# Die Aufzeichnung des Temperatur- und Druckverlaufes



## piedina

Hallo,
Ich möchte Folgendes Übersetzen:
"Die Aufzeichnung des Temperatur*-* und Druckverlaufes"

Welche Übersetzung ist richtig?
1) The monitoring of *the temperature and of the pressure curve*"
2) The monitoring of *the temperature and pressure curve*"
3)The monitoring of* the temperature and pressure curves*"

Es muss klar sein, dass um 2 verschiedene Kurven geht.

Vielen Dank und schöne Grüße!!


----------



## jacquesvd

piedina said:


> Hallo,
> Ich möchte Folgendes Übersetzen:
> "Die Aufzeichnung des Temperatur*-* und Druckverlaufes"
> 
> Welche Übersetzung ist richtig?
> 1) The monitoring of *the temperature and of the pressure curve*"
> 2) The monitoring of *the temperature and pressure curve*"
> 3)The monitoring of* the temperature and pressure curves*"
> 
> Es muss klar sein, dass um 2 verschiedene Kurven geht.
> 
> Vielen Dank und schöne Grüße!!


 
I think monitoring can do but would prefer the word 'recording' and to stress the fact that it concerns both temperature and pressure curve, I would say it like this:

The recording of both the temperature and pressure curves.

Monitoring has an element of 'controlling' in it; recording is merely noting the data, which obviosuly can be used later for all sorts of purposes.
If you want to include the elemnt of control then go for monitoring.


----------



## piedina

Ehi!
Thanks a lot! That's a super answer!


----------



## elroy

It is often best to translate German nouns referring to actions (like "Aufzeichnung," "Umsetzung," "Aufnahme," "Prüfung," "Analyse," etc.) using an _-ing_ form - without "the" - if that's suitable in the given context.  So that's what I would use unless it just won't work in your context (if you provide it, I can let you know for sure).

I don't think "recording" is the best verb to use here, because you don't really "record" curves. 

"Monitoring" is great (and doesn't suggest "controlling" anything) if that's what's meant; "observing" is another possibility.

However, I don't think that "Aufzeichnung" can mean that. I would say "creating" or "preparing."

So to sum up, my translation - in the absence of further context - would be "Creating/preparing a temperature cruve and a pressure curve." In this case, I think it's okay to repeat the word "curve."


----------



## jacquesvd

elroy said:


> It is often best to translate German nouns referring to actions (like "Aufzeichnung," "Umsetzung," "Aufnahme," "Prüfung," "Analyse," etc.) using an _-ing_ form - without "the" - if that's suitable in the given context. So that's what I would use unless it just won't work in your context (if you provide it, I can let you know for sure).
> 
> I don't think "recording" is the best verb to use here, because you don't really "record" curves.
> 
> "Monitoring" is great (and doesn't suggest "controlling" anything) if that's what's meant; "observing" is another possibility.
> 
> However, I don't think that "Aufzeichnung" can mean that. I would say "creating" or "preparing."
> 
> So to sum up, my translation - in the absence of further context - would be "Creating/preparing a temperature cruve and a pressure curve." In this case, I think it's okay to repeat the word "curve."


 
I'm not sure that's entirely true: a monitor is a piece of equipment that checks, warns and controls. In our company we have monitors to check (control) the purity of air with the clear aim to intervene as soon as the recorded date become a cause for concern. (to monitor obviously also means to observe)
Eine Aufzeichnung is a recording.
A recording is a.o.: information or data on a specific subject collected during a specified period of time.  Curves can very well be recorded! 
On the contrary, I don't see what Aufzeichnung would have to do with creating or preparing.


----------



## dec-sev

Will "drawing a temperature..." do?
If I say "...a temperature and a pressure curve" will it be understood as one curve, or two curves? I'm asking because, as I've learned recently, in Russian, if we speak about "homogeneous" objects, it's correct to use the noun in singular form. For example: 
_Left and right hand_. (not hands)
_Cultural and industrial revolution._ (Acutally two revolutions are supposed to be understood). 
I've read about it in an article written by a language scholar.
I've never thought about how the matters stand in this respect in English and German.


----------



## dec-sev

jacquesvd said:


> I'm not sure that's entirely true: a monitor is a piece of equipment that checks, warns and controls. In our company we have monitors to check (control) the purity of air with the clear aim to intervene as soon as the recorded date become a cause for concern. (to monitor obviously also means to observe)
> Eine Aufzeichnung is a recording.
> A recording is a.o.: information or data on a specific subject collected during a specified period of time.  Curves can very well be recorded!
> On the contrary, I don't see what Aufzeichnung would have to do with creating or preparing.


Data can be recorded and then a curve or a diagram can be made in order to demonstrate the tendency, I guess. But if the data or readings are taken uninterruptedly during a certain period of time and you obtain the data in the form of a curve (on the monitor or other device), may be you can say that you "record a curve". As far as "monitoring" is concerned, I've heard a phrase recently which runs "monitoring of inverstment climate". It was in Russian but all the words are loanwords and the phrase sonuded pretty much English


----------



## elroy

jacquesvd said:


> I'm not sure that's entirely true: a monitor is a piece of equipment that checks, warns and controls. In our company we have monitors to check (control) the purity of air with the clear aim to intervene as soon as the recorded date become a cause for concern. (to monitor obviously also means to observe)


 To monitor something is to watch it closely, to observe it; this may be for the purpose of controlling it somehow, but the act of monitoring itself does not include controlling, and you can certainly monitor something with no intent of controlling it.


> Eine Aufzeichnung is a recording.


 In many cases, yes, but as you know the best translation of something always depends on the context (see below). 





> Curves can very well be recorded!


 You record the _data_, but not the curve. Notice that even the original German doesn't say "Die Aufzeichnung der Temperatur- und Druck*kurve*". So actually, a literal translation of the phrase would be something like "recording _developments/changes_ in temperature and pressure." But since the original poster obviously wanted to make it clear that there are two _curves_, I suggested a free translation; however, "record" does not collocate with "curve." The curves here are the form in which the recorded data is presented; they are not what is being recorded. 





> On the contrary, I don't see what Aufzeichnung would have to do with creating or preparing.


 *In this context*, "creating" and "preparing" are suitable because those are verbs that collocate with "curve" and describe what is going on here. You want to _record the data_, so you _create a curve_. You are _recording the data in the form of a curve_, if you will. 





dec-sev said:


> Will "drawing a temperature..." do?


 You can certainly draw a curve, but we don't know how the curve in this context is being created. If it's done using a computer, than "drawing" is not appropriate.


> If I say "...a temperature and a pressure curve" will it be understood as one curve, or two curves?


 I would be unsure as to what you meant, because that's not a natural construction in English.

1 curve: _a temperature and pressure curve_ (only one "a")
2 curves_: a temperature curve and a pressure curve / temperature and pressure curves_ (The second version is ambiguous and could actually refer to more than 2 curves.)



> I've never thought about how the matters stand in this respect in English and German.


 German is similar to Russian in this respect, but English is not.


----------



## Frank78

"Die Aufzeichnung des Temperatur*-* und Druckverlaufes"

Im deutschen Satz geht es nicht zwangsläufig um Kurven, es kann auch eine Tabelle oder ähnliches sein.
Wenn man Eindeutigkeit will muß man von einem "Temperatur-Druck-Diagramm" bzw. "Temperatur-Zeit-Diagramm" reden.

"Die Aufzeichnung der Temperaturkurve" ist im Deutschen genauso falsch wie im Englischen.


----------



## elroy

Frank78 said:


> Im deutschen Satz geht es nicht zwangsläufig um Kurven, es kann auch eine Tabelle oder ähnliches sein.


 Stimmt, aber piedina hat uns im ersten Beitrag mitgeteilt, dass es sich in diesem Fall um Kurven handelt. 





> "Die Aufzeichnung der Temperaturkurve" ist im Deutschen genauso falsch wie im Englischen.


 Dachte ich mir.


----------



## jacquesvd

elroy said:


> To monitor something is to watch it closely, to observe it; this may be for the purpose of controlling it somehow, but the act of monitoring itself does not include controlling, and you can certainly monitor something with no intent of controlling it.


 
According to Webster: to monitor= to keep track of, regulate or control;
to watch, observe or control for a special purpose 

I believe that's clearly meant here, but because 'to monitor' can obviously also simply mean 'to observe' I suggested that if you didn't want the suggestion of 'control', you can then use 'to record' which is simply collecting data. If on the other hand you want to imply this notion, you can use 'monitoring' is what I said.



> In many cases, yes, but as you know the best translation of something always depends on the context (see below). You record the _data_, but not the curve.


 
I have seen countless examples recorded curves in laboratoria, in clean rooms, etc. These curves are supposed to stay within certain preset values and any deviation of the curve below or above the preset line is a cause for intervention or approval/rejection.


----------



## jacquesvd

Frank78 said:


> "Die Aufzeichnung des Temperatur*-* und Druckverlaufes"
> 
> Im deutschen Satz geht es nicht zwangsläufig um Kurven, es kann auch eine Tabelle oder ähnliches sein.
> Wenn man Eindeutigkeit will muß man von einem "Temperatur-Druck-Diagramm" bzw. "Temperatur-Zeit-Diagramm" reden.
> 
> "Die Aufzeichnung der Temperaturkurve" ist im Deutschen genauso falsch wie im Englischen.


 
Es kommt vielleicht darauf an was man hier unter Kurve versteht: wenn man z.B. in einem Reinraum die Sauberkeit der Luft messen will geschieht dies an Hand eines Schreibers der Kurven zieht auf einem Papier und diese Kurven werden später analysiert.

Und jetzt fällt mir auch noch ein Spital ein wo man Hirnaktivität oder Blutdruck usw an Hand von Kurven misst, die nachher interpretiert werden.


----------



## Frank78

Eine (Meß-)kurve ist ein Diagramm, was 2 Werte in Bezug setzt,  z.B. Bevölkerung und Zeit wie hier:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Berlin_Einwohnerentwicklung_1880_2006.jpg

Blutdruckmessung: Druck je Zeit
Hirnaktivität: Elektrische Impluse je Zeit

Alles dasselbe 
Wichtig ist nur das diese Daten in ein Diagramm eingetragen werden und die Punkte miteinander verbunden werden, sonst kann man nicht von "Kurve" sprechen.


----------



## elroy

dec-sev said:


> But if the data or readings are taken uninterruptedly during a certain period of time and you obtain the data in the form of a curve (on the monitor or other device), may be you can say that you "record a curve".


 Even in that context, I would say something like "record the data from the curve." But that's irrelevant because we know that that's not what's going on here.





elroy said:


> According to Webster: to monitor= to keep track of, regulate or control;
> to watch, observe or control for a special purpose


 I don't know which Webster's you're using, but according to M-W.com "to monitor" is "to watch, keep track of, or check usually for a special purpose." I can't think of any contexts in which "monitor" can be used to mean "control," but I can assure you that _in this context _- "monitoring a curve" - there is no implication of control. You can monitor a curve for any number of reasons. 





> I believe that's clearly meant here,


 I don't think so. All the German says is that the data is being recorded. It doesn't say anything about how the data was collected, or to what end.





> I have seen countless examples recorded curves in laboratoria, in clean rooms, etc. These curves are supposed to stay within certain preset values and any deviation of the curve below or above the preset line is a cause for intervention or approval/rejection.


 That sounds to me like a special usage that may be common in certain circles. But that's not what's going on in our context. Here, data is simply being recorded in the form of curves. We don't know what's going to happen with the curves that are generated. They may be saved forever, or they may be disposed of as soon as they have fulfilled their purpose (whatever it may be).


----------



## dec-sev

elroy said:


> You can certainly draw a curve, but we don't know how the curve in this context is being created. If it's done using a computer, than "drawing" is not appropriate.


 Let's suppose that you create  something using AutoCad. This is a programme the engineers use to make drawings in electronic format. A situation: one engineer makes a mistake in the drawing -- he simpy forgets to draw a line, indicate a detail position, whatever. Chief engineer checks the drawing, notice a mistake and asks a man to make corrections. After that he asks him: "Have you drawn that missing line in that drawing?" I personally cannot see a better way to express the idea. At least in Russian I would use "draw".


----------



## jacquesvd

Frank78 said:


> Eine (Meß-)kurve ist ein Diagramm, was 2 Werte in Bezug setzt, z.B. Bevölkerung und Zeit wie hier:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Berlin_Einwohnerentwicklung_1880_2006.jpg
> 
> Blutdruckmessung: Druck je Zeit
> Hirnaktivität: Elektrische Impluse je Zeit
> 
> Alles dasselbe
> Wichtig ist nur das diese Daten in ein Diagramm eingetragen werden und die Punkte miteinander verbunden werden, sonst kann man nicht von "Kurve" sprechen.


 
Ja, aber was man zunächst aufzeichnet ist eine sich bewegende Linie (eine Kurve) die elektrische Impulse je Zeit misst; man kann das dann doch wohl die Aufzeichnung einer Kurve nennen.

Am Beispiel eines Reinraums (sterile room in English) wird fortwährend die Anzahl von Partikeln in der Luft gemessen und das geschieht mittels auf einem Papier gezogene Kurven, die so bald sie nur eine schlechte Messung androhen Alarm auslösen (deshalb heißt das Ding auf Englisch auch ein Monitor!).        

In der Fragestellung Piedinas spricht sie von Kurven; ich verstehe darunter dass sowohl die Temperaturwerte wie auch die Druckwerte zunächst in einer Kurve ausgedruckt werden die dann später selbstverständlich an hand vorgegebener und zu beachtenden Wärme- und Druckwerte interpretiert werden können.


----------



## elroy

dec-sev said:


> "Have you drawn that missing line in that drawing?" I personally cannot see a better way to express the idea. At least in Russian I would use "draw".


 You could just say "Have you added that line to the drawing?".  I don't know exactly how AutoCad works, but if you are using a computer to generate a "drawing" of something, I would not say that you are "drawing" that thing.  If anything I would add an explanation, like "drawing it using a computer."


----------



## Frank78

jacquesvd said:


> In der Fragestellung Piedinas spricht sie von Kurven; ich verstehe darunter dass sowohl die Temperaturwerte wie auch die Druckwerte zunächst in einer Kurve ausgedruckt werden die dann später selbstverständlich an hand vorgegebener und zu beachtenden Wärme- und Druckwerte interpretiert werden können.



Die deutsche Satz kann zweierlei bedeuten.

Eine Messung der Temperatur im Verhältnis zum Druck. Wie etwa, wenn man ein Gas in einem Zylinder komprimiert.

Oder:
Temperatur und Druck im Verlauf der Zeit.


----------



## jacquesvd

elroy said:


> Even in that context, I would say something like "record the data from the curve." But that's irrelevant because we know that that's not what's going on here.


 
When you are recording temperature and pressure in tanks, depending on what is in them, it can very well be that you only record lines(curves) on a paper which you later interpret, analyse. But what the specific piece of equipment does is to record these curves! When you measure particles in the air in clean rooms it happens by means of a pencil drawing lines on a paper showing curves that as soon as they threaten to become out of specification, cause alarm (that's why the specific equipment there is called a monitor). The recordings of these curves can later be analysed against preset values. But what you record are curves! 

My Webster gives: To watch, observe or check for a special purpose; to keep track of, regulate or control the operation of a machine or process; to check or regulate the volume or quality in recording.




> " I can't think of any contexts in which "monitor" can be used to mean "control," but I can assure you that _in this context _- "monitoring a curve" - there is no implication of control. You can monitor a curve for any number of reasons.


 
In the context of temperature and pressure in tanks with a certain content, the amount of particles in the air of a cleanroom, the monitor's first purpose is to control if the temperature, pressure or purity of the air stays within specs and, if not, to cause alarm. Since it records curves, these can obviously later also be analysed (to check e.g. at which specific moment there has been reason for concern)

Piedina's question doesn't specify which piece of equipment is supposed to monitor (record) the temperature and pressure curves nor in which environment. Perhaps we should ask her that. 
The choice for 'monitoring' or 'recording' is hers and since I totally agree with you that to monitor_ can also simply mean to _observe but is often understood to carry an undertone of control, I said that she could use to record if she wanted to completely exclude that connotation.

However, curves can be recorded.


----------



## jacquesvd

Frank78 said:


> Die deutsche Satz kann zweierlei bedeuten.
> 
> Eine Messung der Temperatur im Verhältnis zum Druck. Wie etwa, wenn man ein Gas in einem Zylinder komprimiert.
> 
> Oder:
> Temperatur und Druck im Verlauf der Zeit.


 
Ja, aber Piedina spricht von zwei Kurven, eine die die Temperatur aufzeichnet und eine andere die den Druck registriert; ich nehme an, beide zu jedwedem Zeitpunkt im Verlauf des Prozesses.


----------



## elroy

elroy said:


> When you are recording temperature and pressure in tanks, depending on what is in them, it can very well be that you only record lines(curves) on a paper which you later interpret, analyse. But what the specific piece of equipment does is to record these curves! When you measure particles in the air in clean rooms it happens by means of a pencil drawing lines on a paper showing curves that as soon as they threaten to become out of specification, cause alarm (that's why the specific equipment there is called a monitor). The recordings of these curves can later be analysed against preset values. But what you record are curves!


 I'm sorry, but I don't know what you're talking about. You are referring to "recording curves" as if it were something normal to do, when in fact it doesn't make sense in most contexts. 





> In the context of temperature and pressure in tanks with a certain content, the amount of particles in the air of a cleanroom, the monitor's first purpose is to control if the temperature, pressure or purity of the air stays within specs and, if not, to cause alarm. Since it records curves, these can obviously later also be analysed (to check e.g. at which specific moment there has been reason for concern)


 Is this what you mean by "control"? If so, the correct English word to use here would be "check" or "verify." "Kontrollieren" and "control" are false friends.


> The choice for 'monitoring' or 'recording' is hers and since I totally agree with you that to monitor_ can also simply mean to _observe but is often understood to carry an undertone of control, I said that she could use to record if she wanted to completely exclude that connotation.


 Yes, I know what you said, and I've explained why I find your advice shaky.

"To monitor a curve" is normally understood to mean "to observe a curve" (for *any* purpose!).
"To record a curve" is not something a native speaker of English would say in most contexts.  More importantly, it is definitely not suitable in this context.


----------



## jacquesvd

How would you call a piece of equipment (a monitor) used to record in the form of lines drawn on a paper (curved lines) the amount of particles found in the air of a cleanroom? That piece of equipment is called a monitor and the word ' to control' refers here to the first definition given in Webster, namely to check, test or verify by evidence or experiments.
In my American company it is the word 'to control' that is used in this instance. 
To control and to check are not always interchangeable but in my example of a cleanroom, the word 'to check' is simply not used because the purpose of the monitor is to keep or bring the amounts of particles under control, either by automatically triggered intervention or by causing alarm requesting human intervention or even halting of the process.

A cleanroom is not the only example of an environment in which this type of monitoring occurs but it is the one I know best.

And yes, there are many examples where 'to control' is used as a false friend of 'kontrollieren' but that doesn't mean that to control wouldn't have the meaning of 'to check, to verify by means of evidence' as Webster states and be the appropriate word in a number of cases. In my example it has the undertone of triggering intervention if necessary.

Standing alone 'recording curves' sounds more than odd and I have never heard it but here the question was to translate something that refers to two curves because that is what Piedina said. Assuming that with this specification she stressed the need to speak of curves I wouldn't know how to otherwise translate data recorded in the form of paper on which curved lines are drawn. 

'


----------



## elroy

jacquesvd said:


> How would you call a piece of equipment (a monitor) used to record in the form of lines drawn on a paper (curved lines) the amount of particles found in the air of a cleanroom?


 Such an instrument could be called a number of things. I don't see how that's relevant to this discussion. 





> the word ' to control' refers here to the first definition given in Webster, namely to check, test or verify by evidence or experiments.


 Yes, I am aware of that meaning, but it is used exclusively with human subjects (and besides, it's archaic, as M-W.com says).  In any case, you cannot say 





> the monitor's first purpose is to control if the temperature, pressure or purity of the air stays within specs and, if not, to cause alarm


 That is not grammatically correct in English. 





> In my American company it is the word 'to control' that is used in this instance.


 I know for a fact that an American would not say "to control if"! You can double-check with your American colleagues and ask them how they use the word "control." 





> To control and to check are not always interchangeable but in my example of a cleanroom, the word 'to check' is simply not used because the purpose of the monitor is to keep or bring the amounts of particles under control, either by automatically triggered intervention or by causing alarm requesting human intervention or even halting of the process.


 That doesn't mean that you can say that the monitor "controls if" anything. I'm afraid you're mixing up a bunch of different things and drawing unsupported conclusions. 





> Standing alone 'recording curves' sounds more than odd and I have never heard it


 This is interesting, because earlier you said, "I have seen countless examples recorded curves in laboratoria."

I must have misunderstood what you said. I thought you meant that you had actually come across "recorded curves" as an expression in laboratories (which is why I said that that must be a special usage of the word, referring to curves that are "saved" somewhere for reference), but I now realize that all you meant was that you had seen records of data in the form of curves. That's fine, but you can't call those curves "recorded curves." 





> Assuming that with this specification she stressed the need to speak of curves I wouldn't know how to otherwise translate data recorded in the form of paper on which curved lines are drawn.


 This takes us back to my first couple of posts! Again, you cannot say "recording curves" in that context. There are many constructions that can be used to express the idea in a clear, idiomatic, and accurate way - for example, "recording the data in the form of curves" and "creating curves using the data." But "recording curves" just doesn't work here.


----------



## dec-sev

jacquesvd said:


> When you are recording temperature and pressure in tanks, depending on what is in them, it can very well be that you only record lines(curves) on a paper which you later interpret, analyse…


I’m not sure that I understand it correctly, but I think that you measure the _*value*_ of the temperature or pressure or, so to say, figures (the temperature is 75,6 degrees, etc. If many measurements are taken within a short period of time, we have a curve that consists of a number of points, each of them is an indicator of one measurement taken. 


jacquesvd said:


> In the context of temperature and pressure in tanks with a certain content, the amount of particles in the air of a cleanroom, the monitor's first purpose is to control if the temperature, pressure or purity of the air stays within specs and, if not, to cause alarm.


So, the monitor acts like a pressure-relief valve in the boiler. If the pressure is dangerously high it opens and the pressure inside the boiler lowers. May be it’s correct to say that the valve “controls” the pressure, because the valve is “in charge” of two pressure values: one at which it opens, and the other, when it closes. But you say the monitor causes alarm. Alarm itself does not control anyting, I guess. Suppose, that you have a device in your flat installed that must prevent the thieves from stealing something from your house. You also have a camera, like those in airports and banks. One night when you were away on business the flat was robbed. The alarm went off, the camera has captured some pictures of masked individuals, but the flat has been robbed after all. Can you say that the system controls I don't know what?


elroy said:


> ... I don't know exactly how AutoCad works, but if you are using a computer to generate a "drawing" of something, I would not say that you are "drawing" that thing.  If anything I would add an explanation, like "drawing it using a computer."


It would be nice to hear from a person who knows more about it and what words he uses. But you didn’t have to put _drawing_ in quote. It’s a usual drawing, the only difference is that it’s in electronic format. When you print it out it doesn’t differ from a conventional one drawn using pencils and rulers.  


elroy said:


> That sounds to me like a special usage that may be common in certain circles.


I guess so. Ordinary people don’t monitor the temperature, they simply take a look at the thermometer  To tell you the truth, when I read the first post, the following came to my head:
A person gets up every morning, looks at the thermometer and barometer, and makes an entry in his log. It might be nothing but his hobby. When I was a pupil we once were given a task to do a similar thing during one month by our Natural Science teacher. Then we had to made a diagram and connecting the points we got a curve.


----------



## jacquesvd

elroy said:


> Such an instrument could be called a number of things. I don't see how that's relevant to this discussion. Yes, I am aware of that meaning, but it is used exclusively with human subjects. And in any case, you cannot say That is not grammatically correct in English. I know for a fact that an American would not say "to control if"! You can double-check with your American colleagues and ask them how they use the word "control." That doesn't mean that you can say that the monitor "controls if" anything. I'm afraid you're mixing up a bunch of different things and drawing unsupported conclusions. This is interesting, because earlier you said, "I have seen countless examples recorded curves in laboratoria."
> 
> Let me try to explain myself like this:
> 
> When a production process must happen within strict parameters of temperature, pressure, purity of air, etc companies will look for monitoring equipment that checks (controls) whether this is so.
> 
> But in those cases where falling out of the strict preset parameters the monitoring equipment is supposed to either a) and to the extent possible of course, correct the process automatically or b) request human intervention by causing alarm or c) even by stopping the process altogether according to the seriousness of the problem, the word 'to control' is used and not 'to check'.
> In the language of my American company these monitors control the process. No doubt they do this by first checking if everything happens according to the preset parameters but they are said 'to control the process' and not to merely check the process. The word 'control' is appropriate here because it suggests something more than a simple check.
> 
> I must have misunderstood what you said. I thought you meant that you had actually come across "recorded curves" as an expression in laboratories (which is why I said that that must be a special usage of the word, referring to curves that are "saved" somewhere for reference), but I now realize that all you meant was that you had seen records of data in the form of curves. That's fine, but you can't call those curves "recorded curves." This takes us back to my first couple of posts! Again, you cannot say "recording curves" in that context. There are many constructions that can be used to express the idea in a clear, idiomatic, and accurate way - for example, "recording the data in the form of curves" and "creating curves using the data." But "recording curves" just doesn't work here.


 
Yes, I have seen countless 'recorded curves' (print-outs from parameters recorded in the form of lines (curves) but I agree that I have never heard this standalone expression 'recorded curves'.  So here, I could go with your recording data in the form of curves. 

The request was to translate 'Die Aufzeichnung des Temperatur- und Druckverlaufs' with the added comment that it had to be two curves.

Because I didn't know (and still don't) about which equipment we are speaking in what environment, I wanted to draw Piedina's attention to the fact that 'to record' is merely registering the raw data, and whilst I agreed immediately with you that 'to monitor' can also have this meaning, I nevertheless believed it also necessary to draw Piedina's attention to the fact that 'to monitor', especially in production environments carries the undertone of 'to control the process'

And although I admit that 'recorded curves' sounds odd in an isolated way, I believe that the 'monitoring (recording) of both pressure and temperature curves' of a given process is not really awkward. I don't see a problem with calling it 'The monitoring of both temperature and pressure data in the form of two separate curves' but in this case 'monitoring' sounds more like recording only because it is no longer crystal clear that the data are recorded at the moment of happening or that the collected raw data are expressed (immediately or afterwards) in the form of curves.


----------



## elroy

Thank you for explaining in more detail what the monitors you are familiar with do. In that particular context, it's okay to say that the monitors "control the process" (and by the way, that is not the meaning you cited from M-W.com ), but it is not valid to draw the conclusion that the "to monitor" (as a verb) in and of itself conveys or implies anything about "controlling" anything. 

(By the way, you can't say that the monitors "control whether this is so.") 


> 'to record' is merely registering the raw data, and whilst I agreed immediately with you that 'to monitor' can also have this meaning


 Wait a minute; I never said that "to monitor" can be used instead of "to record." They are two different verbs with two very different meanings. 





> I believe that the 'monitoring (recording) of both pressure and temperature curves' of a given process is not really awkward.


 "Monitoring the curves" is fine, but "recording the curves" _is_ awkward. I don't think I need to belabor that point any further. 


> I don't see a problem with calling it 'The monitoring of both temperature and pressure data in the form of two separate curves'


 What is "it"? Again, "monitoring" is not the same thing as "recording." 





> but in this case 'monitoring' sounds more like recording only because it is no longer crystal clear that the data are recorded at the moment of happening or that the collected raw data are expressed (immediately or afterwards) in the form of curves.


  I'm really not sure where you got the idea that "monitoring" can be used as a synonym of "recording." And I really don't understand what point you're trying to make in the blue part.


----------



## Frank78

We need a simple example. 

If you_ look_ at a barometer for a while you_ monitor_ the changes of the air pressure.
If you_ look at it and write_ the air pressure _down_ on a sheet of paper you record the data.


----------



## jacquesvd

elroy said:


> Thank you for explaining in more detail what the monitors you are familiar with do. In that particular context, it's okay to say that the monitors "control the process" (and by the way, that is not the meaning you cited from M-W.com ), but it is not valid to draw the conclusion that the "to monitor" (as a verb) in and of itself conveys or implies anything about "controlling" anything.
> 
> How do you then understand MW when it says to keep track of, regulate or control the operation of ?
> 
> (By the way, you can't say that the monitors "control whether this is so.")
> Wait a minute; I never said that "to monitor" can be used instead of "to record." They are two different verbs with two very different meanings. "Monitoring the curves" is fine, but "recording the curves" _is_ awkward. I don't think I need to belabor that point any further.  What is "it"? Again, "monitoring" is not the same thing as "recording."  I'm really not sure where you got the idea that "monitoring" can be used as a synonym of "recording." And I really don't understand what point you're trying to make in the blue part.


 
Agreed, I have carelessy used 'monitor' and 'record' here. They are surely no synonyms. But what I want to express is that when you accept that there is monitoring equipment that controls a production process it necessarily implies that this happens ad hoc and that from the sentence ' the monitoring of both temperature and pressure data expressed in the form of two separate curves' somebody could read that the expression of the raw data in two separate curves happened afterwards.


----------



## jacquesvd

Frank78 said:


> We need a simple example.
> 
> If you_ look_ at a barometer for a while you_ monitor_ the changes of the air pressure.
> If you_ look at it and write_ the air pressure _down_ on a sheet of paper you record the data.


 
I think I completely agree with your statement here.


----------



## piedina

Hi,
vielen Dank für euren Hilfe zuerst. Ich habe sicher viel gelernt..., auch über Punkten, die ich nicht unbedingt erwartet habe )))

Ich weiss, dass es richtiger ist, wenn man über Kurven spricht, 2 Variabeln (mindestens) angeben. Aber in dem Kontest die 2. Variabel, die Zeit, war klar und deswegen nicht direkt angesprochen.

Schöne Grüße!


----------



## jacquesvd

dec-sev said:


> I’m not sure that I understand it correctly, but I think that you measure the _*value*_ of the temperature or pressure or, so to say, figures (the temperature is 75,6 degrees, etc. If many measurements are taken within a short period of time, we have a curve that consists of a number of points, each of them is an indicator of one measurement taken.
> So, the monitor acts like a pressure-relief valve in the boiler. If the pressure is dangerously high it opens and the pressure inside the boiler lowers. May be it’s correct to say that the valve “controls” the pressure, because the valve is “in charge” of two pressure values: one at which it opens, and the other, when it closes. But you say the monitor causes alarm. Alarm itself does not control anyting, I guess. Suppose, that you have a device in your flat installed that must prevent the thieves from stealing something from your house. You also have a camera, like those in airports and banks. One night when you were away on business the flat was robbed. The alarm went off, the camera has captured some pictures of masked individuals, but the flat has been robbed after all. Can you say that the system controls I don't know what?
> 
> I still owed you a reply here: I am taking an example from a cleanroom where you measure the amount of particles in the air and must make sure that they don't exceed a tiny number.
> 
> The monitoring equipment controlling this can in a case of a threatening problem e.g. a) either automatically regulate the amount of fresh sterile air sucked in b) when the quantities it can handle in a given period of time don't suffice it causes/generates an alarm to the supervisor of the cleanroom with normally speaking enough reaction time for him to intervene or c) when there is not enough time for the reaction to be valid (or if it comes too slowly) to simply shut down the production process.
> 
> That's why this equipment is said to control the production process and the environmental conditions in which it happens. And with regard thereto one can often hear the question "Are we monitoring our production processes closely enough" it being understood that 'to control' is meant.
> 
> Your comparison with the burglary alarm is therefore not completely valid: the alarm cannot autocorrect like the monitroing equipment in a production process and when the alarm is linked to a police station but the police not intervening in time it cannot stop the burglary like the monitoring equipment can shut down the production process if the corrective intervention doesn't happen in time.
> 
> This whole monitoring or controlling process is of course backed up by recorded data (those data come in the form of lines, curves) which can then be scrutinised/analysed in an effort to define the problem as narrowly as possible, to judge whether it is one-off incident or perhaps the beginning of a structural problem.


----------



## elroy

> How do you then understand MW when it says to keep track of, regulate or control the operation of ?


 As I said earlier, I personally can't think of a context in which "to monitor" means "to control" or "to regulate."  (I'm probably not thinking hard enough.)  But that doesn't matter, because the point is that in this context "to monitor the curve" would not mean "to control the curve." 


jacquesvd said:


> I think I completely agree with your statement here.


 Das freut mich so sehr!


----------



## jacquesvd

> elroy said:
> 
> 
> 
> As I said earlier, I personally can't think of a context in which "to monitor" means "to control" or "to regulate." (I'm probably not thinking hard enough.) But that doesn't matter, because the point is that in this context "to monitor the curve" would not mean "to control the curve."  Das freut mich so sehr!
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> I agree that 'to monitor the curve' is not the same as to control the curve.
> 
> But since in a number of instances monitoring equipment helps to control processes I feel that when you translate 'monitoring the temperature and pressure oscillations expressed as curves' the word 'monitoring' can be heard (but hasn't got to) to carry an undertone of 'control' as opposed to 'recording' these oscillations which would merely say that they are noted (dass sie aufgezeichnet werden). That's what I thought I initially conveyed.
> So, I agree that the naked sentence 'to monitor the curve' would not mean to control the curve, but the verb 'to monitor' has amongst other significations the one that Webster describes as 'to regulate or control an operation (of a machine or a process)'
> 
> In conclusion, the naked translation of ' monitoring the pressure and temperature curves' does not mean 'to control the pressure and temperature curves' but in a production environment anybody would understand that these curves are the expression of pressure and temperature oscillations which can have been monitored by equipment that helps regulating and controlling them for which reason I said that imagining the processes behind these data the word monitor in a number of cases carries an undertone of control.
> 
> Anyway, it's been a fruitful discussion.
Click to expand...


----------



## elroy

Indeed, it has. I now understand the origins of your perceptions of the verb "to monitor," but at least to this English speaker, the connotations you mention are not there, so I find "monitor the curve" perfectly valid as a neutral alternative to "observe the curve."

Thanks for participating in this discussion with so much vigor.


----------



## dec-sev

piedina said:


> Ich weiss, dass es richtiger ist, wenn man über Kurven spricht, 2 Variabeln (mindestens) angeben. Aber in dem Kontest die 2. Variabel, die Zeit, war klar und deswegen nicht direkt angesprochen.


Natürlich, Zeit war auch gemeint.


> vielen Dank für euren Hilfe zuerst. Ich habe sicher viel gelernt..., auch über Punkten, die ich nicht unbedingt erwartet habe )))


If it's not a secret, now that you know about curve monitoring, recording, what not as much as Einstein  what do *you* think will be the best variant to translate the sentence you gave?


----------



## englishman

elroy said:


> To monitor something is to watch it closely, to observe it; this may be for the purpose of controlling it somehow, but the act of monitoring itself does not include controlling, and you can certainly monitor something with no intent of controlling it.



In a technical context, if you "monitor" a measurement, it almost always implies that you are doing it for the purpose of control i.e. that there is a feedback process to bring the monitored measurement back into an accepted range. If you "record" a measurement, it is more likely to imply that you wish to use it at a later time i.e. that there is no feedback process involved. 

And in addition, a "monitored" value need not be "recorded" and often won't be, in embedded electronics systems, simply because there's nowhere for the data to be stored.

I'm not sure which is the most appropriate term to use here though.


----------

