is preferable unless absolute clarity is needed.

あなた:

My questions were intended to clarify whether the definite article "the" should be used for the second "plan view" when mentioning "plan view" twice for precision. Should it be "the plan view" or "a plan view" the second time "plan view" is mentioned?

ChatGPT:

When mentioning "plan view" twice for precision, the second instance should generally take "the" rather than "a", because it refers to the same perspective already introduced.

So the more precise form would be:

"The device includes a substrate, a semiconductor element overlapping the substrate in a plan view, and an insulating portion that does not overlap the substrate in the plan view."

Here’s why:

• The first mention of "a plan view" introduces the concept as a general perspective.
• The second mention refers to the same specific plan view already established, making "the plan view" more appropriate.

Using "a plan view" again might imply an entirely new or different plan view, which is unlikely in this context.

可能性が低減された

衝撃による破損の可能性が低減された車両用ライト。

ChatGPT:

"A vehicle light with a reduced likelihood of damage due to impact."

Key Translation Points:

• 「衝撃による」→「due to impact」
  • Specifies the cause of potential damage.
• 「破損の可能性」→「likelihood of damage」
  • "Likelihood" conveys the probability aspect, keeping it natural.
• 「低減された」→「with a reduced likelihood」
  • Keeps the passive nuance while making the phrase flow naturally.
• 「車両用ライト」→「vehicle light」
  • General but precise term for a light used in vehicles.

Let me know if you prefer a different nuance, such as emphasizing the structural design that reduces damage!

あなた:

How about 1. A vehicle light that has a reduced likelihood of damage due to impact. 2. A vehicle light of which the likelihood of damage due to impact is reduced.

 

ChatGPT:

Both of your options are grammatically correct, but the first one sounds more natural and commonly used in technical descriptions. Here's my assessment:

1. "A vehicle light that has a reduced likelihood of damage due to impact."

   • This is natural and clear.
   • "That has" makes it easy to read and avoids awkward phrasing.
   • Commonly used in technical English and product descriptions.

2. "A vehicle light of which the likelihood of damage due to impact is reduced."

   • This structure is grammatically correct but slightly awkward.
   • "Of which" is less commonly used in modern technical English.
   • The sentence sounds more formal and less fluid than the first one.

Recommendation:

The first option is better for naturalness and readability.

If you want a slightly more concise and formal version:
✅ "A vehicle light with a reduced likelihood of damage due to impact."

Would you like to emphasize any particular aspect, such as structural design or shock absorption?