Glossary entry (derived from question below)
Italian term or phrase:
100,000 mila tonnellate
English translation:
100,000 tons
Added to glossary by
Ivana UK
Jan 28, 2006 00:14
18 yrs ago
6 viewers *
Italian term
100,000 mila tonnellate
Italian to English
Tech/Engineering
Metallurgy / Casting
zinc
I can't get my head around this number - or could it be an error.
It's talking about the production capacity of a non-ferrous material's plant!
It's talking about the production capacity of a non-ferrous material's plant!
Proposed translations
(English)
| 3 | that depends |
Ivana UK
|
| 4 +2 | one hundred thousand |
Alfredo Tutino
|
Proposed translations
35 mins
Selected
that depends
- could be 100,000 tons (the word "mila" having been added unnecesarily)
- could be 100,000,000 tons
(that's my take on it anyway!!)
- could be 100,000,000 tons
(that's my take on it anyway!!)
2 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thanks"
+2
1 hr
Alfredo Tutino
Native in Italian
No MT, No TMs: I am a Translator!
Native in: Italian 
Works in: English to Italian, French to Italian, Italian
one hundred thousand
Probably the comma (,) is used as a decimal separator, here, instead of the anglosaxon point (.). After all, it is normal in Italian...
I do not know what the figure refers to, in fact, but if it is to be interpreted, for instance, as a production figure, 100 millions tons does seem to be too much - my old (1970) inorganical chemistry text gave an estimate of 4 millions (metric) tons/year for world zinc production - I'm sure it has grown, but I can't easily believe a single plant producing 25 times as much (I am assuming we're talking amount of refined metal produced in a year - but even if it is, for instance, the yearly amount raw mineral processed...)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 9 hrs (2006-01-28 10:04:31 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I agreee with Gian on there being too many significant digits after the decimal separator, and I think there *is* some kind of error in the text. To me, it smells of bad commnication in the editing process. The boss: "Put the figures in thousands of tons, here!" (instead of tons) - and the secretary simply moves the the comma 3 places to the left... :-)
I do not know what the figure refers to, in fact, but if it is to be interpreted, for instance, as a production figure, 100 millions tons does seem to be too much - my old (1970) inorganical chemistry text gave an estimate of 4 millions (metric) tons/year for world zinc production - I'm sure it has grown, but I can't easily believe a single plant producing 25 times as much (I am assuming we're talking amount of refined metal produced in a year - but even if it is, for instance, the yearly amount raw mineral processed...)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 9 hrs (2006-01-28 10:04:31 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I agreee with Gian on there being too many significant digits after the decimal separator, and I think there *is* some kind of error in the text. To me, it smells of bad commnication in the editing process. The boss: "Put the figures in thousands of tons, here!" (instead of tons) - and the secretary simply moves the the comma 3 places to the left... :-)
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
Gian
8 hrs
|
|
grazie. Credo che tu abbia ragione sul numero di zeri dopo la virgola - stavo per aggiungere un commento su questo, stanotte, ma avevo sonno... :-)
|
|
| agree |
Yakov Tomara
8 hrs
|
|
grazie
|
Discussion