Lecture 2

合集下载

lecture 2--听辨

听力训练 VS 听辨过程 1

英语听力训练中比较注重语言层面，即十分注意语音、语调和语言的表达及用法。

译员在听辨过程中所注重的是意思，或是讲话者的意图而不是具体的词句表达。所以译员在听到一段话之后在头脑中形成的是一个有逻辑关系的语意整体，而不仅仅是词句的简单集合。
听力训练 VS 听辨过程 2
• 对照关系：like, similarly, in a similar manner, likewise • 对比关系：different from, unlike, by contrast, on the other hand, on the contrary, • conversely
• 解释关系： that is to say, in other words, this means

先后次序：first of all, next, before, after, previously, simultaneously, eventually, finally
Bugs in LCII 恼人的听辨“虫”

1. unknown words 生词 2. culturally-burdened phrases or idioms 英语中的文化陷阱（容易望文生义） 3. illogical flow of thought逻辑混乱 4. heavy accent 口音浓重 5. unfamiliar topic 不了解主题知识 6. too quick a delivery speed 语速过快 7. blurred point of view 意思不明确 8.数字
逻辑关系和对应的标示词
并列关系：and, too, at the same time, meanwhile, in the meantime, as well • • • • • 递进关系：also, moreover, in addition, furthermore, besides, not only, on top of that, apart from 转折关系：but, however, though, whereas, nevertheless, in fact, instead 让步关系：in spite of, despite， although, even though 因果关系：so, thus, hence, as a result, consequently, reason, because, for, due to, accordingly

lecture_2（博弈论讲义GameTheory（MIT））

Last Time:Defined knowledge, common knowledge, meet (of partitions), and reachability.Reminders:• E is common knowledge at ω if ()I K E ω∞∈.• “Reachability Lemma” :'()M ωω∈ if there is a chain of states 01,,...m 'ωωωωω== such that for each k ω there is a player i(k) s.t. ()()1()(i k k i k k h h )ωω+=:• Theorem: Event E is common knowledge at ωiff ()M E ω⊆.How does set of NE change with information structure?Suppose there is a finite number of payoff matrices 1,...,L u u for finite strategy sets 1,...,I S SState space Ω, common prior p, partitions , and a map i H λso that payoff functions in state ω are ()(.)u λω; the strategy spaces are maps from into . i H i SWhen the state space is finite, this is a finite game, and we know that NE is u.h.c. and generically l.h.c. in p. In particular, it will be l.h.c. at strict NE.The “coordinated attack” game8,810,11,100,0A B A B-- 0,010,11,108,8A B A B--a ub uΩ= 0,1,2,….In state 0: payoff functions are given by matrix ; bu In all other states payoff functions are given by . a upartitions of Ω1H : (0), (1,2), (3,4),… (2n-1,2n)... 2H (0,1),(2,3). ..(2n,2n+1)…Prior p : p(0)=2/3, p(k)= for k>0 and 1(1)/3k e e --(0,1)ε∈.Interpretation: coordinated attack/email:Player 1 observes Nature’s choice of payoff matrix, sends a message to player 2.Sending messages isn’t a strategic decision, it’s hard-coded.Suppose state is n=2k >0. Then 1 knows the payoffs, knows 2 knows them. Moreover 2 knows that 1knows that 2 knows, and so on up to strings of length k: . 1(0n I n K n -Î>)But there is no state at which n>0 is c.k. (to see this, use reachability…).When it is c.k. that payoff are given by , (A,A) is a NE. But.. auClaim: the only NE is “play B at every information set.”.Proof: player 1 plays B in state 0 (payoff matrix ) since it strictly dominates A. b uLet , and note that .(0|(0,1))q p =1/2q >Now consider player 2 at information set (0,1).Since player 1 plays B in state 0, and the lowest payoff 2 can get to B in state 1 is 0, player 2’s expected payoff to B at (0,1) is at least 8. qPlaying A gives at most 108(1)q q −+−, and since , playing B is better. 1/2q >Now look at player 1 at 1(1,2)h =. Let q'=p(1|1,2), and note that '1(1)q /2εεεε=>+−.Since 2 plays B in state 1, player 1's payoff to B is at least 8q';1’s payoff to A is at most -10q'+8(1-q) so 1 plays B Now iterate..Conclude that the unique NE is always B- there is no NE in which at some state the outcome is (A,A).But (A,A ) is a strict NE of the payoff matrix . a u And at large n, there is mutual knowledge of the payoffs to high order- 1 knows that 2 knows that …. n/2 times. So “mutual knowledge to large n” has different NE than c.k.Also, consider "expanded games" with state space . 0,1,....,...n Ω=∞For each small positive ε let the distribution p ε be as above: 1(0)2/3,()(1)/3n p p n ee e e -==- for 0 and n <<∞()0p ε∞=.Define distribution by *p *(0)2/3p =,. *()1/3p ∞=As 0ε→, probability mass moves to higher n, andthere is a sense in which is the limit of the *p p εas 0ε→.But if we do say that *p p ε→ we have a failure of lower hemi continuity at a strict NE.So maybe we don’t want to say *p p ε→, and we don’t want to use mutual knowledge to large n as a notion of almost common knowledge.So the questions:• When should we say that one information structure is close to another?• What should we mean by "almost common knowledge"?This last question is related because we would like to say that an information structure where a set of events E is common knowledge is close to another information structure where these events are almost common knowledge.Monderer-Samet: Player i r-believes E at ω if (|())i p E h r ω≥.()r i B E is the set of all ω where player i r- believesE; this is also denoted 1.()ri B ENow do an iterative definition in the style of c.k.: 11()()rr I i i B E B E =Ç (everyone r-believes E) 1(){|(()|())}n r n ri i I B E p B E h r w w -=³ ()()n r n rI i i B E B =ÇEE is common r belief at ω if ()rI B E w ¥ÎAs with c.k., common r-belief can be characterized in terms of public events:• An event is a common r-truism if everyone r -believes it when it occurs.• An event is common r -belief at ω if it is implied by a common r-truism at ω.Now we have one version of "almost ck" : An event is almost ck if it is common r-belief for r near 1.MS show that if two player’s posteriors are common r-belief, they differ by at most 2(1-r): so Aumann's result is robust to almost ck, and holds in the limit.MS also that a strict NE of a game with knownpayoffs is still a NE when payoffs are "almost ck” - a form of lower hemi continuity.More formally:As before consider a family of games with fixed finite action spaces i A for each player i. a set of payoff matrices ,:l I u A R ->a state space W , that is now either finite or countably infinite, a prior p, a map such that :1,,,L l W®payoffs at ω are . ()(,)()w u a u a l w =Payoffs are common r-belief at ω if the event {|()}w l w l = is common r belief at ω.For each λ let λσ be a NE for common- knowledgepayoffs u .lDefine s * by *(())s l w w s =.This assigns each w a NE for the corresponding payoffs.In the email game, one such *s is . **(0)(,),()(,)s B B s n A A n ==0∀>If payoffs are c.k. at each ω, then s* is a NE of overall game G. (discuss)Theorem: Monder-Samet 1989Suppose that for each l , l s is a strict equilibrium for payoffs u λ.Then for any there is 0e >1r < and 1q < such that for all [,1]r r Î and [,1]q q Î,if there is probability q that payoffs are common r- belief, then there is a NE s of G with *(|()())1p s s ωωω=>ε−.Note that the conclusion of the theorem is false in the email game:there is no NE with an appreciable probability of playing A, even though (A,A) is a strict NE of the payoffs in every state but state 0.This is an indirect way of showing that the payoffs are never ACK in the email game.Now many payoff matrices don’t have strictequilibria, and this theorem doesn’t tell us anything about them.But can extend it to show that if for each state ω, *(s )ω is a Nash (but not necessarily strict Nash) equilibrium, then for any there is 0e >1r < and 1q < such that for all [,1]r r Î and [,1]q q Î, if payoffs are common r-belief with probability q, there is an “interim ε equilibria” of G where s * is played with probability 1ε−.Interim ε-equilibria:At each information set, the actions played are within epsilon of maxing expected payoff(((),())|())((',())|())i i i i i i i i E u s s h w E u s s h w w w w e-->=-Note that this implies the earlier result when *s specifies strict equilibria.Outline of proof:At states where some payoff function is common r-belief, specify that players follow s *. The key is that at these states, each player i r-believes that all other players r-believe the payoffs are common r-belief, so each expects the others to play according to s *.*ΩRegardless of play in the other states, playing this way is a best response, where k is a constant that depends on the set of possible payoff functions.4(1)k −rTo define play at states in */ΩΩconsider an artificial game where players are constrained to play s * in - and pick a NE of this game.*ΩThe overall strategy profile is an interim ε-equilibrium that plays like *s with probability q.To see the role of the infinite state space, consider the"truncated email game"player 2 does not respond after receiving n messages, so there are only 2n states.When 2n occurs: 2 knows it occurs.That is, . {}2(0,1),...(22,21,)(2)H n n =−−n n {}1(0),(1,2),...(21,2)H n =−.()2|(21,2)1p n n n ε−=−, so 2n is a "1-ε truism," and thus it is common 1-ε belief when it occurs.So there is an exact equilibrium where players playA in state 2n.More generally: on a finite state space, if the probability of an event is close to 1, then there is high probability that it is common r belief for r near 1.Not true on infinite state spaces…Lipman, “Finite order implications of the common prior assumption.”His point: there basically aren’t any!All of the "bite" of the CPA is in the tails.Set up: parameter Q that people "care about" States s S ∈,:f S →Θ specifies what the payoffs are at state s. Partitions of S, priors .i H i pPlayer i’s first order beliefs at s: the conditional distribution on Q given s.For B ⊆Θ,1()()i s B d =('|(')|())i i p s f s B h s ÎPlayer i’s second order beliefs: beliefs about Q and other players’ first order beliefs.()21()(){'|(('),('))}|()i i j i s B p s f s s B h d d =Îs and so on.The main point can be seen in his exampleTwo possible values of an unknown parameter r .1q q = o 2qStart with a model w/o common prior, relate it to a model with common prior.Starting model has only two states 12{,}S s s =. Each player has the trivial partition- ie no info beyond the prior.1122()()2/3p s p s ==.example: Player 1 owns an asset whose value is 1 at 1θ and 2 at 2θ; ()i i f s θ=.At each state, 1's expected value of the asset 4/3, 2's is 5/3, so it’s common knowledge that there are gains from trade.Lipman shows we can match the players’ beliefs, beliefs about beliefs, etc. to arbitrarily high order in a common prior model.Fix an integer N. construct the Nth model as followsState space'S ={1,...2}N S ´Common prior is that all states equally likely.The value of θ at (s,k) is determined by the s- component.Now we specify the partitions of each player in such a way that the beliefs, beliefs about beliefs, look like the simple model w/o common prior.1's partition: events112{(,1),(,2),(,1)}...s s s 112{(,21),(,2),(,)}s k s k s k -for k up to ; the “left-over” 12N -2s states go into 122{(,21),...(,2)}N N s s -+.At every event but the last one, 1 thinks the probability of is 2/3.1qThe partition for player 2 is similar but reversed: 221{(,21),(,2),(,)}s k s k s k - for k up to . 12N -And at all info sets but one, player 2 thinks the prob. of is 1/3.1qNow we look at beliefs at the state 1(,1)s .We matched the first-order beliefs (beliefs about θ) by construction)Now look at player 1's second-order beliefs.1 thinks there are 3 possible states 1(,1)s , 1(,2)s , 2(,1)s .At 1(,1)s , player 2 knows {1(,1)s ,2(,1)s ,(,}. 22)s At 1(,2)s , 2 knows . 122{(,2),(,3),(,4)}s s s At 2(,1)s , 2 knows {1(,2)s , 2(,1)s ,(,}. 22)sThe support of 1's second-order beliefs at 1(,1)s is the set of 2's beliefs at these info sets.And at each of them 2's beliefs are (1/3 1θ, 2/3 2θ). Same argument works up to N:The point is that the N-state models are "like" the original one in that beliefs at some states are the same as beliefs in the original model to high but finite order.(Beliefs at other states are very different- namely atθ or 2 is sure the states where 1 is sure that state is2θ.)it’s1Conclusion: if we assume that beliefs at a given state are generated by updating from a common prior, this doesn’t pin down their finite order behavior. So the main force of the CPA is on the entire infinite hierarchy of beliefs.Lipman goes on from this to make a point that is correct but potentially misleading: he says that "almost all" priors are close to a common. I think its misleading because here he uses the product topology on the set of hierarchies of beliefs- a.k.a topology of pointwise convergence.And two types that are close in this product topology can have very different behavior in a NE- so in a sense NE is not continuous in this topology.The email game is a counterexample. “Product Belief Convergence”:A sequence of types converges to if thesequence converges pointwise. That is, if for each k,, in t *i t ,,i i k n k *δδ→.Now consider the expanded version of the email game, where we added the state ∞.Let be the hierarchy of beliefs of player 1 when he has sent n messages, and let be the hierarchy atthe point ∞, where it is common knowledge that the payoff matrix is .in t ,*i t a uClaim: the sequence converges pointwise to . in t ,*i t Proof: At , i’s zero-order beliefs assignprobability 1 to , his first-order beliefs assignprobability 1 to ( and j knows it is ) and so onup to level n-1. Hence as n goes to infinity, thehierarchy of beliefs converges pointwise to common knowledge of .in t a u a u a u a uIn other words, if the number of levels of mutual knowledge go to infinity, then beliefs converge to common knowledge in the product topology. But we know that mutual knowledge to high order is not the same as almost common knowledge, and types that are close in the product topology can play very differently in Nash equilibrium.Put differently, the product topology on countably infinite sequences is insensitive to the tail of the sequence, but we know that the tail of the belief hierarchy can matter.Next : B-D JET 93 "Hierarchies of belief and Common Knowledge”.Here the hierarchies of belief are motivated by Harsanyi's idea of modelling incomplete information as imperfect information.Harsanyi introduced the idea of a player's "type" which summarizes the player's beliefs, beliefs about beliefs etc- that is, the infinite belief hierarchy we were working with in Lipman's paper.In Lipman we were taking the state space Ω as given.Harsanyi argued that given any element of the hierarchy of beliefs could be summarized by a single datum called the "type" of the player, so that there was no loss of generality in working with types instead of working explicitly with the hierarchies.I think that the first proof is due to Mertens and Zamir. B-D prove essentially the same result, but they do it in a much clearer and shorter paper.The paper is much more accessible than MZ but it is still a bit technical; also, it involves some hard but important concepts. (Add hindsight disclaimer…)Review of math definitions:A sequence of probability distributions converges weakly to p ifn p n fdp fdp ®òò for every bounded continuous function f. This defines the topology of weak convergence.In the case of distributions on a finite space, this is the same as the usual idea of convergence in norm.A metric space X is complete if every Cauchy sequence in X converges to a point of X.A space X is separable if it has a countable dense subset.A homeomorphism is a map f between two spaces that is 1-1, and onto ( an isomorphism ) and such that f and f-inverse are continuous.The Borel sigma algebra on a topological space S is the sigma-algebra generated by the open sets. (note that this depends on the topology.)Now for Brandenburger-DekelTwo individuals (extension to more is easy)Common underlying space of uncertainty S ( this is called in Lipman)ΘAssume S is a complete separable metric space. (“Polish”)For any metric space, let ()Z D be all probability measures on Borel field of Z, endowed with the topology of weak convergence. ( the “weak topology.”)000111()()()n n n X S X X X X X X --=D =´D =´DSo n X is the space of n-th order beliefs; a point in n X specifies (n-1)st order beliefs and beliefs about the opponent’s (n-1)st order beliefs.A type for player i is a== 0012(,,,...)()n i i i i n t X d d d =¥=Î´D0T .Now there is the possibility of further iteration: what about i's belief about j's type? Do we need to add more levels of i's beliefs about j, or is i's belief about j's type already pinned down by i's type ?Harsanyi’s insight is that we don't need to iterate further; this is what B-D prove formally.Coherency: a type is coherent if for every n>=2, 21marg n X n n d d --=.So the n and (n-1)st order beliefs agree on the lower orders. We impose this because it’s not clear how to interpret incoherent hierarchies..Let 1T be the set of all coherent typesProposition (Brandenburger-Dekel) : There is a homeomorphism between 1T and . 0()S T D ´.The basis of the proposition is the following Lemma: Suppose n Z are a collection of Polish spaces and let021201...1{(,,...):(...)1, and marg .n n n Z Z n n D Z Z n d d d d d --´´-=ÎD ´"³=Then there is a homeomorphism0:(nn )f D Z ¥=®D ´This is basically the same as Kolmogorov'sextension theorem- the theorem that says that there is a unique product measure on a countable product space that corresponds to specified marginaldistributions and the assumption that each component is independent.To apply the lemma, let 00Z X =, and 1()n n Z X -=D .Then 0...n n Z Z X ´´= and 00n Z S T ¥´=´.If S is complete separable metric than so is .()S DD is the set of coherent types; we have shown it is homeomorphic to the set of beliefs over state and opponent’s type.In words: coherency implies that i's type determines i's belief over j's type.But what about i's belief about j's belief about i's type? This needn’t be determined by i’s type if i thinks that j might not be coherent. So B-D impose “common knowledge of coherency.”Define T T ´ to be the subset of 11T T ´ where coherency is common knowledge.Proposition (Brandenburger-Dekel) : There is a homeomorphism between T and . ()S T D ´Loosely speaking, this says (a) the “universal type space is big enough” and (b) common knowledge of coherency implies that the information structure is common knowledge in an informal sense: each of i’s types can calculate j’s beliefs about i’s first-order beliefs, j’s beliefs about i’s beliefs about j’s beliefs, etc.Caveats:1) In the continuity part of the homeomorphism the argument uses the product topology on types. The drawbacks of the product topology make the homeomorphism part less important, but theisomorphism part of the theorem is independent of the topology on T.2) The space that is identified as“universal” depends on the sigma-algebra used on . Does this matter?(S T D ´)S T ×Loose ideas and conjectures…• There can’t be an isomorphism between a setX and the power set 2X , so something aboutmeasures as opposed to possibilities is being used.• The “right topology” on types looks more like the topology of uniform convergence than the product topology. (this claim isn’t meant to be obvious. the “right topology” hasn’t yet been found, and there may not be one. But Morris’ “Typical Types” suggests that something like this might be true.)•The topology of uniform convergence generates the same Borel sigma-algebra as the product topology, so maybe B-D worked with the right set of types after all.。

【托福听力备考】TPO3听力文本——Lecture 2

【托福听力备考】TPO3听力文本——Lecture 2对于很多学生来说，托福TPO材料是备考托福听力最好的材料。

相信众多备考托福的同学也一直在练习这套材料，那么在以下内容中我们就为大家带来托福TPO听力练习的文本，希望能为大家的备考带来帮助。

Lecture 2 Film historyNarrator：Listen to part of a lecture in a film history class.Professor：Okay, we’ve been discussing films in the 1920s and 30s, and how back then film categories, as we know them today, had not yet been established. We said that by today’s standards, many of the films of the 20s and 30s would be considered hybrids, that is, a mixture of styles that wouldn’t exactly fit into any of today’s categories. And in that context, today we are going to talk about a film-maker who began making very unique films in the late 1920s. He was French, and his name was Jean Painlevé.Jean Painlevé was born in 1902. He made his first film in 1928. Now in a way, Painlevé’s films conform to norms of the 20s and 30s, that is, they don’t fit very neatly into the categories we use to classify films today. That said, even by the standards of the 20s and 30s, Painlevé’s films were a unique hybrid of styles. He had a special way of fusing, or some people might say, confusing, science and fiction. His films begin with facts, but then they become more and more fictional. They gradually add more and more fictional elements. In fact, Painlevé was known for saying that science is fiction.Painlevé was a pioneer in underwater film-making, and a lot of his short films focused on the aquatic animal world. He liked to show small underwater creatures, displaying what seemed like familiar human characteristics – what we think of as unique to humans. He might take a clip of a mollusk going up and down in the water and set it to music. You know, to make it look as if the mollusk were dancing to the music like a human being – that sort of thing. But then he suddenly changed the image or narration to remind us how different the animals are, how unlike humans.He confused his audience in the way he portrayed the animals he filmed, mixing up our notions of the categories human and animal. The films make us a little uncomfortable at times because we are uncertain about what we are seeing. It gives him films an uncanny feature: the familiar made unfamiliar, the normal made suspicious. He liked twists, he liked the unusual. In fact, one of his favorite sea animals was the seahorse because with seahorses, it’s the male that carries the eggs, and he thought that was great. His first and most celebrated underwater film is about the seahorse.Susan, you have a question?Student 1：But underwater film-making wasn’t that unusual, was it? I mean, weren’t there other people making movies underwater?Professor：Well, actually, it was pretty rare at that time. I mean, we are talking the early 1930s here.Student 1：But what about Jacques Cousteau? Was he like an innovator, you know, with underwater photography too?Professor： Ah, Jacques Cousteau. Well, Painlevé and Cousteau did both film underwater, and they were both innovators, so you are right in that sense. But that’s pretty much where the similarities end.First of all, Painlevé was about 20 years ahead of Cousteau. And Cousteau’s adventures were high-tech, with lots of fancy equipment, whereas Painlevé kind of patchedequipment together as he needed it. Cousteau usually filmed large animals, usually in the open sea, whereas Painlevé generally filmed smaller animals, and he liked to film in shallow water.Uh, what else? Oh well, the main difference was that Cousteau simply investigated and presented the facts – he didn’t mix in fiction. He was a strict documentarist. He set the standard really for the nature documentary. Painlevé, on the other hand, as we said before, mixed in elements of fiction. And his films are much more artistic, incorporating music as an important element.John, you have a question?Student 2：Well, maybe I shouldn’t be asking this, but if Painlevé’s films are so special, so good, why haven’t we ever heard of them? I mean, everyone’s heard of Jacques Cousteau.Professor： Well, that’s a fair question. Uh, the short answer is that Painlev é’s style just never caught on with the general public. I mean, it probably goes back at least in part to what we mentioned earlier, that people didn’t know what to make of his films – they were confused by them, whereas Cousteau’s documentaries were very straightforward, met people’s expectations more than Painlevé’s films did. But you true film history buffs know about him. And Painlevé is still highly respected in many circles.。

lecture 2 西方翻译理论

2)连贯性法则(coherence rule)

诺德将连贯法则分为文内连贯(intratextual coherence)和文际连贯(intertextual coherence)。所谓文内连贯是指“目标语文本应该要可接受和有意义，即目标语文本与接收环境连贯一致。‘与... 连贯’与接收者的环境和文化‘的一部分’同义。”(Nord,2001:32)而文际连贯又称忠诚原则，是指“以目的论为指向的翻译框架下的原文文本与目标文本之间的关系。”
交际理论学派

奈达是交际翻译理论的代表。他的翻译理论可归纳为六个方面：（1）理论原则。所有语言都具有同等表达能力，而翻译的首要任务就是使读者看译文可一目了然。（2）翻译的性质。按照奈达的定义，“所谓翻译，是指从语义到文体（风格）在译语中用最切近而又最自然的对等语再现原语的信息”。其中三点是关键：一是“顺乎自然”，译文不能有翻译腔；二是 “最切近”，在“自然”的基础上选择意义与原文最接近的译文；三是“对等”，这是核心。所以，翻译必须达到四个标准：（a）达意；（b）传神；（c）措词通顺自然；（d）读者反应相似。

但是正如人们正愈益深刻地认识到的那样，翻译活动决不仅仅是一种语言文字的转换操作，它在本质上是一种特殊的语际交流活动，涉及到一系列的超语言范畴，涉及到语言外其他的文化系统。语言学派的弱点就在于它只注重原文和译文在语言上的对等，而忽视了话语的交际功能以及翻译活动与社会文化之间的关系，有见树不见林之虞。（近二十年来语言学派开始注重研究话语层面上的等值问题，在一定程度上弥补了早期研究的缺陷。）
西方翻译理论
2013级英语笔译1 吴叔尉 2015/9
一、西方翻译史上的5个重大历史时期
1）古代时期（古希腊/罗马时期）拉丁文版《奥德赛》被视为西方翻译史上最早的译作 2）罗马帝国后期圣.哲罗姆翻译钦定拉丁文版《圣经》与此同时大批阿拉伯语作品被译为拉丁语 3）文艺复兴时期（renaissance 14世纪至17世纪初）英国钦定英文版《圣经》

Lecture 2

2. How do you do? •
（好）你好吗？
• Fine，thank you. • （饭，三克油。）很好，谢谢。 • Very well, thanks. • （外瑞威尔，三克斯。） • 很好，谢谢。
问候基本句型
3. Good morning!
早上好！ Good afternoon! 下午好！ Good evening! 晚上好！ 4. How is …? …好吗？ 3. Good morning! Good afternoon! Good even I’m(=I am)… (爱母…) 我是… • I’m from...
（爱母芙蓉母…)
我是来自于...
介绍的相关词汇
• name ( 内母) 名字 • what (沃特) 什么 • is (一子) 是 are(阿) 是 • his 他的 my(卖) 我的 her(喝) 她的 your(哟) 你的 • he() 他 I（爱）我 she(睡) 她 you（油）你 • son （桑）儿子 daughter（多特）女儿
• 早上好！ • 下午好！ • 晚上好！
• （Good!） • Goodbye!
• 故的 • 故的拜
• （好！） • 再见！
问候基本句型
1. Hello! /Hi! 你好！ 1. Hello! /Hi!
2. How do you do?第一次见面时用
（好度油度？）你好吗？
How are you?熟悉后用
•
4. …is fine，thank you. And you? • （…一字饭，三克油。安的油） …很好，谢谢。你呢？ • …is very well, thanks. • （…一字外瑞威尔，三克斯。） • …很好，谢谢。

Lecture2

=have an effect on... =have an influence on...
e.g. Forgiveness and encouragement can make a great difference to a
child's future.
□ embarrassed embarrassing
□ forgive
v.原谅
e.g. We are always told to forgive and forget, for there is a saying “to err is
human, to forgive divine”.
□ make a difference to...
对......产生影响
Useful Words
□ forgiveness
n.宽恕；饶恕
ask forபைடு நூலகம்beg for forgiveness 请求/乞求原谅
e.g. The little boy begged me for forgiveness when he learned what he did
hurt me badly.
a.感到尴尬的 a.令人尴尬的
e.g. I felt very embarrassed when I found my students making fun of me,
for this was very embarrassing.
□ keep/stay calm 保持冷静； calm/cool down 冷静下来
所有（三者以上）任何一个（三者以上）没有一个（三者以上）
e.g. All of the apples are small. You can take any of them. None of them is ripe.

lecture 2 英译汉的技巧

众所周知，过度肥胖或消瘦都肯定是
不健康的。 He acts a lot older than his years. 他年纪轻轻，做事却相当老练。
The
young girl thumbed her way to the passing cars.
那个年轻的姑娘站在路边不停地向来往的
汽车摆动着竖起的拇指表示她要搭车.
2.直译加注
(literal translation + annotation)
音译加注：音译后附加解释性注释。
1.
词语翻译
比萨饼丰田车撒哈拉沙漠艾滋病爵士乐
Pizza Toyota Sahara AIDS Jazz
2.
句子翻译 He did it a Jordon. 他投篮像飞人乔丹那样棒。 I’m Peter Darwin. Everyone asks, so I may as well say at once that no, I’m not related to Charles. 我叫彼得.达尔文。谁都会对我的名字产生疑问，我不妨当下说个明白：我与进化论创始人查尔斯没有关系。 A dead leaf fell in Soapy’s lap. That was Jack Frost’s card. 一片枯叶飘落到苏贝的膝头。那是杰克.弗罗斯特的名片。（杰克.弗罗斯特：英文里对“寒霜” 的拟人称号。）
释义（paraphrase)
定义：舍弃原文的具体表达形式和比喻形
象，采取解释性的办法译出原文。在翻译一些具有鲜明民族色彩的词语（如成语、典故、超常规搭配）时，如果直译不能使译文读者明白其意思，而加注又使译文太啰嗦时，可采用释义法，将原文的意思传达出来。

【托福听力备考】TPO6听力文本——Lecture 2

【托福听力备考】TPO6听力文本——Lecture 2众所周知，托福TPO材料是备考托福听力最好的材料。

相信众多备考托福的同学也一直在练习这套材料，那么在以下内容中我们就为大家带来托福TPO听力练习的文本，希望能为大家的备考带来帮助。

TPO 6 Lecture 2 BiologyNarrator：Listen to part of a lecture in a biology class.Professor：Ok, I have an interesting plant species to discuss with you today.Uh…it’s a species of a very rare tree that grows in Australia, Eidotheahardeniana, but it’s better known as the Nightcap Oak.Now, it was discovered only very recently, just a few years ago. Um… itremained hidden for so long because it’s so rare. There are only about 200 ofthem in existence. They grow in a rain forest, in a mountain rage…range in thenorth part of New South Wales which is uh… a state in Australia. So just 200individual trees in all.Now another interesting thing about the Nightcap Oak is that it is…itrepresents…uh…a very old type…uh…kind of tree that grew a hundred million yearsago. Um, we found fossils that old that bear remarkable resemblance to the tree.So, it’s a primitive tree. A…a living fossil you might say. It’s relic fromearlier times and it has survived all these years without much change. Andit…it’s probably a kind of tree from which other trees that grow in Australiatoday evolved.Just to give you an idea of what we are talking about. Here’s a picture ofthe leaves of the tree and its flowers. I don’t know how well you can see theflowers. They’re those little clusters sitting at the base of the leaves.Okay, what have we tried to find out about the tree since we’ve discoveredit? Hmm…or how…why is…is it so rare? It’s one of the first questions. Um…how isit…um…how does it reproduce? It’s another question. Um, maybe those two questions are actually related. Jim?Student：Hmm …I don’t know. But I can imagine that…for instance, seed dispersal might be a factor. I mean if the…er…you know, if the seeds cannot really disperse in the wild area, then, you know, the tree may not colonize new areas. It can’t spread from the area where it’s growing.Professor：Right. That’s…that’s actually a very good answer. Uh, of course, you might think there might not be many areas where the tree could spread into,er…because…um…well, it’s very specialized in terms of the habitat. But, that’snot really the case here. Um…the suitable habitat, that is, the actualrainforest is much larger than the few hectares where the Nightcap Oakgrows.Now this tree is a flowering tree as I showed you. Um…um…it produces a fruit,much like a plum. On the inci…inside there’s a seed with a hard shell. It…itappears that the shell has to crack open or break down somewhat to allow the seed to soak up water. You know, if the Nightcap Oak remains…if their seedsremain locked inside their shell, they will not germinate. Actually, theseeds…er…they don’t retain the power to germinate for very long, maybe two years. So there’s actually quite a short window of opportunity for the seed togerminate. So the shell somehow has to be broken down before this…um…germinationability expires. And…and then there’s a kind of rat that likes to feed on the seeds as well. So, given all these limitations, not many seeds that the tree produces will actually germinate. So this is a possible explanation for why the tree does not spread. It doesn’t necessarily explain how it became so rare, but it explains why it doesn’t increase.OK, so it seems to be the case that the species, this Nightcap Oak is notvery good at spreading. However, it seems, though we can’t be sure, that it’svery good at persisting as a population. Um…we…there’s some indications to suggest that the population of the Nightcap Oak has not declined over the last.er…you know, many hundreds of years. So it’s stayed quite stable. It’s not aremnant of some huge population that is dwindled in the last few hundred years for some reason. It’s not necessarily a species in retreat. Ok, so it cannotspread very well, but it’s good at maintaining itself. It’s rare, but it’s notdisappearing.Ok, the next thing we might want to ask about a plant like that is whatchances does it have to survive into the future. Let’s look at that.。

Lecture 2-新视野大学英语第四册Unit 2 第二讲

Text Study
Language Points
conformity:(formal) （对社会规则的）遵从，遵守 behaviour or actions that follow the accepted rules of society
f. By participating in this system of extreme conformity, women are actually opening themselves up to the scrutiny of other women, the only ones qualifie 快看我！ to judge their effortsway, to get back to my original point: If you’re a man, and a woma asks you how she looks, you can’t say she looks bad without receiving immediate and well-deserved outrage. (Para. 11)
I’m not saying that appearance is of no importance. I’m just saying tha
e.g. They plastered the city with posters condemning her election 他们在城里到处张贴谴责她当选的海报。她给自己从头到脚都抹上了强效防晒露。 She plastered herself from head to toe in high factor sun lotion.
Summary
The confusing pursuit of beauty When a woman asks a man how she looks, come it is very difficult for him to up ___________ the with right answer. Men do not think of their looks in the same way as women do. They stick to ________ an opinion and like to think of themselves as affixThey much value don’t to average-looking. __________________ to their looks. However, women tend to think their appearance is magnify “not good enough”. They would _______ the smallest imperfections in their bodies.

lecture2

Lecture Two A Contrastive Study of Chinese and English 只赢得：几杵疏钟，半江渔火，两行秋雁，一枕清霜。

There left behind are bronze bells heard occasionallyand fishing boats with flickering lamps seen in the middle of the lake, wild geese leaving in a hurry in two files in autumn, and only frosted snow all over the terrains in winter.What remains is only sparse bells ringing in cold hills, fishermen ' s lantern lights by riverside, two rows of wild geese flying in autumn sky and a dreary dream of hoary winter frost. 知己知彼，百战不殆；不知彼而知己，一胜一负；不知彼不知己，每战必殆。

You can fight a hundred battles without defeat if you know the enemy as well as yourself. You will win one battle and lose another if you know yourself but leave yourself in the dark about the enemy. You will lose every battle if you leave both the enemy and yourself in the dark.From Structure1. 英语有形态变化 ,汉语没有严格意义的形态变化 .English : gender, number, case, tense, voice, mood, degree of comparison, person and parts of speech. 汉语 : 数量助词 ,动态助词 ,结构助词He is a professional. He is a loose man. He served as a call boy when he was 19.She is a professional. She is a loose woman. She served as a call girl when she was 19.2. 英语经常使用定冠词和不定冠词I have lived here for more than a year. I have lived here fore more than one year.It isn ' t going to rain today, is it? Just think it over. All right, let ' s make it tomorrow. Let 's go. 打吧 ,打不下去 ;跑吧 ,跑不了 ,敌人只好投降 .Unable to fight on or to escape, the enemy were forced to surrender.3. 英语常用介词 ,汉语则少用介词 .What is he at? 他正在干什么 ?John voted with the Tories. John 投票支持保守党 .He is a man above vulgar interests. 他是一个脱离了低级趣味的人It looks as if we are in for a storm. 看来我们免不了要碰上一场暴风雨了 .If a man couldn ' t walk into a room and tell who was for him and who was against him, then he wasn ' t much of a politic 。

52第五讲_lecture_2_原核转录过程-讲义

上一讲中我们已经了解了转录的概念，知道了RNA聚合酶的作用以及复制和转录过程的一些差别。

这一讲我们一起来看看原核细胞中转录的具体过程。

原核细胞的转录过程简单来说，可以分为三步，起始，延伸和终止。

1、起始(Initiation)：先来说说转录的起始环节，虽然说，不是每个好的开始都会有一个好的结局，但一个不好的开始注定得不到一个好的结局，可见一个好的开始是有多么重要。

对转录也一样，转录的起始是转录的关键步骤，它决定着转录的成败。

而且不管原核真核，转录的起始阶段在整个转录过程中是一个限速阶段，起始过程也是调控基因表达的最重要的环节。

1.1 闭合复合体的形成及σ因子对启动子的特异性识别转录起始有三个阶段，首先其涉及到的就是RNA聚合酶与启动子的识别。

上一节我们已经提过，原核细胞RNA聚合酶核心酶可以与DNA序列相结合，但它不能区分启动子和其它的DNA序列，因而并没有特异性起始转录的作用。

而当σ因子与RNA聚合酶的核心酶结合形成RNA聚合酶全酶后，全酶对一般DNA序列的识别结合能力显著降低，而对启动子的识别结合能力显著增强，因为σ因子能够特异性的识别并结合启动子的-10和-35区。

所以说σ因子在RNA聚合酶与启动子的识别与结合过程中发挥了关键作用。

σ因子可以分成4个区域，其中区域4可以形成一个常见的螺旋转角螺旋的结构识别启动子-35区并与之结合，而-10区可以被σ因子区域2中的一个螺旋结构识别。

1.2 开放复合体的形成及s因子在启动子DNA解旋中的作用RNA聚合酶全酶与启动子结合后，可以引起-11至+3区域的DNA发生解旋，形成一个转录泡。

转录泡的形成标志着转录起始复合体由闭合复合体转换为开放复合体，这也是转录起始的第二个阶段。

由于-10区处在DNA双链分子发生解旋的元件中，σ因子区域2与-10区除了结合之外，还参与了这段区域DNA的解旋过程。

最新的研究发现，σ因子区域2与-10区结合后，可以使得-10区非模板链上的两个碱基外翻出来，从而促进模板链被释放形成单链。

Lecture 2 演绎和归纳

Lecture 2 演绎和归纳一、课堂目标：1.演绎（三段论）的定义、形式和应用2.归纳的定义和应用3.归纳在生活中的广泛存在和缺陷二、课堂活动安排：对应目标一：1.《两小儿辩日》初探2.你会怎样论证？对应目标二：1.三组三段论2.《两小儿辩日》再探对应目标三：1.我们班的同学...2.从生活中来，到生活中去三、课堂时间安排：四、知识点：演绎：由一般原理推演出一般情况下结论的过程。

（从一般到特殊）演绎推理中主要讲三段论，三段论包括“大前提”、“小前提”和“结论”三个部分。

“大前提”是演绎推理中一般的知识性的前提，“小前提”是演绎推理中包含着特殊知识的前提，而“结论”就是经过推理得到的结果。

通俗地解释，大前提就相当于“奶奶蒸了一锅肉馅的包子”，小前提就相当于“奶奶从这个锅里夹了一只包子”，结论就是“这一只包子是肉馅的”。

归纳：由一系列具体事实概括出一般原理的过程。

（从特殊到一般）归纳推理包括“完全归纳推理”和“不完全归纳推理”。

“完全归纳推理”指对某一集合中所有成员一一进行考察，发现他们都符合或不符合某一特质，而得到一个结论，即“这个集合的所有成员都（不）符合此特质”。

“不完全归纳推理”指对某一集合中部分成员进行考察，发现他们都符合或不符合某一特质，而得到一个结论，即“这个集合中所有成员都（不）符合此特质”。

“不完全归纳推理”在生活中比“完全归纳推理”应用宽泛得多，但是可信度也相对较低。

通俗地说，归纳就是“奶奶蒸了一锅包子，高悦同学夹起来一个尝了一口，发现是肉馅的（事实）；她夹起来第二个尝了一口，发现也是肉馅的（事实）；她夹起来第三个尝了一口，发现还是肉馅的（事实）”，于是得出结论“这锅包子是肉馅的”。

五、材料[L2R1] 两小儿辩日选自《列子》孔子东游，见两小儿辩斗，问其故。

一儿曰：“我以日始出时去人近，而日中时远也。

”一儿以日初出远，而日中时近也。

一儿曰：“日初出大如车盖，及日中则如盘盂，此不为远者小而近者大乎？”一儿曰：“日初出沧沧凉凉，及其日中如探汤，此不为近者热而远者凉乎？”孔子不能决也。

Lecture-2

• 一、西方古代社会的管理实践和思想（6世纪以前） • 二、西欧中世纪的管理实践和思想
• 三、欧洲文艺复兴对管理思想发展的影响
一、西方古代社会的管理实践和思想（6世纪以前）• 1、关于西方和西方国家的概念
• 2、古希腊的管理制度与思想
• 3、古罗马的管理制度与思想
• 4、宗教所体现的管理思想
• 5、早期管理思想的主要特点
• 认为治国人才必须受过良好教育，主张通过教育来培养治国人才，对管理人员要进行选拔。为了造就治国人才，苏格拉底非常重视教育，付出了毕生的精力。 • 关于教育的内容：培养人的美德，教人学会做人，成为有德行的人；要教人学习广博而实用的知识；主张教人
岸重要港口。人口27.1万。主要建于离岸4公
里的海边浅水滩上，平均水深1．5米。
• 由铁路、公路、桥与陆地相连。由118个小岛
组成，并以 177条水道、401座桥梁连成一体，以舟相通，有“水上都市”、“百岛城”、 “桥城”之称。
管理和拯救威尼斯：水的魅力与困扰
• 水——曾是威尼斯的保护神，现却成了威尼斯最大的敌人。 • 1966年，威尼斯发生大洪灾，城内水位高达1米——防洪是国家头等大事。 • 每100年，威尼斯就会下沉1.3厘米。二战后，每20年内下沉30厘米，威尼斯人生活的中心——圣马可广场只高于警戒水位30厘米。 • 2001年1月，威尼斯遭受了历史上最为严重的水灾，洪水持续了4天4夜，城市的大半部分都淹没在水中。 • 2008年10月1日，威尼斯经历了22年以来最大的一次水灾。 • 如何管理和拯救威尼斯？ 2009年10月新动工建设一项耗资 30亿美元的新防洪闸门工程。 2012年10月12日，威尼斯遭受水灾
• 城邦所设的行政官员都是义务职，不支薪水；全部行政官员并不组成为某个行政首脑统一领导下的“政府”。

商务英语翻译(英译汉)lecture 2

⒀ 两种语言习惯顺序不同，这主要体现在一些习语上。汉译时按汉语习惯进行调整。

Sooner or later 迟早 back and forth 前后 Right and left 左右 you, he and I 我，你，他 Rain or shine 不论晴雨
语序调整翻译法 P.112
第八单元
主语的翻译
P.75
英译汉翻译的程序

1. 对原文准确断句，分清原文结构
2.选择句型进行翻译关键是确定译文主语

正说反译：
（一）英语中很多词本身就含有否定意义，beyond, absent, stop, bad, avoid, exclude, except, doubt, resistant, refuse, few, little, 这类词在翻译中要译出它的含有的否定意义。 The window refuses to open. 窗户打不开。 Children were excluded from getting in the building. 孩子不许进入这幢楼房。 Such a chance denied me. 我没有得到这个机会。 The explanation is pretty thin.
反说正译

我们将正译法的使用大致分为三类。（一）祈使句中的否定说法有时正译，因为说话人想表达的常常是一个正面的意义。 No smoking! 严禁吸烟 Don’t lose time in posting this letter. 赶快把这封信寄出去。

正说反译、反说正译翻译法 P.103

所谓正译，是指把句子按照与汉语相同的语序或表达方式译成英语。所谓反译则是指把句子按照与汉语相反的语序或表达方式译成英语。

【托福听力备考】TPO10 听力文本——Lecture 2

【托福听力备考】TPO10 听力文本——Lecture 2众所周知，托福TPO材料是备考托福听力最好的材料。

相信众多备考托福的同学也一直在练习这套材料，那么在以下内容中我们就为大家带来托福TPO听力练习的文本，希望能为大家的备考带来帮助。

TPO10 Lecture 2 European HistoryNarrator: Listen to part of a lecture in a European History Class.Professor：So would it surprise you to learn that many of the foods that wetoday consider traditional European dishes that their key ingredients were noteven known in Europe until quite recently, until the European started tradingwith the native peoples of North and South America? I mean, you are probablyaware that the Americas provide Europe and Asia with foods like squash, beans,turkey, peanuts. But what about all those Italian tomato sauces, hungariangoulash or my favorite, French fries? Those yummy fried potatoes.Student：Wait. I mean I knew potatoes were from where, South America?Professor ：South America. Right, the Andes Mountains.Student：But you are saying tomatoes too? I just assume since they’re used inso many Italian dishes.Professor：No, like potatoes, Tomatoes grew wild in the Andes. Although unlikepotatoes, they weren’t originally cultivated there. That seems to have occurredfirst in Central America. And even then the tomato doesn’t appear to have beenvery important as a food plant until the Europeans came on the scene. They tookit back to Europe with them around 1550. And Italy was indeed the first placewhere it was widely grown as a food crop. So in a sense, it really is moreItalian than American.And another thing and this is true of both potato and tomato. Both of these plants are members of the Nightshade family. The Nightshade family is a category of plants which also includes many that you wouldn’t want to eat, like mandrake, belladonna, and even tobacco. So it’s no wonder that people once considered potatoes and tomatoes to be inedible too, even poisonous. And in fact, the leaves of the potato plant are quite toxic. So it took both plants quite a while to catch on in Europe. And even longer before they made the return trip to North America and became popular food items here.Student：Yeah, you know, I remember, I remember my grandmother telling me that when her mother was a little girl, a lot of people still thought that tomatoes are poisonous.Professor：Oh, sure. People didn’t really start eating them here until the mid-eighteen hundreds.Student：But seems like I heard... didn’t Thomas Jefferson grow them or something?Professor：Well, that’s true. But then Jefferson is known not only as the third president of the United States but also as a scholar who was way ahead of his time in many ways. He didn’t let the conventional thinking of his day restrain his ideas.Now, potatoes went through a similar sort of ...uh... of a rejection process,especially when they were first introduced in Europe. You know how potatoes can turn green if they are left in the light too long? And that greenish skin can make the potatoes tastes bitter; even make you ill. So that was enough to put people off for over 200 years. Yes, Bill?Student：I’m sorry professor Jones. But I mean yeah ok. American crops have probably contributed a lot to European cooking over the years. But…Professor：But have they really played any kind of important role in European history? Well, as a matter of fact, yes. I was just coming to that.Let’s start with North American corn or maize, as it’s often called. Now before the Europeans made contact with the Americas, they subsisted mainly on grains, grains that often suffered from crop failures. And largely for this reason that political power in Europe was centered for centuries in the South, around the Mediterranean Sea, which was where they could grow these grains with more reliability.But when corn came to Europe from Mexico, well, now they had a much hardier crop that could be grown easily in more northerly climates and the centers of power began to shift accordingly. And then, well, as I said potatoes weren’t really popular at first. But when they finally did catch on which they did first in Ireland around 1780. Well, why do you suppose it happen? Because potatoes have the ability to provide an abundant and extremely nutritious food crop, no other crop grew in North Europe at the time had anything like the number of vitamins contained in potatoes. Plus, potatoes grown on the single acre of landcould feed many more people than say, wheat grown on the same land. Potatoes soon spread to France and other Northern European countries. And as a result, the nutrition of the general population improved tremendously and population soared in the early 1800s and so the shift of power from southern to northern Europe continued.。

托福听力TPO12原文 Lecture 2-智课教育旗下智课教育

智课网托福备考资料托福听力TPO12原文 Lecture 2-智课教育旗下智课教育下面就让小编来为大家介绍一下托福听力TPO12原文中Lecture 2的文本内容吧，大家要好好把握，这些都是非常有价值的材料，同时，大家也可以登录智课教育论坛进行TPO练习辅导，希望能够给准备托福听力的同学带来帮助。

TPO12 Lecture 2BusinessProfessor：Ok, as we’ve talked about a key aspect of running a successful business is knowing, um, getting a good sense of what the customer actually wants, and how they perceive your product. So with that in mind, I want to describe a very simple method of researching customer preference, and it is becoming increasingly common, it's called----MBWA----which stands for managing by wandering around. Now, MBWA, that's not the most technical sounding name you've ever heard, but it describes the process pretty accurately. Here is how it works.Basically, Um, the idea is that business owners or business managers just go out and actually talk to their customers, and learn more about how well the business is serving their needs, and try to see what the customer experiences,because that's a great way to discover for yourself, how your product is perceived, what the strengths and weaknesses are, you know, how to you can improved it that sort of thing, you know Dortans, they make soup and can vegetables and such. Well, the head of the company, had Dortans’ topped executives walk around supermarkets, um, asking shoppers what they thought of Dortans’ soup, and he use the data to make changes to the company's product, I mean, when Dortans of all the companies, embraces something as radical as MBWA, it really show you how popular the theory has become, yes,Lisa?Student A：But this is dangerous to base decisions on information from a small sample of people? Is it large scale market research safer getting data on a lot of people?Professor：That's a good question, and well I don't want to pretend that W… MBWA is some sort of, um, replacement for other methods of customer research. Now,the market research data definitely can give you a good idea of, um, of the big picture, but MBWA is really useful kind of filling in the blanks, you know, getting a good underground sense of how you products you use, and how people need respond to them, and Yes, the numbers of opinion you get is small so you do need to be careful, but, good business managers will tell you that the big fear they have an.. .and one of the most frequent problems they come across is well becoming out of touch with what their customers really want and need,you know surveys and market research stuff like that, they can only tell you so much about what the customers actually want in their day-to-daylives.Managing by wandering around on the other hand, that get you in there give you a good sense about what customers needs so. So when use combination then, MBWA and market research were the powerful tools. Oh, here is another example for you, um, see you executive for a clothing manufacture. It was,um,Lken, Lken jeans you know, they went in work in the store for a few days,selling Lken's cloths. Now that give them a very different idea about their product, they saw how people responded to it; they could go up to customers in the store asked questions about it, yes Mike?Student B：Well, I would think that a lot of customers will be bothered by, you know, if I'm shopping, I don't know if I want some business representatives coming up to me and asking me questions, it's.. It's like when I got phone call at home from marketing researchers, I just hang up themProfessor：Oh, well, it's certainly true that well no one likes getting calls at home from market researchers or people like that, but I will tell you something. Most customers have exact opposite reaction when they comes to MBWA. Now,don't ask me why, because I really have no idea, but the fact is that customers tend to respond really well to MBWA, which is the key reason for a success.In fact, the techniques of MBWA works so well, they have actually been extended to all kinds of different contacts like politics for instance, Um, a few years back, the major of Botamore, Um.. I can guess its name is Shapher or something like that. Anyway, he decided that the best way to serve the peopleof the city, of his city, was actually get out there in it and experience the things that they experienced, so he right around the city in, you know, all parts of it, and he see all the prattles; he see how the trash was sometimes, um, not pick up but off side the street and then they go back to the office and they write these memos, and these memos to stuff about the problems he had seen, and how they needed to be fixed, you know that sort of thing, but the thing is he got all the information just by going around and seeing the different Botamore neighborhoods and talking to the people in them, and he called it--- small politics, we'd call it MBWA, or just, playing good customer service.《商学》教授：好。

lecture 2

8
2）汉语亲属称谓语的英译法）充分性” 可接受性” ※ “充分性”与“可接受性”：充分性 “充分性”就是遵守原文及源语文化的规范， “可接受性” 充分性”就是遵守原文及源语文化的规范，可接受性” 则是遵守原文乃至于源语言和文化的规范。在汉文化里人们习惯于用“排行称谓“，如”大哥“、”二哥“，”大嫂习惯于用“排行称谓“ 大哥“ 二哥“ “、”二嫂“等，在西方文化中，人们则习惯于使用”姓名二嫂“ 在西方文化中，人们则习惯于使用” 称谓“ 在翻译亲属称谓语时，称谓“，在翻译亲属称谓语时，为了让英语读者理解汉语中人物之间错综复杂的关系，我们宜”目标语文化的规范“ 人物之间错综复杂的关系，我们宜”目标语文化的规范“，即通常将汉语中的“排行称谓“译成英语的”姓名称谓“ 即通常将汉语中的“排行称谓“译成英语的”姓名称谓“以符合英语的称谓习惯。符合英语的称谓习惯。
Task 1:汉语亲汉语亲பைடு நூலகம்属称谓语的特点及其英译 Task 2:社会称社会称谓语系统的分类及其英译
Lecture 2
称谓文化与汉英翻译
5
e.g. 刘太太也称赞丈夫心思敏捷，只担心方鸿渐本刘太太也称赞丈夫心思敏捷，
领太遭，替他捧牢饭碗。领太遭，要大舅子替他捧牢饭碗。钱钟书《围城》（钱钟书《围城》） Mrs. Liu also approved of her husband’s keen reasoning, her only qualm being that Fang was inept and would need her husband to keep his job for him. (珍妮凯利、茅国权译）珍妮·凯利珍妮凯利、刘太太想把自己丈夫的妹妹许配给方鸿渐，〔注〕刘太太想把自己丈夫的妹妹许配给方鸿渐，假若此桩婚姻成功的话，婚姻成功的话，那么他们两家就能通过姻亲结成连襟亲属关那么刘太太的丈夫就自然成了方鸿渐妻子（系。那么刘太太的丈夫就自然成了方鸿渐妻子（刘太太丈夫的妹妹）舅爷” 的妹妹）的 “ 舅爷 ” 。假若汉译英时将这么复杂的关系转过去，肯定会让英语读者摸不着头脑。因此，简译成 her husband，英语读者一看就知道指的是刘太太的丈夫。，英语读者一看就知道指的是刘太太的丈夫。