This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
German to English translations [PRO] Tech/Engineering - Mathematics & Statistics
German term or phrase:Links-Multiplikation
Hi folks. I am at the limit of my math understanding and need some help with this term. Here is the usage:
Y = XG + N . (13.1) Links-Multiplikation dieser Gleichung mit dem komplex konjugierten Eingangsspektrum X liefert XY = XXG + XN . (13.2)
(In the second equation, the first X in each term has a bar over it as does the X following 'Eingangsspektrum.')
Now, I see what they are doing. As matrix multiplication is not commutative, it seems they are telling me to put the X-bar on the LEFT side of each term. OK, but WHAT do we call that in English? I am tempted to use: Multiplying this equation by the complex conjugate input spectrum X yields ...
and just finesse the whole problem.
The client suggested 'outer product' but that is a bit beyond my math knowledge so I really cannot assess its validity.
Are there any math wizards out there who can help me with references or who have a translation for this?
Thanks to Erik and everybody else who commented. I just never thought of looking for the obvious answers.
A reference would have been nice, but, as Erik said, that is not his job. 2 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer
Maybe our experiences differ. Most people I know who aren't language professionals, need some kind of EN translation and don't know what to put in there will either try a literal translation or look for one of these databases. Literal translation works and it's in one of the databases too: https://www.dict.cc/?s=linksmultiplikation
I know because I'm the one who sometimes had to go in and correct some of the stuff, which is fine because that's my job. But it doesn't help that links to these collections of terms (they aren't dictionaries; you won't catch me calling them that) are being posted as part of some answers. In that sense, it may be better not to put something there at all.
I also agree that it is contradictory to post it non-Pro, but ask for an explanation. On the other hand, I do think Phil's right that some kind of reference would help. And I'm surprised that Steffen agrees, who almost always posts some kind of explanation or links :) I'm not telling anyone or asking anyone to take half an hour out of their busy schedule to answer a question, although I still don't understand KudoZ' bias toward agreements.
Björn: No offense taken, not at all. I haven't given an explanation because Jccantrell already gave one in the question. It's quite clear that he has no problems understanding the concept, he was just unsure how to put it in his target language.
I'm not sure that your assessment regarding the randomly selected bilingual layman is true. Mind that they wouldn't be told to simply translate the term in question literally. They'd be asked what the correct translation is. I guess that the majority would answer the question with "I have no idea" (might be worth an experiment), while a few might indeed get the translation right. The difference is that they would be right by chance, and with a very low level of certainty. Compare this with the examples given in the FAQ you quote ("I love you", "Welcome to Panama", "Mmm, yummy"), where literally every single bilingual person would be able to give a correct answer without hesitating, and with a level of certainty of as near to 100% as it gets. So I stand by my point, this is a pro question.
1) Some people flaunt their supposed knowledge of a field when they have none. I can see your credentials, so this isn't so much of an issue; with many others, I can't (including me, BTW).
2) Some people let the commenters do the work for them. Jccantrell and Phil will know what I'm talking about when I say Johanna had to provide a reference explaining what the answerer clearly didn't explain and Phil provided another piece of the puzzle--this time, the question wasn't just about how to translate it, but why this term was there in German at all. I don't think that's OK.
You shouldn't take offense to this; maybe I sound a bit aggravated because I just had to prepare a six-post-long rebuttal for another question. It's one of the reasons why I think the system is somewhat broke.
Unfortunately, KudoZ isn't all that clear about it. Straight from the rulebook: "When applying the above definitions, detach yourself from your own background/specialisation and think of a - hypothetical - randomly selected bilingual person. Is it likely that this person would be able to produce a good translation of the term or phrase in question (and in the particular context shown) from the top of his/her head?" https://www.proz.com/translation-articles/articles/95/1/Kudo...
Someone should rephrase this. As it stands, the answer in this context would be Yes, since it's a one-for-one translation. What else would a "random person" say?
I'm not trying to be demeaning. I am a bit surprised about your lack of an explanation, though, since I have seen answers/d-box posts of yours and I'd have expected something. I also think he should use the verb here, which he can ("left multiply"; no hyphen).
I'd be all on your side if we took a generic definition of "pro" and "non-pro". However, for Kudoz, these terms have been defined very clearly: A question is non-pro if any bilingual person can answer it without the aid of a dictionary. I don't think that this question falls into that category.
Regarding Google, the question is: Will an asker with average Google skills be able to check the validity of a proposed answer? I think this is basically independent from the fact that everyone doesn't always get the same search results.
A good portion of the questions, especially in the English-German forum BTW, should be non-Pro, because I can get my nephew to answer this if necessary (and come up with a better suggestion, but I'll leave that aside for now). Some examples are literal translations, questions about colloquial usage, synonyms and the like, and terms that remain in EN or DE (yes, you'll find a recent one like this in my list--feel free to vote it non-Pro; I have no issue with it).
Now, this one does require special knowledge and I understand jccantrell's problem of not seeing the forest for the trees, but what I don't see is an explanation anywhere. How does this help? And I know from experience that if you know your stuff, it'll take you a minute or two to find a reference: https://mafiadoc.com/chapter-2-linear-transformations-and-ma...
I have to say that Erik is right, it is not his job to find references. That fact that I never came across 'left multiplication' until now is what caused the problem. I was looking though all the references on matrix multiplication and they never touched on this term. Never thought to look at the most obvious choice. Forest for the trees, I guess.
I'm not saying "trust me, I know". I'm merely pointing the asker in a certain direction for further research, which any translator worth his salt will have to do anyway. Also, I think that classifying a question as non-pro while at the same time demanding references is self-contradictory.
I'll be happy to provide references if these can't be found with a very simple Google search (so not in this case) or if my answer is seriously challenged by a colleague (dito, so far).
Phil, I disagree because such an 'easy guess' would require at least some prior mathematical knowledge, and jc's context is highly technical to boot, so it'd require pinpoint precision in the translated version. To my German native ears, 'Links-Multiplikation/Linksmultiplikation' doesn't sound all too common - this question is thus not as straightforward as it seems at first glance.
See my answer to Erik. Funnily enough, the next question in my language pairs is this one http://www.proz.com/kudoz/french_to_english/medical_general/... where the asker was very honest in saying that he forgot to try the most obvious solution. It may be a technical subject, but the answer is easy to guess.
I completely fail to see how this question could be 'Non-Pro' in any way.
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
12 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +4
left multiplication, pre-multiplication
Explanation: The literal translation is correct, it's left-multiplication or pre-multiplication. Not sure about correct hyphenization.
Erik Freitag Germany Local time: 14:07 Specializes in field Native speaker of: German PRO pts in category: 44
Grading comment
Thanks to Erik and everybody else who commented. I just never thought of looking for the obvious answers.
A reference would have been nice, but, as Erik said, that is not his job.