-
1 nature of interaction
Большой англо-русский и русско-английский словарь > nature of interaction
-
2 nature of interaction
Математика: природа взаимодействия -
3 nature of interaction
English-russian dictionary of physics > nature of interaction
-
4 nature of interaction
Англо-русский словарь по машиностроению > nature of interaction
-
5 nature of interaction
English-Russian scientific dictionary > nature of interaction
-
6 nature of interaction
The English-Russian dictionary on reliability and quality control > nature of interaction
-
7 nature
1) естество; натура2) природа3) сущность4) характер; свойство; качество5) род; сорт•- dual nature of light -
8 nature
-
9 interaction
-
10 interaction with nature
Техника: взаимодействие с природойУниверсальный англо-русский словарь > interaction with nature
-
11 interaction of society and nature
English-russian dctionary of diplomacy > interaction of society and nature
-
12 the close interaction between people and nature
Общая лексика: тесная связь человека с природойУниверсальный англо-русский словарь > the close interaction between people and nature
-
13 природа взаимодействия
Большой англо-русский и русско-английский словарь > природа взаимодействия
-
14 Language
Philosophy is written in that great book, the universe, which is always open, right before our eyes. But one cannot understand this book without first learning to understand the language and to know the characters in which it is written. It is written in the language of mathematics, and the characters are triangles, circles, and other figures. Without these, one cannot understand a single word of it, and just wanders in a dark labyrinth. (Galileo, 1990, p. 232)It never happens that it [a nonhuman animal] arranges its speech in various ways in order to reply appropriately to everything that may be said in its presence, as even the lowest type of man can do. (Descartes, 1970a, p. 116)It is a very remarkable fact that there are none so depraved and stupid, without even excepting idiots, that they cannot arrange different words together, forming of them a statement by which they make known their thoughts; while, on the other hand, there is no other animal, however perfect and fortunately circumstanced it may be, which can do the same. (Descartes, 1967, p. 116)Human beings do not live in the object world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their society. It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection. The fact of the matter is that the "real world" is to a large extent unconsciously built on the language habits of the group.... We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation. (Sapir, 1921, p. 75)It powerfully conditions all our thinking about social problems and processes.... No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same worlds with different labels attached. (Sapir, 1985, p. 162)[A list of language games, not meant to be exhaustive:]Giving orders, and obeying them- Describing the appearance of an object, or giving its measurements- Constructing an object from a description (a drawing)Reporting an eventSpeculating about an eventForming and testing a hypothesisPresenting the results of an experiment in tables and diagramsMaking up a story; and reading itPlay actingSinging catchesGuessing riddlesMaking a joke; and telling itSolving a problem in practical arithmeticTranslating from one language into anotherLANGUAGE Asking, thanking, cursing, greeting, and praying-. (Wittgenstein, 1953, Pt. I, No. 23, pp. 11 e-12 e)We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages.... The world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds-and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds.... No individual is free to describe nature with absolute impartiality but is constrained to certain modes of interpretation even while he thinks himself most free. (Whorf, 1956, pp. 153, 213-214)We dissect nature along the lines laid down by our native languages.The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds-and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds.... We are thus introduced to a new principle of relativity, which holds that all observers are not led by the same physical evidence to the same picture of the universe, unless their linguistic backgrounds are similar or can in some way be calibrated. (Whorf, 1956, pp. 213-214)9) The Forms of a Person's Thoughts Are Controlled by Unperceived Patterns of His Own LanguageThe forms of a person's thoughts are controlled by inexorable laws of pattern of which he is unconscious. These patterns are the unperceived intricate systematizations of his own language-shown readily enough by a candid comparison and contrast with other languages, especially those of a different linguistic family. (Whorf, 1956, p. 252)It has come to be commonly held that many utterances which look like statements are either not intended at all, or only intended in part, to record or impart straightforward information about the facts.... Many traditional philosophical perplexities have arisen through a mistake-the mistake of taking as straightforward statements of fact utterances which are either (in interesting non-grammatical ways) nonsensical or else intended as something quite different. (Austin, 1962, pp. 2-3)In general, one might define a complex of semantic components connected by logical constants as a concept. The dictionary of a language is then a system of concepts in which a phonological form and certain syntactic and morphological characteristics are assigned to each concept. This system of concepts is structured by several types of relations. It is supplemented, furthermore, by redundancy or implicational rules..., representing general properties of the whole system of concepts.... At least a relevant part of these general rules is not bound to particular languages, but represents presumably universal structures of natural languages. They are not learned, but are rather a part of the human ability to acquire an arbitrary natural language. (Bierwisch, 1970, pp. 171-172)In studying the evolution of mind, we cannot guess to what extent there are physically possible alternatives to, say, transformational generative grammar, for an organism meeting certain other physical conditions characteristic of humans. Conceivably, there are none-or very few-in which case talk about evolution of the language capacity is beside the point. (Chomsky, 1972, p. 98)[It is] truth value rather than syntactic well-formedness that chiefly governs explicit verbal reinforcement by parents-which renders mildly paradoxical the fact that the usual product of such a training schedule is an adult whose speech is highly grammatical but not notably truthful. (R. O. Brown, 1973, p. 330)he conceptual base is responsible for formally representing the concepts underlying an utterance.... A given word in a language may or may not have one or more concepts underlying it.... On the sentential level, the utterances of a given language are encoded within a syntactic structure of that language. The basic construction of the sentential level is the sentence.The next highest level... is the conceptual level. We call the basic construction of this level the conceptualization. A conceptualization consists of concepts and certain relations among those concepts. We can consider that both levels exist at the same point in time and that for any unit on one level, some corresponding realizate exists on the other level. This realizate may be null or extremely complex.... Conceptualizations may relate to other conceptualizations by nesting or other specified relationships. (Schank, 1973, pp. 191-192)The mathematics of multi-dimensional interactive spaces and lattices, the projection of "computer behavior" on to possible models of cerebral functions, the theoretical and mechanical investigation of artificial intelligence, are producing a stream of sophisticated, often suggestive ideas.But it is, I believe, fair to say that nothing put forward until now in either theoretic design or mechanical mimicry comes even remotely in reach of the most rudimentary linguistic realities. (Steiner, 1975, p. 284)The step from the simple tool to the master tool, a tool to make tools (what we would now call a machine tool), seems to me indeed to parallel the final step to human language, which I call reconstitution. It expresses in a practical and social context the same understanding of hierarchy, and shows the same analysis by function as a basis for synthesis. (Bronowski, 1977, pp. 127-128)t is the language donn eґ in which we conduct our lives.... We have no other. And the danger is that formal linguistic models, in their loosely argued analogy with the axiomatic structure of the mathematical sciences, may block perception.... It is quite conceivable that, in language, continuous induction from simple, elemental units to more complex, realistic forms is not justified. The extent and formal "undecidability" of context-and every linguistic particle above the level of the phoneme is context-bound-may make it impossible, except in the most abstract, meta-linguistic sense, to pass from "pro-verbs," "kernals," or "deep deep structures" to actual speech. (Steiner, 1975, pp. 111-113)A higher-level formal language is an abstract machine. (Weizenbaum, 1976, p. 113)Jakobson sees metaphor and metonymy as the characteristic modes of binarily opposed polarities which between them underpin the two-fold process of selection and combination by which linguistic signs are formed.... Thus messages are constructed, as Saussure said, by a combination of a "horizontal" movement, which combines words together, and a "vertical" movement, which selects the particular words from the available inventory or "inner storehouse" of the language. The combinative (or syntagmatic) process manifests itself in contiguity (one word being placed next to another) and its mode is metonymic. The selective (or associative) process manifests itself in similarity (one word or concept being "like" another) and its mode is metaphoric. The "opposition" of metaphor and metonymy therefore may be said to represent in effect the essence of the total opposition between the synchronic mode of language (its immediate, coexistent, "vertical" relationships) and its diachronic mode (its sequential, successive, lineal progressive relationships). (Hawkes, 1977, pp. 77-78)It is striking that the layered structure that man has given to language constantly reappears in his analyses of nature. (Bronowski, 1977, p. 121)First, [an ideal intertheoretic reduction] provides us with a set of rules"correspondence rules" or "bridge laws," as the standard vernacular has it-which effect a mapping of the terms of the old theory (T o) onto a subset of the expressions of the new or reducing theory (T n). These rules guide the application of those selected expressions of T n in the following way: we are free to make singular applications of their correspondencerule doppelgangers in T o....Second, and equally important, a successful reduction ideally has the outcome that, under the term mapping effected by the correspondence rules, the central principles of T o (those of semantic and systematic importance) are mapped onto general sentences of T n that are theorems of Tn. (P. Churchland, 1979, p. 81)If non-linguistic factors must be included in grammar: beliefs, attitudes, etc. [this would] amount to a rejection of the initial idealization of language as an object of study. A priori such a move cannot be ruled out, but it must be empirically motivated. If it proves to be correct, I would conclude that language is a chaos that is not worth studying.... Note that the question is not whether beliefs or attitudes, and so on, play a role in linguistic behavior and linguistic judgments... [but rather] whether distinct cognitive structures can be identified, which interact in the real use of language and linguistic judgments, the grammatical system being one of these. (Chomsky, 1979, pp. 140, 152-153)23) Language Is Inevitably Influenced by Specific Contexts of Human InteractionLanguage cannot be studied in isolation from the investigation of "rationality." It cannot afford to neglect our everyday assumptions concerning the total behavior of a reasonable person.... An integrational linguistics must recognize that human beings inhabit a communicational space which is not neatly compartmentalized into language and nonlanguage.... It renounces in advance the possibility of setting up systems of forms and meanings which will "account for" a central core of linguistic behavior irrespective of the situation and communicational purposes involved. (Harris, 1981, p. 165)By innate [linguistic knowledge], Chomsky simply means "genetically programmed." He does not literally think that children are born with language in their heads ready to be spoken. He merely claims that a "blueprint is there, which is brought into use when the child reaches a certain point in her general development. With the help of this blueprint, she analyzes the language she hears around her more readily than she would if she were totally unprepared for the strange gabbling sounds which emerge from human mouths. (Aitchison, 1987, p. 31)Looking at ourselves from the computer viewpoint, we cannot avoid seeing that natural language is our most important "programming language." This means that a vast portion of our knowledge and activity is, for us, best communicated and understood in our natural language.... One could say that natural language was our first great original artifact and, since, as we increasingly realize, languages are machines, so natural language, with our brains to run it, was our primal invention of the universal computer. One could say this except for the sneaking suspicion that language isn't something we invented but something we became, not something we constructed but something in which we created, and recreated, ourselves. (Leiber, 1991, p. 8)Historical dictionary of quotations in cognitive science > Language
-
15 chemistry
'kemistri
1. noun((the science that deals with) the nature of substances and the ways in which they act on, or combine with, each other: Chemistry was his favourite subject; the chemistry of the blood.) química- chemical
2. noun(a substance used in or obtained by a chemical process: Some chemicals give off harmful fumes.) producto químico- chemistchemistry n químicatr['kemɪstrɪ]1 químican.• química (Química) s.f.'keməstri, 'kemɪstrimass nouna) ( science) química fb) ( interaction) sintonía f, vibraciones fpl['kemɪstrɪ]good/bad chemistry — buena/mala sintonía
1.N química fthe chemistry between them is right — (fig) están muy compenetrados
2.CPDchemistry laboratory N — laboratorio m de química
chemistry set N — juego m de química
* * *['keməstri, 'kemɪstri]mass nouna) ( science) química fb) ( interaction) sintonía f, vibraciones fplgood/bad chemistry — buena/mala sintonía
-
16 play
play [pleɪ]━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━1. noun4. compounds━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━1. noun• there was some good play in the second half on a assisté à du beau jeu pendant la deuxième mi-temps• to bring or call sth into play faire intervenir qchb. ( = movement) jeu mc. ( = drama) pièce f (de théâtre)• to be in a play [actor] jouer dans une piècea. [+ game, sport] jouer à• what position does she play? à quelle place joue-t-elle ?• don't play games with me! ne vous moquez pas de moi !• to play ball with sb ( = cooperate) coopérer avec qn• to play the game ( = play fair) jouer le jeu• he gave up playing the field and married a year ago il a cessé de papillonner et s'est marié il y a un anb. [+ opponent] rencontrerc. [+ chess piece, card] jouerf. ( = direct) [+ hose, searchlight] dirigera. jouer► play + preposition• what's he playing at? (inf) à quoi il joue ?• how much time do we have to play with? (inf) combien de temps avons-nous ?4. compounds► play-off noun (after a tie) ≈ match m de barrage (départageant des concurrents à égalité) ; (US) (for championship) match m de qualification[+ tape] réécouter( = minimize importance of) [+ significance] minimiser ; [+ situation, attitude] dédramatiser[+ sb's emotions, good nature] jouer sur( = give trouble) the engine is playing up le moteur fait des siennesa. ( = give trouble to) his leg is playing him up sa jambe le tracasseb. ( = magnify importance of) exagérer (l'importance de)* * *[pleɪ] 1.2) (amusement, recreation)3) Sport, Gamesthe ball is out of play/in play — la balle est hors jeu/en jeu
4) fig (movement, interaction) jeu m2.transitive verb1) jouer à [game, match, cards]; jouer [card]to play goal — ( in football) être gardien de but
to play the ball to somebody — ( in basketball) passer la balle à quelqu'un
2) Music jouer de [instrument]; jouer [tune, symphony, chord]3) ( act out) Theatre interpréter, jouer [role]4) Audio mettre [tape, video, CD]5) Finance3.to play the stock market — boursicoter (colloq)
1) [children] jouer ( with avec)2) figwhat does he think he's playing at? — GB (colloq) qu'est-ce qu'il fabrique (colloq)?
3) Sport, Games jouer5) Cinema, Theatre [play] se jouer; [film] passer; [actor] jouershe's playing opposite him in ‘Macbeth’ — elle lui donne la réplique dans ‘Macbeth’
6) [fountain, water] couler; Music [record] jouer•Phrasal Verbs:- play off- play on- play out- play up••all work and no play (makes Jack a dull boy) — Prov il n'y a pas que le travail dans la vie
-
17 Mind-body Problem
From this I knew that I was a substance the whole essence or nature of which is to think, and that for its existence there is no need of any place, nor does it depend on any material thing; so that this "me," that is to say, the soul by which I am what I am, is entirely distinct from body, and is even more easy to know than is the latter; and even if body were not, the soul would not cease to be what it is. (Descartes, 1970a, p. 101)still remains to be explained how that union and apparent intermingling [of mind and body]... can be found in you, if you are incorporeal, unextended and indivisible.... How, at least, can you be united with the brain, or some minute part in it, which (as has been said) must yet have some magnitude or extension, however small it be? If you are wholly without parts how can you mix or appear to mix with its minute subdivisions? For there is no mixture unless each of the things to be mixed has parts that can mix with one another. (Gassendi, 1970, p. 201)here are... certain things which we experience in ourselves and which should be attributed neither to the mind nor body alone, but to the close and intimate union that exists between the body and the mind.... Such are the appetites of hunger, thirst, etc., and also the emotions or passions of the mind which do not subsist in mind or thought alone... and finally all the sensations. (Descartes, 1970b, p. 238)With any other sort of mind, absolute Intelligence, Mind unattached to a particular body, or Mind not subject to the course of time, the psychologist as such has nothing to do. (James, 1890, p. 183)[The] intention is to furnish a psychology that shall be a natural science: that is to represent psychical processes as quantitatively determinate states of specifiable material particles, thus making these processes perspicuous and free from contradiction. (Freud, 1966, p. 295)The thesis is that the mental is nomologically irreducible: there may be true general statements relating the mental and the physical, statements that have the logical form of a law; but they are not lawlike (in a strong sense to be described). If by absurdly remote chance we were to stumble on a non-stochastic true psychophysical generalization, we would have no reason to believe it more than roughly true. (Davidson, 1970, p. 90)We can divide those who uphold the doctrine that men are machines, or a similar doctrine, into two categories: those who deny the existence of mental events, or personal experiences, or of consciousness;... and those who admit the existence of mental events, but assert that they are "epiphenomena"-that everything can be explained without them, since the material world is causally closed. (Popper & Eccles, 1977, p. 5)Mind affects brain and brain affects mind. That is the message, and by accepting it you commit yourself to a special view of the world. It is a view that shows the limits of the genetic imperative on what we turn out to be, both intellectually and emotionally. It decrees that, while the secrets of our genes express themselves with force throughout our lives, the effect of that information on our bodies can be influenced by our psychological history and beliefs about the world. And, just as important, the other side of the same coin argues that what we construct in our minds as objective reality may simply be our interpretations of certain bodily states dictated by our genes and expressed through our physical brains and body. Put differently, various attributes of mind that seem to have a purely psychological origin are frequently a product of the brain's interpreter rationalizing genetically driven body states. Make no mistake about it: this two-sided view of mind-brain interactions, if adopted, has implications for the management of one's personal life. (Gazzaniga, 1988, p. 229)Historical dictionary of quotations in cognitive science > Mind-body Problem
См. также в других словарях:
NCI-Nature Pathway Interaction Database — PID Content Description Pathway Interaction Database. Contact Laboratory National Cancer Institute … Wikipedia
INTERACTION (sciences humaines) — «L’idée d’interaction n’est pas une notion de sens commun», écrivaient Park et Burgess en 1907, dans leur Introduction à la science de la sociologie ; «elle représente l’aboutissement d’une réflexion longuement développée par les êtres humains,… … Encyclopédie Universelle
Interaction sociale — Interaction (sciences sociales) Pour les articles homonymes, voir Interaction. Une interaction est un échange d information, d affects ou d énergie entre deux agents au sein d un système. C est une action réciproque qui suppose l entrée en… … Wikipédia en Français
Intéraction sociale — Interaction (sciences sociales) Pour les articles homonymes, voir Interaction. Une interaction est un échange d information, d affects ou d énergie entre deux agents au sein d un système. C est une action réciproque qui suppose l entrée en… … Wikipédia en Français
Nature (journal) — Nature Magazine and Nature (magazine) redirect here. For the U.S. magazine published in Baltimore between 1923–1959, see American Nature Association. Nature … Wikipedia
Interaction design — (IxD) is the discipline of defining the behavior of products and systems that a user can interact with. The practice typically centers around complex technology systems such as software, mobile devices, and other electronic devices. However, it… … Wikipedia
interaction — [ ɛ̃tɛraksjɔ̃ ] n. f. • 1876; de inter et action ♦ Action réciproque. ⇒ interdépendance. Interaction sociale. ♢ Phys. Deux corps en interaction. ⇒ 1. action, réaction. Interactions de gravitation, électromagnétiques, nucléaires. Interaction forte … Encyclopédie Universelle
Interaction Faible — Pour les articles homonymes, voir Interaction. La force faible ou interaction faible est l une des quatre forces fondamentales de la nature, les trois autres étant la force de gravitation, la force électromagnétique, et l interaction forte. L… … Wikipédia en Français
Interaction Fluide-Structure — L effondrement du pont de Tacoma Narrows, en 1940. L interaction fluide structure ou IFS concerne l étude du comportement d un solide immergé dans un fluide, dont la réponse peut être fortement affectée de par l action du fluide. L étude de ce… … Wikipédia en Français
Interaction d'echange — Interaction d échange En physique, l’interaction d échange est un effet quantique qui accroît ou décroît l énergie d un ou plusieurs électrons lorsque leurs fonctions d ondes se superposent. Conséquence du principe d exclusion de Pauli, cette… … Wikipédia en Français
Nature Publishing Group — Type Private Founded 1869 (Nature Journal) Headquarters 4 Crinan Street, London, United Kingdom … Wikipedia
