Idiosyncrasies of German patent translation — part 3

Standard German patent terms

As with all languages, German follows strict formal conventions with respect to patent terminology. There are many German patent words and phrases that have precise English equivalent terms. Unfortunately, the Internet is littered with poorly translated German patents, and so it is not uncommon to find incorrectly translated terms being used in many English translations of German patents.

A term like “im Wesentlichen”, for instance, has a precise meaning and equivalent standard translation in patent texts (i.e. as “substantially” – meaning ‘for the most part’, when the allowance for slight deviation prevents an invention from being unnecessarily limited in scope to ‘overly’ precise parameters), whereas it is often found incorrectly translated and understood. (For instance, the similar term ‘wesentlich’ has a completely separate meaning (“essential”) in patent terminology).

Even in the same patent text, it is also possible to find words used in different contexts and thus to mean different things. For example, “Verfahren” could signify a “method”, a “process” more generally (i.e. not pertaining to the invention), application “proceedings” or even something like “displace”/“displacement”. The word “Gegenstand” most often refers to “subject matter” of a patent, but could also, in a given patent text, refer simply and generically to an “object”. Solid knowledge of key patent terminology is essential to the correct and precise translation of German patents into English. There are hundreds of precise patent terms that need to be learned and correctly applied when translating from German to English. It is not enough to just know the terms. For example, it may be important in a given context to discern where the author of a text is referring generically with “Verfahren” to a “process” that is being used in a claimed “method” so as not to confuse and conflate the term with the claimed subject matter.

Article usage

Sometimes it is also a matter of understanding conventions pertaining to the use of “articles”. “Subject matter” (“Gegenstand” in German), for instance, is not used with the indefinite article in English patents (or patent translations), and the plural is not “subject matters”, but “subjects”. The German “Gegenstand der Erfindung”, however, is often to be translated into English as “the invention relates to..”, rather than any construction involving “subject matter”. The subject matter of a set of claims is often presented in German without the use of articles: e.g. “Verfahren zum/zur […]”, i.e. “Method for […]”). It is common practice to refer to the first instance of the subject matter (i.e. ‘method’ in this case) in English with the indefinite article (e.g. “A method for manufacturing”, and then to use the definite article for dependent claims (e.g “The method according to claim 1 […]”).

Article usage in English and German generally differs, but in the case of patents it is a matter of learning a whole set of unique patent conventions when it comes to articles. For example, “Der unabhängige Anspruch 1” is translated as “independent claim 1”, but “der geltende Anspruch 1” is correctly translated with the definite article in English as “the current claim 1”.

Translating terminology of an invention

Your German to English translator will often need to do research in order to correctly translate certain terms. Referring to the IPC (categories), any possible patent family and priority documents, the closest prior art and ultimately the patent drawings and the description/specification of an invention will be required in order to accurately translate certain terms. The drawings are often indispensable when it comes to interpreting the meaning of some German terms, particularly when there is nothing but a cursory mention of them in the description.

A common example is “Grund-”, which in compound nouns could mean a “base” but also “main”. For example, “Grundlkörper” might mean “main body” or “base body”. Context is key and sometimes it is important to determine the element’s position in relation to other system or device components, which is often only possible by referring to the available drawings.

The term “Steg” is another favourite, which could easily be translated into English in a dozen different ways depending on the context — examples including “web”, “bridge”, “connecting piece”, “rib”, “bar” etc. In this case, it is necessary to determine the shape and function of “Steg” to find the correct English translation.

Conclusion

When translating German patents to English, not only are experience, proficiency and research a requisite for all good and successful patent translators, but knowledge of and access to standard patent formulations, terms, conventions and style guides are also indispensable.

/0 Comments/by

Idiosyncrasies of German patent translation — part 2

German patent texts are typically characterised by long, intricate sentences packed with technical details. The German language’s system of gender and cases in particular makes the meaning of nested clauses a lot easier to follow and less ambiguous than would be the case with equivalent sentence structure in English.

When translating German patents into English, it is important to ensure that ambiguity is not introduced into the English by rigidly following German sentence structure.

Relative pronouns

In English, relative pronouns (e.g. “which” and “that”) commonly immediately follow the noun or noun clause to which they refer.

With a German sentence like “An der Stirnseite des Gefäßes ist ein Rohr angeordnet, das sich in Richtung des Anlagenauslasses erstreckt”, to use the relative pronoun “which” as a translation of “das” might introduce ambiguity in an English translation: “A tube is arranged on the end face of the vessel, which extends in the direction of the system outlet”. The “which extends” could be misconstrued as referring to “the vessel” rather than the “tube”. In this case, it would be clearer to replace the relative pronoun with the conjunction “and”: “A tube is arranged on the end face of the vessel and extends in the direction of the system outlet”. When translating German patents into English, skill and discernment are needed in knowing when and how a different word order and/or structure is/are required.

In the context of relative pronouns, German’s use of commas to demarcate clauses also means that it is not always immediately apparent when a relative clause is a defining or non-defining relative clause. However, the placement of commas in English is particularly significant since the absence of a comma before a “which” relative clause will signify a defining clause. An understanding of the broader context is essential here to correctly differentiate between defining and non-defining clauses when translating German patents into English. An encompassing view and understanding of the invention by referring to the description, claims and drawings is paramount.

Active/passive voice

German patents heavily rely on passive voice to maintain an objective and formal tone (e.g. “Es wird gezeigt, dass…” = “It is shown that…”), whereas English patents tend to favour a more direct active voice in most cases where possible, often for the sake of readability. The main exception to intentionally rendering passive sentences of the German text as active constructions would most certainly be in the case of patent claims, where there is often less leeway in changing the structure of sentences. The structure of claims has often been chosen deliberately and for legally significant reasons.

As a result of the combination of the passive voice and seemingly ‘superfluous’ relative clauses, the meaning in English can get particularly convoluted if a literal translation is followed. This might be case in sentences using a word form like “durchströmbar” (e.g. “Das System ist mit Kühlmittel durchströmbar, das … zugeführt wird” – “Coolant can flow through the system and is fed …”; the German reads literally as “The system is flowed through by coolant, which is fed […]). In this case, a kind of passive construction in the German is translated with the active voice in the English translation and without the use of a relative clause since the “coolant” is the subject of both clauses.

/0 Comments/by

Idiosyncrasies of German patent translation — part 1

Why translate German patents?

Since Germany is a contracting nation to the PTC and EPC, there is broad scope for getting German patents validated and/or ‘counter-filed’ in other countries as part of an international patent application. Given the dominance of English, not only as an official and accepted language with WIPO, EPO and many International Searching Authorities, but also as a major global language of science and trade, there is equally great need for German to English patent translation.

Patent translations in English are often used as an intermediary language for further translation into other regional languages. This makes the precision of such German to English translations particularly important. Seemingly minor discrepancies, errors or inconsistencies could potentially be magnified by the time a second or third translation is produced on the basis of the first English translation.

Translation into any language will have its own unique set of challenges and intricacies, and German to English translation is no exception.

General requirements of patent translation

Every single patent translation brings its own new and context-dependent challenges, where interpretation of meaning is sought across the different patent application documents (e.g. support and clarification of the claims will be sought in the description and drawings to an invention). In fact, it is always necessary to cross-reference parts of any text among the relevant application documents and drawings, not only for the sake of consistency of terms in the translation, but also to ensure the most basic understanding of how various components of an invention relate to one another and their nature (function, shape, location etc.). The translator will also often have to refer to a family document or even a prior art document for the sake of clarity.

Aside from the need for ‘intrinsic’ interpretation (i.e. using the text in question) of a patent document and its associated application documents (i.e. with the need to seek coherence, logic and consistency within a text and its translation), humans are messy, fallible and often illogical creatures. The authors of patent documents will create very real challenges for very human reasons: with typographical errors, inconsistent usage of terms, incorrect or inconsistent use of reference signs, errors with syntax and grammar, non-adherence to drafting rules and guidelines and/or inadvertent logical errors. It takes a degree of skill and experience to navigate these obstacles — knowing when to reproduce errors, find creative workarounds or make minor corrections (e.g. with basic typographical errors). In the case of some egregious errors in a source text, at first it can appear impossible to find an adequate translation. However, no matter the type of error encountered, the nature of the source language (e.g. German) will inevitably shape the form that many of those errors will take.

We will explore and share some of the unique aspects of German translation with you. And, hopefully, it will become quickly apparent just how much care, attention and effort are required to produce precise and quality patent translations.

Idiosyncrasies of German patent translation at a glance

1. Structure and word order

German sentences are often long and highly structured, but often with nested clauses and a lot more flexible word order than in English. Sometimes the order of clauses has to be flipped just to obtain a more natural word order in English. Nested clauses can throw up issues with the use of articles if the first clause in which a noun is met in a German sentence has to be flipped and made a second or third clause, for instance, in the English sentence, where the indefinite article will now have to be the definite article. Also, strict word order rules mean that associated verbs for a single clause can be separated by several lines of text in German — which in some cases means verbs being forgotten/omitted altogether by the author and/or a careful parsing of a sentence by the reader to match up a verb with its clause. The result of the above can be long trains of thought requiring a re-ordering of sentence structure to be more easily read and followed in English.

2. Passive voice

German patents heavily rely on passive voice to maintain an objective and formal tone. On the other hand, English patents tend to favour a more direct active voice, and the passive voice can often lead to unnaturally sounding and unclear sentences in English. Careful balance is needed to preserve the original intent of the author, bearing in mind that conciseness and clarity are actual requirements for patent claims.

3. Punctuation differences

German uses commas more frequently than English, especially in long sentences. Simply reproducing commas in English translations is not possible. The rules governing their use in English are different and may also depend in some cases on style guides. One instance of caution is where commas and their absence are the difference between defining and non-defining clauses. A comma or its absence could literally affect the scope of protection for an invention in English.

4. Non-equivalent words

There are words in German that are translated in any number of ways depending on the context or not at all.

For instance, the words “jeweils” and “jeweilig” are frequently mistranslated by inexperienced translators, and using context-dependent equivalents (perhaps in an attempt to fill valency in a sentence) can distort meaning. It is often necessary to actually check the wider context (e.g. to see whether several objects/components are referred to) to determine how to correctly translate “jeweils” and “jeweilig”. It is not uncommon to refer to the reference signs used and drawings in order to correctly interpret the meaning of “jeweilig”. The term “respective” (as an example of a possible translation for “jeweilig”) in English may require using plural forms of nouns in an English translation where singular nouns are used in the German source text.

Modal verbs are used differently in German too. The modal verb “sollen” has various meanings. Some common uses of the word “sollen” are to indicate: recommendations (e.g. should), purpose or intent (supposed to, intended to/for, aim), indirect statements (in which case the indicative form of the verb is most often required). Furthermore, the “sollte(n)” form is additionally used in conditional sentences.

In summary

German patent translation not only requires an excellent grasp of the German and English languages — syntax, grammar, usage and style ­– but also a knowledge of patent language conventions and terminology, as well as experience and skill in knowing how to negotiate the differences between these languages and being able to familiarise oneself with a given subject matter in hand and resolve issues on a case-by-case and context-dependent basis (i.e. with research and reference checking).

/0 Comments/by