-
Both Hartman and Fish argued that the rhetorical strategies of Milton's similes work to reinforce the theological categories of good and evil.
哈特曼和费什都论述到这里修辞上的策略,起到了加强,善与恶在神学层面上的区分。
-
To speak of shepherds and shepherding in a pastoral poem seems almost invariably to be a strategy or a way to speak of poets and their craft of poetry.
在田园诗里描绘牧羊人,看起来是一种固定不变的策略或者方式,用以描述诗人和他们的造诣。
-
We've argued that once we realize those aren't going to be played, that 2 and 9 aren't going to be played.
我们明白了一旦我们知道了,无人会采用那些策略时,那么也没有人会选立场2和9
-
By the way, I'm going to leave also to your sections the strange confusion that ensues in taking a rhetorical device, metonymy, and making it synonymous with grammar on the axis of combination.
另外，我还将把奇怪的困惑留给你们思考,这个困惑随着使用修辞学策略和转喻而产生，并使得它在结合轴上与语法有着同样的意思。
-
Let me mention a few administration economic proposals, all couched in terms of controlling cost and spurring growth, all linked in one way or another to the economic crisis that was started during the housing bust.
让我们谈谈,政府的一些经济策略，全都归于,控制成本和刺激增长的名下，全部都与,金融危机有关,都是在房产市场萧条时出台的。
-
This is once you've decided that you're going to be an active manager and try and pursue market beating strategies, how do you decide where it is that you want to spend your time and energy?
一旦你决定了要当主动管理型基金经理人,努力追求高于市场收益的策略,你会如何决定,在哪些方面投入时间和精力
-
I've got each person's name and I've got a number from each person: a strategy from each person.
我有你们每个人的名字和所选数字,即每个人的策略
-
Now of course, the presbyters had seized control in the first place because they disapproved of the tactics of suppression and intervention that had been deployed by the bishops, or the prelates, of the old church.
当然，现在长老首先掌握了控制权,因为他们对旧教会主教和教士的,镇压和干预策略非常反对。
-
If we delete the strategies 1 and 10, which were dominated, then does 3 dominate 2?
如果我们剔除劣势策略1和10,那么策略3优于策略2吗
-
So if the only tool I taught you in this class was dominated strategies and the iterative deletion of dominated strategies we'd be stuck.
所以之前讲的,不要采用劣势策略,和迭代剔除劣势策略在这里就不奏效了
-
So much for talking about coordination games and helping you with your dating strategy.
讲了有关协调博弈和约会策略的问题,今天我们就讲这么多了吧
-
So we were able to dominate 1 and 10 in the first round, so we know this won't be played, and we know this won't be played.
在第一次推理中1和10是劣势策略,我们知道无人会采用它们,我们就不会去采用它们
-
We've argued that 1 and 10 shouldn't be chosen because they're dominated.
我们已经知道无人会选立场1和10,因为它们是劣势策略
-
This should be something familiar from when we were deleting dominated strategies.
这和我们之前学过的,迭代剔除劣势策略类似
-
Okay, 1 and 10 are both dominated.
和10 是劣势策略
-
So if we do the procedure of iteratively deleting dominated strategies, going back again, looking what's dominated, all that's left is 5 and 6.
如果我们按照这个程序,迭代剔除劣势,不断回头看看那些策略是劣势的,最终将只剩下立场5和6
-
Never mind, if you are doing that strategy, take it from a Brit, most princes are as dumb as toast, not worth waiting for.
如果你真的采取这个策略,记住这句英国的俗语吧,王子和土司一样蠢,不值得你去等的
-
So we've now got all of the ingredients of the game: players, strategies, payoffs.
现在这个博弈的所有要素都有了,参与人,策略和收益
-
Here you are, you're working for Mckinsey, you've been hired by Joe Smith and Ann blogs to figure out their strategy, working on a problem in a team on working on my homework assignments.
你是在为麦肯锡工作,你被乔史密斯和安博客录用,帮他们寻找合理策略,或者在学习小组里一起做作业
-
So we know that 2 is not dominated, and particularly not dominated by 3, When you delete the dominated strategy of 2 dominating 1, or 1 being dominated, when you delete that and 10, then it is.
我们知道选立场2并不是劣势策略,它并不劣于选立场3,当你剔除劣于策略2的劣势策略1,或者说立场1处于劣势,当你剔除策略1和10之后,2就变成劣势策略了
-
So if you think people are going to play a particular way, in particular if you think people are going to choose the strategy of Ryan and Chris, and choose around 33, then 22 seems a great answer.
如果你认为大家会按这种方式推理的话,确切地说就是如果你认为大家会依照,瑞恩和克里斯的策略而选择33的话,22看起来是个不错的选择
-
So Christine is correct in saying that once we delete the strategies 1 and 10 once we realize that those positions are not going to be chosen by our sophisticated candidates then we realize that probably choosing 2 isn't a good idea either.
克里斯汀说的很对,一旦我们剔除了策略1和10,一旦我们意识到,不会有人选择这些立场时,我们会发现,选立场2或9可能也不是个好主意了
-
Once I deleted all the strategies that were never a best response and just focused on that little box of strategies that survived, the picture looked exactly the same as it did before, albeit it blown up and the numbers changed.
一旦剔除了非最佳对策的策略,仔细研究剩下的策略时,图像还和以前看起来是一样的,尽管坐标改变了,图像放大了
-
Why is it that when we see these law partners, or medical partners, or whatever it happens to be, or students together on a homework assignment, why is it we tend to get inefficiently little effort when we start figuring out the strategy and working through the game?
为什么这些律师事务所的律师,医疗合伙人或者其他类似的机构,还有一起做作业的学生,当我们研究过这些策略和博弈后,为何这样的组合往往是收效甚微的
-
You can't think that it really could make so much difference in the real world how prices and quantitie and welfare, and profit is going to work out depending on some thought experiment about how I think about my strategy set.
你们很难想象在现实世界里,价格 产量 福利和利润会因为,不同策略集合设定下的思想实验,而产生如此巨大的变化
-
So here's Player I's payoff as a function of what Player II chooses and what Player I chooses, so we have that already.
这个就是参与人I的收益的方程,它是参与人I和II策略的函数,我们已经得到了
-
Now I need to distinguish this from the set of possible strategies of Player I, so I'm going to use capital "Si" to be what?
我们需要把这个特定的策略和,参与人i的可能策略集合区别开来,我们用大写的Si来表示什么
-
So just rewriting, Player i's strategy, same thing, ?i is a best response.
我来写一下,参与人i的策略,和之前一样,?i是最佳对策
-
So the best response for Player 1, as a function of what Player 2 chooses, q2, is just equal to the q1 hat in this expression and if I solve that out carefully, I will no doubt make a mistake, but let's try it.
这个就是参与人1的最佳对策,它是参与人2策略q2的一个函数,它和之前的q1帽那个表达式是相等的,虽然我是很仔细地计算的,还是有可能算错的,我来验证一下
应用推荐