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.
This person has a SecurePRO™ card. Because this person is not a ProZ.com Plus subscriber, to view his or her SecurePRO™ card you must be a ProZ.com Business member or Plus subscriber.
Affiliations
This person is not affiliated with any business or Blue Board record at ProZ.com.
English to Amharic: English to Amharic: Amharic Translation General field: Law/Patents
Source text - English Hi dipsy001,
First of all,a very interesting doubt! After a long time, I thought about a CR question for 15 minutes.
I'll first discuss option A and then option D:
Option A:
(A) Profit-making corporations interested in developing products based on patents held by universities are likely to try to serve as exclusive sponsors of ongoing university research projects.
What does it mean?
It means that corporations are likely to do one thing (one thing = exclusive sponsor of ongoing research projects). Does it in any way mean that they will not do the other thing (other thing = fund programs to improve undergraduate teaching)? Rather, on the contrary, the universities may make it a condition for anyone becoming an exclusive sponsor to also fund undergraduate teaching. Isn't it?
Option D:
First of all, your doubt here is different from that of dav373. He said that option D indicates that logos university will not patents and hence, this option is irrelevant since we are talking about patents and not the absence of patents.
On the other hand, you say that if logos university has a patent, then corporations will need to pay logos university to access the payment and therefore, this option does not weaken the argument.
Am I correct in my understanding?
Now, here I agree with dav373 that if the research is duplicate of the research already completed by corporations, then there is hardly a possibility of logos university getting patents. In such a case, since it does not have patents, it will not be able to fund programs to improve undergraduate training. So, now, we are less sure of their plan. Therefore, option D actually weakens the viability of the plan.
Now, you can see that I disagree with dav373 that option D is irrelevant just because it means that logos university will not get patents. If I say that
I plan to sell my upcoming book to pay off my tuition fees.
Can't you weaken my plan by saying that no one will even publish that book?
English to Tigrinya: English to Tigrinya: Tigrinya Transltion General field: Law/Patents
Source text - English Hi dipsy001,
First of all,a very interesting doubt! After a long time, I thought about a CR question for 15 minutes.
I'll first discuss option A and then option D:
Option A:
(A) Profit-making corporations interested in developing products based on patents held by universities are likely to try to serve as exclusive sponsors of ongoing university research projects.
What does it mean?
It means that corporations are likely to do one thing (one thing = exclusive sponsor of ongoing research projects). Does it in any way mean that they will not do the other thing (other thing = fund programs to improve undergraduate teaching)? Rather, on the contrary, the universities may make it a condition for anyone becoming an exclusive sponsor to also fund undergraduate teaching. Isn't it?
Option D:
First of all, your doubt here is different from that of dav373. He said that option D indicates that logos university will not patents and hence, this option is irrelevant since we are talking about patents and not the absence of patents.
On the other hand, you say that if logos university has a patent, then corporations will need to pay logos university to access the payment and therefore, this option does not weaken the argument.
Am I correct in my understanding?
Now, here I agree with dav373 that if the research is duplicate of the research already completed by corporations, then there is hardly a possibility of logos university getting patents. In such a case, since it does not have patents, it will not be able to fund programs to improve undergraduate training. So, now, we are less sure of their plan. Therefore, option D actually weakens the viability of the plan.
Now, you can see that I disagree with dav373 that option D is irrelevant just because it means that logos university will not get patents. If I say that
I plan to sell my upcoming book to pay off my tuition fees.
Can't you weaken my plan by saying that no one will even publish that book?
Learn more about additional services I can provide my clients
Bio
My name is Yonas Huluka. I am native professional English to Amharic, Oromo, Tigrinya, Sidamo and Somali translator with more than 3 years of experience. I also do Transcription, Editing, Proofreading and Voice-Over services. I work with Memesource CAT tool but also I am familiar with SDL trados, MemoQ and other CAT tools.
I am dedicated freelancer that works with professional manner and delivers tasks with quality and always on time. Professionalism, Work ethics, Punctuality and Quality tasks are my attributes.
Portfolio