Backfill package / Backfill layer

18:56 Jan 3, 2019 

Should I understand that you ever got your boots muddy (which I did, by the way) or ever read/fill a tender form? cause your explanations sure don’t speak for it!

I fail to see where the discussion up to now clarified anything but differences in FR-US and FR-CA. Strictly speaking, in English, "backfill" is used to mean both the "material used in refilling an excavation" - which we call, in FR-CA, "matériau de remplissage" or "granulats", depending on the context - and "to refill an excavation" - which we call, in FR-CA, "remblayer/remblayage": the action of filling an excavation, a trench, etc. with a (sterile) material, the result of which is a "remblai".

So, "strictly speaking", as a native speaker of French, I will use "remblai" to point to the mass of the "stuff" (sand, earth, gravel, etc.) put in place according to certain backfilling specifications (conditions de remblayage) and it’s the "remblai" ou "le corps du remblai" (= the whole/the largest part, depending on the context) and a "couche supérieure/sous-fondation/fondation" that will "obtain" 11/17 MPa - certainly not the "package". Just like here, a "work package" can’t be "responsible for" anything.

10:19 Jan 3, 2019 

I think the discussion here clarifies why sitting at a desk dealing with legal documents can't provide the same knowledge of construction contracts as working on both drafting and on-site management of such contracts. Getting one's boots muddy is very useful.
Note that, strictly speaking, "remblai" is the stuff, "remblayage" is what one does with it.

10:11 Jan 3, 2019 

Thanks for drawing that to my attention. I've corrected the typo. You could, of course, have done so yourself.

22:44 Jan 2, 2019 

there is a mistake in what you put in the glossary, it certainly is not "rembai"

22:32 Jan 2, 2019 

S.t.p., ne me prête pas d’intention. Je n’avais pas commenté ta réponse, donc, je n’ai pas "immédiatement compris "remblai" comme une traduction littérale". En fait, j’ai accroché sur "remblayage" pour "backfill layer".

22:14 Jan 2, 2019 

pourquoi je ne me suis pas avancée davantage, ce que tu as aussitôt compris comme une traduction littérale

21:56 Jan 2, 2019 

Faut croire que non! :-/
Mais pour ma défense (et celle de Finch, quand même!) faut-il ajouter que le texte soumis n’est vraiment pas un chef d’oeuvre? S’il y a distinction à faire, ça coûtait quoi de dire ce qu’il y a "on top of the backfill layer"?

21:48 Jan 2, 2019 

Tu n'es pas encore habituée aux inepties qui trouvent leur chemin vers le glossaire ?

21:22 Jan 2, 2019 

Oui. Bien sûr! Que valent mes 14 ans d’expérience (à plein temps!) dans la préparation de documents de soumission (clauses générales et particulières, devis, formulaires de soumission, etc.) et la cinquantaine de rapports d’expertise en génie civil des cinq dernières années (études géotechniques, excavations et remblais, fondations, murs de soutènement, etc.) face à des "likely to mean", "apparently relates to" et à une traduction littérale? Bien peu! J’ai sûrement dû rêver ma proposition. Pardonnez-moi!

J’ose à peine vous suggérer de réviser ce qu’est une "apposition" (je n’en vois aucune) et les divers sens que peut prendre le verbe "s’opposer" en français, mais je laisse avec plaisir "any excavation and backfiling contractor" apprécier vos explications!

10:49 Jan 1, 2019 

Any native speaker of English who had ever managed a large construction project would recognise that "package" refers to the contractual work package and couldn't possibly mean the body/mass of backfill. The text then switches in "17MPa on top of the backfill layer" to talk about a physical layer of backfill that is identified in a picture. The 17MPa compaction rate apparently relates to topsoil that is laid on top of that backfill layer. A minimum compaction rate across the whole of that work package is laid down and then a higher compaction rate is specified for a particular part of that work package.

The syntactical device of putting 17MPa in apposition to 11MPa, by using a comma and a phrase with no verb, makes it clear that both relate to the same work package. Note the difference between the syntactic term "apposition" and "opposition". There is no "opposition" here.