Didn't create a new list. The old l is still there but it's different than it used to be.

它改变了数组，而并没有新建一个数组,老数组l依旧存在。

麻省理工公开课 - 计算机科学及编程导论课程节选

Whereas the list assignment you see here did not rebind the object l 1, it changed this. OK?

并没有对包含1的对象做重新绑定,所以这有所改变，对不对？

麻省理工公开课 - 计算机科学及编程导论课程节选

But the mere fact that they would change your behavior doesn't yet tell you whether they're reason-generating facts.

但仅仅是它们会改变你的行为这个事实,并没有告诉你它们是否是产生原因的事实。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Priests, these are the bishops of the old system, have changed their name to presbyters, perhaps, and they look like revolutionaries, but they're manipulative, controlling actions haven't essentially changed at all.

牧师，这些是旧制度的主教，或许已经把名字变为长老，他们看起来像革命者，但其实他们的操纵，控制的行为并没有改变什么。

耶鲁公开课 - 弥尔顿课程节选

So, for instance, one example is there's no language in the world that ever constructs a question by switching the order of words around in a sentence.

举例来说,世界上并没有语言能够通过,改变句子中词的顺序,来构成疑问句

耶鲁公开课 - 心理学导论课程节选

Calorimeter doesn't change in this process.

量热计在这个过程中并没有改变。

麻省理工公开课 - 热力学与动力学课程节选

On the one hand, it could be that certain facts, if you knew them, would cause you to behave differently without actually giving you any reason to behave differently.

一方面，可能有某些事实，如果你知道了它们，会导致你的行为不同,但并没有真正地给你改变行为的理由。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选