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。

耶鲁公开课 - 弥尔顿课程节选

Let's talk sort of at a more tactical level, about what do we want you to know in this course.

我们来讲一些策略层面上的目标，关于我们希望你们从课程中学到什么。

麻省理工公开课 - 计算机科学及编程导论课程节选

So by thinking about my opponent, by putting myself in my opponent's shoes, I realize that she has a dominant strategy, Alpha.

所以考虑到我的对手,站在她的立场上看,我发现她有一个优势策略α

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

And there're different people who have different tastes about what you do with this piece and that piece of land how do you approach this political issue and that issue.

不同的人有不同的喜好,在应该对这一国及那一国实行何种策略的问题上,在如何解决这一以及其它政治问题上意见都不同。

普林斯顿公开课 - 人性课程节选

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。

耶鲁公开课 - 文学理论导论课程节选

The second question was about China and there was a special report in the recent Economist talking about the ravenous appetite that China has for natural resources right now. I was curious what you ? thought the effect that would have on global financial ? markets and your investing strategy?

第二个问题是有关于中国的,在最近的《经济学人》杂志上有一篇特别报道,该报道是关于现在中国对自然资源的极度渴望,我非常想知道您个人认为,他们这种情况对全球金融市场会有什么影响呢,对您的投资策略又有什么影响呢？

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

So once again what this idea is this idea is you yourself should not play a dominated strategy.

所以再次强调,站在我们自己的立场上说,我们不应采用劣势策略

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So in that game we played at the end last time, what were the set of strategies?

上节课我们最后做的游戏,策略的集合是什么样的呢

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

The key strategy here, essentially the strategy is going to be very simple.

关键的策略,本质上,策略是非常简单的

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

But as a statement of strategy, it's a pretty good idea.

但从策略上讲,这是个不错的想法

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

All of you, at the end last time, wrote down this number and handed them in so we had one number, one strategy choice for each person in the class.

上节课大家都交上来了一个数字,所以每个人都有对应的数字,这就是每个人都有一个策略

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So let's actually, you might want to be a little bit gentle in your own notebook, but on my board let's get rid of all these strategies that are never a best response.

所以我们干脆点,在笔记本上,你们动作轻点,我直接在划掉这些非最佳对策的策略

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

And if I did this, and again, don't scribble too much in your notes but if we just make it clear what's going on here, I'm actually going to delete these strategies since they're never going to be played I end up with a little box again.

如果我再进行一次,别在笔记上乱画,我们只是想知道最后会怎样,因为这些策略不会被人采用,所以我剔除掉它们,最后我得到了一个更小的方格

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

We know from last time that you should not choose a dominated strategy, and we also know we probably aren't going to choose a weakly dominated strategy, and we also know that you should put yourself in other people's shoes and figure out that they're not going to play strongly or strictly or weakly dominated strategies.

上节课我们学到了,不要采用劣势策略,然后今天我们学到了,我们有时可能不会选择弱劣势策略,我们还学会了站在别人立场上思考,然后推测出他们不会选择,严格劣势策略或弱劣势则略

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

I'm going to put down two different definitions of best response, one of which corresponds to best response to somebody else playing a particular strategy like left and right, and the other is just going to correspond to the more general idea of a best response to a belief.

我写出最佳对策的两种不同形式定义,一个是参与人针对对手策略的定义,比如这里的左路右路,另一个强调的是,最佳对策的广义上的定义

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Similarly, we can see that Right is not dominated, because it does better against Up, than does Left.

类似的,我们也得出右也不是劣势策略,因为参与人I选上时,选右比选左好

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So, for example, you might think Down is dominated, but if we look a bit carefully we see that Down actually does better than Up against Right, and Down does better than Middle against Left.

例如说,你们可能认为选下是个劣势策略,但仔细观察后你会发现,参与人II选右时,选下要比上更好,参与人II选左,选下比选中更好

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Problem is here, that Player II has a continuum of strategies and trying to draw all possible probabilities over an infinite number of objects on the board is more than my drawing can do. Too hard.

现在问题是,参与人II的策略是连续的,想要把无限可能性的概率,做成图都画在黑板上,是不可能的了

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选