This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
English language (monolingual) [PRO] Science - Chemistry; Chem Sci/Eng
English term or phrase:cabbage
In the sentence: "Sweep up and shovel without dust, and dispose as normal cabbage".
I am translating a text in the field of "occupational safety" and hazardous substances. I don't make out what cabbage means here, as it is talking about chemical substances.
and IF there was any dictation involved (think Dragon). garbage with a Boston/New England accent is very easily (mis)understood as cabbage. Just a thought
I'm relieved to hear that the advice is to seek clarification. I strongly agree with that and feel it would be good idea to say so explicitly, just in case Morad got the impression from the Non-Pro votes and the numerous unqualified agreements that there was really no doubt about it.
Interestingly enough, Asker's document doesn't seem to come up on a 'Net search? Unless of course it is 'THE' one we have all found! Yes, of course it would be reckless to suggest anything other than seeking clarification from the source — I feel sure all of us here took that for granted, as being the customary advice given to any asker in the absence of unambiguous context or other confirmatory details.
In fact, no, the instance I found was the same one as Helen's!
"Sweep up and shovel without dust, and dispose as normal cabbage. After cleaning, flush traces away with water. Only small quantities"
This substance is clearly not all THAT hazardous, despite the apparently dire warnings! Were it to be so, they would surely not be suggesting "sweep up" either — nor simply "flush traces away with water"; but it does specifically go on to say that it is only talking about "small quantities".
The intended word may not be "spillage", but I think there are sound reasons to doubt that it is "garbage", and if it is not, it would be unfortunate, to say the least, to recommend that Morad translates it into Farsi like that (as I presume he has to do).
Safety advice is a serious matter, and I think it is a little reckless to brush aside the difficulties here and state confidently that they're saying this stuff, whatever it is (and we don't know) can effectively be flushed down the toilet with no qualms. Might it not be better to reserve judgement and ask for clarification?
Yes, I did indeed have a look at Helen's ref., as well as at the only other almost identical result I found on the 'Net too. I note that the document contains many anomalies, some downright curious EN, and seems to have been cobbled together from differing sources; I suspect the use of 'cabbage' in both documents I found probably arises from some foreign source — possibly the original country of manufacture of the specific chemical ingredient concerned. However, the document also contains the word 'spillage' — it seems curious that one instance should be perfectly spelled, and another not so. On the reverse consideration, there are a tiny handful of examples of "dispose [of] as normal garbage", but none at all with 'spillage'. Then again, of course, we don't know what particular hazardous chemical Asker is dealing with here; no doubt there is other information on the same MSDS that would clarify that point.
You may or may not have had a look at the document Helen found, which uses this precise bizarre phrase. She quotes it in her answer. It is (a) from the UK, (b) a liquid disinfectant/cleanser and (c) very hazardous, corrosive and not to be release into the environment. Disposing of any quantity of it as "normal garbage" is so irresponsible that it seems very hard to believe that it would be recommended.
Of course, I don't know that it's the same substance Morad's document is referring to, but it does seem likely, given that this is such a strange phrase (and the cabbage is not the only strange element, though certainly the strangest).
There are a few instances on the 'Net (relevant to a greater or lesser extent) of "dispose as normal garbage" or "dispose of as normal garbage"
The only instances with "cabbage" are of dubious provenance, seemingly possibly even from non-native EN sources.
On the other hand, the Google search I performed (and yes, I am very well aware that different people in different countries will get different results!) did not return a single result for the exact collocations "dispose of as normal spillage" OR "dispose as normal spillage"
For one thing, 'cabbage' is a huge leap from 'spillage' — would require a multi-letter typo, and is a pretty unlikely spell-checker suggestion.
Equally, as a transcription error or speech-to-text dictation error, garbage > cabbage is an easy slip to make, whereas there is no phonetic similarity at all between spill- and cabb-.
Then again, from the sense of the phrase, 'sweep up and dispose [of] as normal garbage' makes perfect sense — if they are saying that a minor quantity of this substance may be considered as 'normal', i.e. not 'hazardous' waste. 'Spillage' often (but of course by no means exclusively!) suggests possibly a liquid, which you probably wouldn't be sweeping up, nor would it be likely to create dust. OK, I agree that something like a powder might also be said to be 'spilt'. But I'm not sure then we would most likely say 'dispose as normal spillage' — is the implication still 'normal' as distinct from 'hazardous'?
I think only the origin of this document can give any clue: IF it is US, then I think the 'garbage' theory is still the most plausible;if however we know for sure that this is NOT from the US, then I would agree it tends to rule it out.
I find Helena's arguments persuasive. To me, the strongest reason for not interpreting this as garbage, apart from the register (if they meant garbage they would say waste) is that there are surely hardly any chemical substances that should be disposed of as normal "garbage"; such advice is implausible.
And in the texts I've found that include the identical phrase, it appears under the section titled ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES. Accidental release = spillage.
I would definitely interpret it as 'spillage', mainly because 'garbage' is not commonly used in UK English. I've also found similar texts (from the UK) that refer to 'leakage' and 'spillage'.
I've found a document with the identical phrase, but it's from the UK. I don't think it would refer to 'garbage'. Perhaps 'cabbage' should be 'spillage'.
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
2 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +9
garbage
Explanation: Almost certainly a typo.
philgoddard United States Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 8