0

I was asked to proof-read an english text. The sentence "Each product is defined into final detail" caught my eyes, as I do not know if it is valid. I believe the client wants to say "Each product is defined down to the last detail."

Now I am not sure. Is the first version in any way correct or is it just plain wrong?

3
  • 1
    I agree the client is looking for "last detail", or wants to say "in fine detail".
    – Dan Bron
    Sep 12, 2014 at 10:27
  • 1
    An alternative possibility is "The final details of each product are defined". But without any linguistic or explanatory context, it's impossible for me to be sure. "Each product is defined into final detail" is not idiomatic English. Your query demonstrates the validity of the general principle that it is inadvisable to proofread text written in, or to translate into, a language that one does not speak like a native.
    – Erik Kowal
    Sep 12, 2014 at 10:30
  • There was no real context, it was supposed to be displayed over a movie of the products (car parts).
    – Lars Ebert
    Sep 12, 2014 at 10:35

1 Answer 1

0

The grammar looks correct to me, but without further context the meaning is indeed garbled. I can't parse what the sentence means, especially because I don't know what this product is. A physical product is not "defined": it's made, constructed, pieced together, processed, but definitely not "defined", at least not into a physical item.

The only meaning I could guess from that sentence is that "This is a finished product based on the final blueprint that we made", but like I said, without context it may be wrong

But for proof-reading-wise to me it looks correct, it's just meaningless

2
  • A manufactured physical product can be defined in the sense that the concept for it can be worked out and shaped, or its details can be designed. But certainly, in a movie subtitle 'defined' is too vague and imprecise unless the accompanying photography makes it obvious which meaning is intended.
    – Erik Kowal
    Sep 12, 2014 at 10:42
  • @ErikKowal I meant that defining something does not create it, defining something simply conceptualizes it
    – Raestloz
    Sep 13, 2014 at 2:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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