1

I am confused in translating some kind of phrases such as these.

Which one of the pairs is true? If both, What is the difference? and what is the meaning of the phrase? (I mean if I want to explain the phrase what I must say?)

  • Security function requirement interfering actions
  • Security function requirement interfered actions

  • Security function requirement enforcing actions

  • Security function requirement enforced actions

Update : I want to translate the following paragraph in Persian. But I don't understant the ...ing words in the bold phrases return to which one of the words in back!

Note : SFR = Sequrity Function Requirement

The purpose of this work unit is to supplement the details about the SFR-enforcing actions (provided in work unit ADV_FSP.3-6) with a summary of the remaining actions (i.e., those that are not SFR-enforcing). This covers all SFR-supporting and SFR-non-interfering actions, whether invokable through SFR-enforcing TSFI or through SFR-supporting or SFR-non-interfering TSFI. Such a summary about all SFR-supporting and SFR-non-interfering actions helps to provide a more complete picture of the functions provided by the TSF, and is to be used by the evaluator in determining whether an action or TSFI may have been mis-categorised.

  • Inappropriate elision causes ambiguities like this. Include every word and see what the sentence implies. HTH. – Kris Sep 1 '14 at 4:41
  • @Kris Question Updated. please take a look. Thanks – TheGoodUser Sep 1 '14 at 4:52
  • 1
    One way to understand the (possible/ intended) meanings relate to the direction: "SFR interfered actions" are actions that are interfered with by SFR; "SFR interfering actions" are actions that interfere with SFR. – Kris Sep 1 '14 at 4:56
  • So the meaning of Those that are not SFR-enforcing is : Those actions that are not enforces SFRs, Right? – TheGoodUser Sep 1 '14 at 5:04
  • Please check again -- " that are not enforces SFRs, " needs correction. However, "not SFR-enforcing" is fine. – Kris Sep 1 '14 at 5:05
1

The -ing form in the examples could be replaced by a relative sentence:

action SFR-enforcing = action that enforces SFR

action not SFR-enforcing = action that does not enforce SFR

action SFR-supporting = action that supports SFR

action not SFR-supporting = action that does not support SFR

action SFR-interfering = action that interferes with SFR

action not SFR-interfering = action that does not interfere with SFR

At first sight, the past participle form, ending in -ed, is not correct.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.