Separate A from B
Thread Content
Separate A from B – does it mean separating A from B, or separating A from within B? Separating A from B indicates that A and B are independent, and B does not contain A ； And the separation of A from B indicates that B contains A. If we consider only “separate A from B”, then these two translations do not cause much ambiguity; however, in actual sentences, there is a difference between the two translations. The column is designed to separate (CH3)3SiCl from SiCl4, CH3HSiCl2 and hydrocarbons. However, trimethylchlorosilane is not present in SiCl4, CH3HSiCl2, and hydrocarbons. So wouldn’t it be better to use the following translation: This tower is used to separate trimethylchlorosilane from SiCl4, CH3HSiCl2, and hydrocarbons. What do you all think?
I think it is to isolate A from B. But is there a problem with the example you gave? Assuming there is nothing wrong with the English sentence, however, column separation is a physical separation process – how can you separate out materials that are not present in the raw material? Is it that this column is closely connected to both a “reactor tower” and a “separation tower,” and appears as a single “column” from the outside? This situation does exist.
The explanation in Landau: \"separate from\" means to divide...from..., to distinguish...from..., to cause...to be separated from..
It should be A separated from B. In the sentence, COLUMN should refer to a distillation column, which is used to separate (CH3)3SiCl from the mixture of (CH3)3SiCl/SiCl4/CH3HSiCl2/hydrocarbons. To verify whether the translation is correct, you can check with technical personnel to see if it aligns with the technical content.
I also agree with the view from the 5th floor; it should be (CH3)3SiCl that is separated from CH3HSiCl2, SiCl4, hydrocarbons, and (CH3)3SiCl!
Separating A from B generally refers, in my opinion, to the separation of the two substances, A and B. A tower is used to separate two substances; generally, one substance emerges from the top of the tower while the other emerges from the bottom. This post was last edited by echommm on 2009-3-16 21:14]
Literally, it means separating B from A. But this example is not easy to understand. Here’s my thinking: generally, saying “separate A from B” implies that B is the main component, either in terms of quantity or as the product. However, we all know that even when we refer to it as product B, it doesn’t mean it’s 100% pure B; there are various impurities present. When separating them, is it necessary to specify that we’re separating ** from B, @@, ##, %%, &&...? It’s sufficient to simply say separating ** from B. I can accept both translations (I’m being indecisive again,:lol :lol), but I prefer the phrase “separating trimethylchlorosilane from SiCl4, CH3HSiCl2, and hydrocarbons” – it makes the hierarchy clearer. Ah, all these complications arise from taking things seriously:( :( This post was last edited by dongping001 on 2009-3-16 at 11:34.]
In fact, when it comes to separating A from B, there is a possibility that B includes A as well; it depends on the context. For example: separate oxygen from water, separate oxygen from Cl2. In the case where B does not contain A, it means separating A from B; separate oxygen from air. B contains A, but in most cases B does not contain A. However, attention should be paid when translating – for instance, in the phrase separate oxygen from Cl2, even though B does not contain A, translating it as “separate oxygen from chlorine gas” is more appropriate than “separate oxygen and chlorine gas”. This post was last edited by niuky on 2009-3-16 11:44]
The statement that A is separated from B means that A represents the impurity, and the desired product obtained through the separation is B.
The actual feed to the column is a mixture of (CH3)3SiCl, SiCl4, CH3HSiCl2, and hydrocarbons, and this column is used to separate (CH3)3SiCl from the mixture. Based on everyone’s discussion, it’s possible that A is separated from B, or that B includes A. But here, B does not include A; therefore, the revised translation is more accurate ； Or, in other words: This tower separates trimethylchlorosilane from the feed mixture.
“The actual feed to the column is a mixture of (CH3)3SiCl, SiCl4, CH3HSiCl2, and hydrocarbons, and this column is used to separate (CH3)3SiCl from the mixture. ” I think this explanation is acceptable. (CH3)3SiCl is the target product (I’m not familiar with the specific process; it seems related to polysilicon materials: P). It needs to be separated from a mixture of (CH3)3SiCl, SiCl4, CH3HSiCl2, and hydrocarbons; the mixture must contain (CH3)3SiCl, otherwise the setup of the tower would be pointless. I’m only talking in terms of unit operations.
The column is designed to separate (CH3)3SiCl from SiCl4, CH3HSiCl2, and hydrocarbons. After reading that informative post, upon further consideration, it turns out to be the same as the separation of two substances, A and B; the difference is that in this case, B is a mixture of three different substances. So I think the original poster’s revised translation on floor 1 is good.
A is isolated from B. It is possible that B is the main phase and A is the secondary phase ； It is possible that A is the target product ； It is also possible that A is an impurity ；
Separate (a metal) from an ore – Extract (a metal) from ore.
I agree to separate A from B, but I generally think it’s better to keep them as A/B
I think it’s more accurate to separate A from B
There’s no doubt: isolate A from B.
separate (...) from .... means to divide/split/isolate/distinguish/identify something from another thing. The specific phrasing should be adjusted accordingly based on the context. Adding the word “ China” unnecessarily can lead to many misinterpretations; this has been explained clearly earlier, so we can conclude this discussion: handshake