The role of CAT tools in Patent Translation
Tesi di laurea in Laboratorio CAT
Serena CUSCIANNA
UniversitĂ del Salento, A.A. 2018/2019
2. THE LANGUAGE OF PATENTS
After having defined, in Chapter 1, the main structural features of a patent and having outlined a legal context, the language of patents will be the core topic of this chapter by explaining the linguistic and terminological specificities of the language of patents. For a better understanding of the topic, examples will be provided from projects on which I worked during my internship experience. In compliance with the law on copyright and related rights (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/790/oj) and the General Data Protection Regulation (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj), only patents that have already been granted and whose full text is of public domain and accessible in databases such as Google Patents (https://www.google.it/?tbm=pts) or EPO website (https://data.epo.org/publication-server/search) will be considered.
2.1 General aspects
The old advice “say what you mean and mean what you say” has never been as crucial as in the case of patents. As stated by the patent translator Martin Cross (2007, p. 19), «a patent is a long, precisely worded legal definition of an invention. As such, the meaning conveyed by the words is important, but so is the wording itself». In this dissertation, the importance of relying on professionals and being assisted by attorneys during the preparation and application procedure for a patent has been mentioned several times. Many inventors «pay thousands of dollars to have a patent attorney or agent choose the exact phrasing that will give them the maximum coverage while steering clear of the prior art» (Cross, 2007, p. 20). For this reason, great care must be taken in picking the right word to meet the required degree of formality but, at the same time, to be simple enough to explain the invention to someone who is not already intimately familiar with the invention.
In order to understand how critical is the choice of language and words to be used in the description and claims of an invention as a means of its protection, the patent attorney Gene Quinn (2017) mentioned the famous “case of Chef America v. Lamb Weston” (https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-federal-circuit/1419835.html).
The Federal Circuit had to interpret the meaning of the patent claim phrase “heating the resulting batter-coated dough to a temperature in the range of about 400°F. to 850°F.” Unfortunately, because what was said literally required the internal temperature of the dough to reach a temperature of between 400°F. 800°F., the patent owner had a useless patent. […] The word chosen had a specific and undeniable meaning and, therefore, a charcoal briquette was unfortunately what was protected.
Because of the nature of the patent documents, the subject matter of the patent can belong to very different technical fields thus implying the use of the relevant technical terms. Nonetheless, according to Quinn (2016; 2017), a few simple rules can help patent writers:
- an absolute prerequisite is to have access to a dictionary. It will be useful to find the expressions and terms best suited to the context;
- the description of the invention must be as specific and explicit as possible. The description of the invention is the starting text from which the claims will be extrapolated, the latter being the only legally valid section of a patent. Do not make the mistake of assuming that the reader has the same degree of knowledge as the inventor or that he interprets a term in the same way. According to attorney Quinn, the key lies in imagining describing the invention to a blind person. Only in this way will you find the most creative and enlightening ways to verbally convey the desired message (Quinn, 2017);
- the claims should be written as clearly and concisely as possible. It is advisable to avoid being wordy and drawing terms from the description.
Using the latter as a glossary will ensure the correspondence of the contents, the consistency of the text, as well as effective claims (Quinn, 2016). It is, therefore, understood that the language of patents is extremely structured and can be deemed both as a technical-scientific and bureaucratic-legal language. From a technical-scientific perspective, the language of patents prefers nominal style, denotative semantics or a lack of emotionality. On the other hand, from a legal perspective, the language of patents has a variety of technical terms and extremely formal deictics (Perotto, 2008, pp. 47-51).
Linguistic and terminological aspects will be discussed in more detail in the next sections illustrated by examples. The examples will be organized in tables in which the reference patent number, the technical domain and the text extract will be reported. In the latter, the underlining is to indicate the aspects to which each table refers.
2.2 Linguistic aspects
One of the most relevant features of the technical patent language is the nominal style at the expense of flexed verbal forms (Perotto, 2008, p. 48). In other words, the tendency is to concentrate all the elements of speech within nominal phrases. Nominalization consists in transforming a verb or adjective into a noun or a nominal phrase.
Examples of nominalization
EP 2 600 235
Physics
“The accompanying drawings, which are included to provide a further understanding of the invention […]”.
EP 3 171 036
Mechanical engineering and electricity
“The connection block provides a compact element for connecting the parts of the cooling station […]”.
EP 3 214 785
Electricity
“Figure 12 illustrates an embodiment of a process for adapting to varying channel conditions […]”.
Another important morphosyntactic feature is the use of passive and impersonal verbal forms (Perotto, 2008, p. 49). This technique facilitates the objectification of speech and helps the individuality of the author of the text to “go unnoticed”. Furthermore, it allows attention to be shifted to the processes illustrated rather than to the agents, which are omitted (Scarpa, 2012). Depersonalization gives the text a neutral and emotionless tone. This is a feature that is typical of specialized discourse, where the tone is generally kept neutral, as the demonstrative value of discourse derives from the concepts presented in a logical and consequential way, rather than from an emphatic use of discourse (Perotto, 2008, p. 49).
Examples of passive and impersonal forms
EP 3 218 725
Physics
“The barcode scanner can be provided within a scanner bay […]”.
EP 3 081 408
Transporting and heating
“Reference will be now made in detail to the preferred embodiment of the present invention […]”.
EP 2 600 235
Physics
“Meanwhile, it is possible not to display the widget indicator 431B on the app icon 431 only when the specific touch gesture is performed[…]”.
The choice of verb tenses is also rather restricted. In fact, in patents as in other types of scientific texts, the present simple, the present perfect, should/could/may/might modals and, occasionally, the future tenses are often used (Perotto, 2008, p. 67). The use of the past tense is rare and limited.
Examples of preferred verb tenses
EP 3 263 234
Human necessities
“Further, a stepped member may be formed on the guide wall member […]”.
EP 3 263 234
Performing operations and transporting
“A computer is employed to analyze the image as a matrix of cells […]”.
EP 2 458 038
Metallurgy and electricity
“In particular, the cost problem has been the largest impediment for spread of fuel cells […]”
EP 3 081 408
Transporting and heating
“First, the case that the two blowers 130 are mounted will be described […]”.
Another linguistic aspect that immediately stands out when reading a patent is the high occurrence of long and articulated sentences. Syntactic condensation is an expedient aimed at trying to communicate as many nuanced details as possible within the same period. In this way, the complexity and density of the text may increase, thus complicating comprehension at first reading. However, the risk of interpretative ambiguity is reduced (Perotto, 2008, p. 70).
Examples of syntactic condensation
EP 3 165 799
Mechanical engineering
“When two-phase gas-liquid state refrigerant having high quality flows into the first connecting pipe 41 or the second connecting pipe 42 at a low rate, as Fig. 13 illustrates, the flow of the refrigerant becomes a twophase flow (stratified flow) in which gas and liquid are separated, the gas-phase refrigerant is distributed to the upper portion of the first connecting pipe 41 or the second connecting pipe 42, and the liquid-phase refrigerant is distributed to the lower portion of the first connecting pipe 41 or the second connecting pipe 42”.
EP 3 171 036
Mechanical engineering and electricity
“The liquid cooling station comprises at least one pump and at least one motor connected to the at least one pump for operating the at least one pump to circulate cooling liquid between the cooling station and an object to be cooled, at least one first cooling liquid outlet port for supplying the cooling liquid towards the object to be cooled and at least one first cooling liquid inlet port for receiving the cooling liquid from the object to be cooled”.
Besides nominalization, when drafting a patent, adjectivization is often employed (i.e., the use of verbs, nouns or adverbs as adjectives).
Examples of adjectivization
EP 3 072 476
Human necessities
“The embodiments discussed herein pertain to an intraocular lens insertion apparatus”.
EP 3 171 036
Mechanical engineering and electricity
“From the second cooling liquid inlet port 33 the cooling liquid circulated through the heat exchanger […]”.
EP 3 062 423
Electricity
“In FIG. 3, the power-supply-lead board-in connector 4 is disposed on the board-in- connector disposing portion 10, the terminals (not illustrated) that are exposed from the surface […]”.
2.3 Lexical aspects
In a study conducted by Darren Hsin-hung Lin and Shelley Ching-yu Hsieh on the specialized vocabulary in modern patent language, it is stated that on a corpus of 558 words recorded in the USPTO glossary, «the coverage of patent technical words was 38% which is much higher than the 18.3% of the 102 words used in a general context» (2010, p. 420). From a lexical point of view, the language of patents is characterized by a high degree of specificity. The terminology used is unambiguous, monorefential. Monoreferentiality is a lexical parameter indicating that a word has a unique meaning, not in the sense of having only one referent, as words generally have several referents, but in the sense that, in a given context, only one meaning is allowed.
A hallmark of patent texts is the high frequency of technical terms (i.e., the concentration of specific terms) within the text and the individual sentence (Perotto, 2008, p. 69). Nouns, adjectives and, eventually, verbs are preferred.
Examples of concentration of technical terms
EP 2 257 618
Chemistry
“In contrast, affinodetection with ECA and PHA, two lectins specific for complex N- linked glycan epitopes, were negative (not shown)”.
EP 3 140 239
Performing operations
“A set of hydraulic rams 140, each equipped with a force sensor (not shown) may be used between the clamp arms 14 of the clamp assembly 10, with each ram 140 aligned with one of the pivoting clamp pad support assemblies 32, as shown in FIG. 9, to calibrate the load cells 82”.
EP 3 180 552
Mechanical engineering and electricity
“Feedthrough 70 has a feedthrough flange 74 and securing nut 75 for attaching feedthrough 70 to a side wall of vane chamber 28”.
The monoreferentiality of the patent lexicon makes the text repetitive due to the absence of synonymy. As Perotto (2008, pp. 71-72) points out, repetitiveness is usually a symptom of poor quality in translation. However, in the case of patents, the repetition is widely used to broaden and facilitate understanding. As shown in the following examples, repetitiveness may involve individual terms or even whole periods.
Examples of repetitiveness
EP 3 171 036
Mechanical engineering and electricity
“The liquid cooling station comprises at least one pump and at least one motor connected to the at least one pump for operating the at least one pump to circulate cooling liquid […]”.
EP 3 165 799
Mechanical engineering
“[0049] When two-phase gas-liquid state refrigerant having high quality flows into the first connecting pipe 41 or the second connecting pipe 42 at a low rate, as Fig. 13 illustrates, the flow of the refrigerant becomes a twophase flow (stratified flow) in which gas and liquid are separated, the gas-phase refrigerant is distributed to the upper portion of the first connecting pipe 41 or the second connecting pipe 42, and the liquid-phase refrigerant is distributed to the lower portion of the first connecting pipe 41 or the second connecting pipe 42. […]
[0054] When the two-phase gas-liquid state refrigerant having high quality flows into the first connecting pipe 41 at a low rate, the flow of the refrigerant becomes a twophase flow (stratified flow) in which gas and liquid are separated, the gas-phase refrigerant is distributed to the upper portion of the first connecting pipe 41, and the liquid-phase refrigerant is distributed to the lower portion of the first connecting pipe 41”.
Due to the legal-bureaucratic nature of the language of patents, extensive use is made of conjunctions, adverbs and locutions (Perotto, 2008, p. 77), which act as textual connectors and aim to maintain strong textual cohesion. Highly recurrent text connectors are: herein, whereby, hereinafter, thus, therefore, thereof, wherein, as such.
Examples of text connectors
EP 2 458 038
Metallurgy and electricity
“[…]the expected potential range is as wide as from about 0 V vs SHE to 1.0 V vs SHE or higher (hereinafter all potentials are versus SHE and simply denoted as V)”.
EP 3 155 494
Physics
“In a further aspect, the invention provides a system for tagging an object which can be of public interest, whereby a person or a machine with interest in the object is equipped with a three-dimensional camera […]”.
EP 3 218 725
Physics
“This disclosure describes a system for processing a sample and methods and uses thereof, for providing redundant identification […]”.
Perotto (2008, p. 76) also includes anaphora among the distinguishing features of the language of patents. An anaphora is the “use of a grammatical substitute (such as a pronoun or a pro-verb) to refer to the denotation of a preceding word or group of words. also: the relation between a grammatical substitute and its antecedent” (Merriam-Webster online dictionary). The gerund or the adjective “said” is used for this purpose.
Examples of anaphor
EP 3 307 361
Human necessities
“As such, in this application, the distal direction must be understood as the direction of injection with reference to the drug delivery device, and the proximal direction is the opposite direction to said direction of injection”.
EP 3 214 785
Electricity
“Sometimes, the channels preferred by transmitter and the receiver overlap only partially (or do not overlap at all), and in such cases the receiver may determine S6 those channels that provide the best channel quality for the receiver […]”.
Zerling (2010, p. 3) defined the writing style of any patent as a “formula”, meaning that it features a certain stylistic rigidity. The language of patents, indeed, must respect a series of conventions, forms, and conventional phrases, often repeated in the body of the text. Each section of any patent has its specific keywords and common formulations. When translating a patent, it is imperative for the translator to respect all the linguistic and lexical characteristics of this type of text. However, the patent translation will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.
Read the next chapter “Computer-aided translation“.