並列に流れる

冷却液源と発熱部との間を流れる冷却液が互いに並列に流れる複数の分流管。

ChatGPT:

ChatGPT

Multiple branch pipes through which the cooling liquid flows in parallel between the cooling liquid source and the heat-generating section.

あなた:

Is the expression " the cooling liquid flows in parallel" natural? Can a single entity flow in parallel?

ChatGPT:

ChatGPT

You're absolutely correct to question whether the phrase "the cooling liquid flows in parallel" is natural. A single entity, such as a liquid, cannot technically "flow in parallel" on its own. Instead, "flows in parallel" typically refers to the paths or channels through which the liquid flows.

Suggested Revisions:

1. "Cooling liquid flows through multiple parallel branch pipes between the cooling liquid source and the heat-generating section."

   • This shifts the focus to the paths being parallel, which is more accurate.

2. "Multiple branch pipes carry cooling liquid in parallel between the cooling liquid source and the heat-generating section."

   • This emphasizes that the pipes operate in parallel.

3. "Cooling liquid flows through multiple branch pipes arranged in parallel between the cooling liquid source and the heat-generating section."

   • This explicitly describes the parallel arrangement of the pipes, which avoids ambiguity.

Recommendation:

Option 1 is concise and natural for most contexts, but Option 3 provides additional clarity if the arrangement of the pipes is particularly important. Would you like to explore other variations?

あなた:

Yet, is your initial translation "Multiple branch pipes through which the cooling liquid flows in parallel between the cooling liquid source and the heat-generating section" understandable and acceptable, even for technical documents such as patents?

ChatGPT:

ChatGPT

Yes, the initial translation "Multiple branch pipes through which the cooling liquid flows in parallel between the cooling liquid source and the heat-generating section" is understandable and acceptable, even for technical documents like patents. Here's why:

1. Clarity:
   The phrase "flows in parallel" is commonly understood in technical contexts to mean that the liquid is flowing through multiple parallel paths (e.g., branch pipes). While a single liquid cannot "flow in parallel" by itself, the technical audience would interpret this as referring to the arrangement of the paths.

2. Conciseness:
   The translation avoids unnecessary verbosity, which is often preferred in patent claims where brevity and precision are valued.

3. Technical Appropriateness:
   The expression "flows in parallel" is used in engineering and scientific literature to describe parallel flow paths, even if it isn't perfectly literal. It’s an established shorthand that technical professionals would recognize.

Conclusion:

The initial translation is both understandable and technically acceptable for patent documents. However, if you want to achieve maximum precision or formality, a more explicit alternative (like "flows through multiple parallel branch pipes") could be slightly clearer. Let me know if you'd like further refinement!