とを２軸とする平面

基板は、正方向と前記正方向と直交する所定方向とを２軸とする平面における断面形状が曲線である。

ChatGPT:

How about:
"The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by two axes: the positive direction and a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction."

This translation clearly specifies the two reference axes and maintains the intended meaning.

あなた:

How about:

1. The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by the two axes of the positive direction and a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction.

2. The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by the two axes corresponding to the positive direction and a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction.

3. The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by the two axes, one in the positive direction and the other a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction.

4. The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by the two axes in the positive direction and a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction.

ChatGPT:

Here’s an evaluation of your options:

1. "The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by the two axes of the positive direction and a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction."

   • This is grammatically correct, but "the two axes of the positive direction" might be slightly ambiguous, as it could imply that both axes are related to the positive direction.

2. "The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by the two axes corresponding to the positive direction and a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction."

   • The phrase "two axes corresponding to" is slightly wordy and may not add much clarity compared to the previous version.

3. "The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by the two axes, one in the positive direction and the other a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction."

   • This is a very clear and natural way to express the idea. The structure avoids ambiguity by explicitly defining the two axes.

4. "The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by the two axes in the positive direction and a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction."

   • This version is slightly awkward because "the two axes in the positive direction" could mistakenly imply that both axes are in the positive direction.

Best Choice:

Option 3 is the most precise and natural, as it explicitly distinguishes between the two directions without unnecessary complexity.

あなた:

Which is better between your initial translation "The substrate has a cross-sectional shape that is curved in a plane defined by two axes: the positive direction and a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction" and my option 3, particularly with regard to "the two axes" and "two axes"?

ChatGPT:

Your Option 3 ("the two axes, one in the positive direction and the other a predetermined direction orthogonal to the positive direction") is slightly clearer and more explicit than my initial translation, especially because it explicitly states that there are two specific axes and describes each one separately.

However, the difference between "the two axes" and "two axes" is subtle but can impact how definitively the reader perceives them:

• "The two axes" implies that these are the only two relevant axes in this context, reinforcing that they are predefined and specific.
• "Two axes" is slightly less restrictive and could be interpreted as any two axes that meet the given criteria, though the rest of the sentence provides clarity.

If the goal is to emphasize that these two axes are uniquely defined within the context (which is likely the case in technical writing), "the two axes" is preferable. Therefore, my initial translation with "the two axes" is slightly stronger in precision. However, your Option 3 is still very good and avoids ambiguity effectively.

あなた:

The one with the definite article "the two axes" is better, isn't it, given that a plane should have no more than two axes?

ChatGPT:

Yes, "the two axes" is better because a plane is inherently defined by exactly two axes. Using "the" reinforces that these are the specific and only two axes relevant in this context.

Saying "two axes" could suggest that there might be other possible pairs of axes, which is unnecessary or slightly ambiguous here. Since the sentence is defining a plane and explicitly stating which two axes define it, the definite article "the two axes" is the more precise and natural choice.