Перевод: с английского на все языки

со всех языков на английский

to describe one's purposes

  • 1 describe one's purposes

    Универсальный англо-русский словарь > describe one's purposes

  • 2 describe one's purposes

    изложить свои намерения

    Новый англо-русский словарь > describe one's purposes

  • 3 describe

    describe [dɪˊskraɪb] v
    1) опи́сывать, изобража́ть; характеризова́ть(ся);

    to describe one's purposes изложи́ть свои́ наме́рения

    2) геом. начерти́ть, постро́ить ( фигуру)
    3) описа́ть (круг, кривую)

    Англо-русский словарь Мюллера > describe

  • 4 describe

    dɪsˈkraɪb гл.
    1) описывать, рассказывать, изображать;
    характеризовать(ся) (as) to describe in detail, to describe minutely ≈ подробно описывать to describe vividly ≈ живо описывать I would describe him as an excellent teacher. ≈ Я бы сказал, что он прекрасный преподаватель. Would you describe this piece of music as well written? ≈ Можно ли сказать об этой вещи, что она хорошо написана? The prisoner described himself as an unemployed painter. ≈ Арестованный назвался безработным художником. Syn: portray, depict, report
    2) мат. описать (одну фигуру вокруг другой) ;
    начертить to describe arc ≈ описывать дугу описывать, изображать - to * a person описать человека - to * one's purposes изложить свои намерения - to * smb.'s views охарактеризовать чьи-л. взгляды - to * smth. as good /to be good/ описать или охарактеризовать что-л. с хорошей стороны - he was *d as being very clever о нем говорили, что он очень умен описывать - words cannot * this scene слова бессильны описать эту сцену описывать;
    вычерчивать - to * a circle описать окружность - to * a triangle построить треугольник describe вычерчивать ~ изображать ~ описать (круг, кривую) ;
    начертить ~ описывать, изображать;
    характеризовать(ся) ;
    to describe one's purposes изложить свои намерения ~ вчт. описывать ~ описывать ~ вчт. характеризовать ~ характеризовать ~ in detail описать подробно ~ описывать, изображать;
    характеризовать(ся) ;
    to describe one's purposes изложить свои намерения

    Большой англо-русский и русско-английский словарь > describe

  • 5 describe

    [dɪsˈkraɪb]
    describe вычерчивать describe изображать describe описать (круг, кривую); начертить describe описывать, изображать; характеризовать(ся); to describe one's purposes изложить свои намерения describe вчт. описывать describe описывать describe вчт. характеризовать describe характеризовать describe in detail описать подробно describe описывать, изображать; характеризовать(ся); to describe one's purposes изложить свои намерения

    English-Russian short dictionary > describe

  • 6 describe

    [dısʹkraıb] v
    1. 1) описывать, изображать

    to describe smb.'s views - охарактеризовать чьи-л. взгляды

    to describe smth. as good /to be good/ - описать или охарактеризовать что-л. с хорошей стороны

    he was described as being very clever - о нём говорили, что он очень умён

    2) описывать
    2. описывать; вычерчивать

    НБАРС > describe

  • 7 describe

    v
    1) змальовувати, описувати, зображати

    to describe smb.'s views — охарактеризувати чиїсь погляди

    2) накреслювати, окреслювати
    3) малювати портрет
    * * *
    v
    1) описувати, зображувати; характеризувати
    2) описувати; окреслювати

    English-Ukrainian dictionary > describe

  • 8 describe

    verb
    1) описывать, изображать; характеризовать(ся); to describe one's purposes изложить свои намерения
    2) описать (круг, кривую); начертить
    Syn:
    portray
    * * *
    (v) конкретизировать; описать; описывать
    * * *
    описывать, рассказывать, изображать
    * * *
    [de·scribe || dɪ'skraɪb] v. описывать, описать, изображать, характеризовать, характеризоваться, охарактеризовать, построить, начертить
    * * *
    изображать
    изобразить
    начертить
    описать
    описывать
    опишите
    характеризовать
    * * *
    1) описывать, рассказывать, изображать; характеризовать(ся) (as) 2) мат. описать (одну фигуру вокруг другой)

    Новый англо-русский словарь > describe

  • 9 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 it
       Solving a problem in practical arithmeticTranslating from one language into another
       LANGUAGE 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 Language
       The 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 Interaction
       Language 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

  • 10 Introspection

       1) Experimental Introspection Is the One Reliable Method of Knowing Ourselves
       When we are trying to understand the mental processes of a child or a dog or an insect as shown by conduct and action, the outward signs of mental processes,... we must always fall back upon experimental introspection... [;] we cannot imagine processes in another mind that we do not find in our own. Experimental introspection is thus our one reliable method of knowing ourselves; it is the sole gateway to psychology. (Titchener, 1914, p. 32)
       There is a somewhat misleading point of view that one's own experience provides a sufficient understanding of mental life for scientific purposes. Indeed, early in the history of experimental psychology, the main method for studying cognition was introspection. By observing one's own mind, the argument went, one could say how one carried out cognitive activities....
       Yet introspection failed to be a good technique for the elucidation of mental processes in general. There are two simple reasons for this. First, so many things which we can do seem to be quite unrelated to conscious experience. Someone asks you your name. You do not know how you retrieve it, yet obviously there is some process by which the retrieval occurs. In the same way, when someone speaks to you, you understand what they say, but you do not know how you came to understand. Yet somehow processes take place in which words are picked out from the jumble of sound waves which reach your ears, in-built knowledge of syntax and semantics gives it meaning, and the significance of the message comes to be appreciated. Clearly, introspection is not of much use here, but it is undeniable that understanding language is as much a part of mental life as is thinking.
       As if these arguments were not enough, it is also the case that introspective data are notoriously difficult to evaluate. Because it is private to the experiencer, and experience may be difficult to convey in words to somebody else. Many early introspective protocols were very confusing to read and, even worse, the kinds of introspection reported tended to conform to the theoretical categories used in different laboratories. Clearly, what was needed was both a change in experimental method and a different (non-subjective) theoretical framework to describe mental life. (Sanford, 1987, pp. 2-3)

    Historical dictionary of quotations in cognitive science > Introspection

  • 11 soft dollaring

    See:
    Another reason managers are interested in controlling client commissions deserves special attention. "Soft dollaring" has got to be one of the most misunderstood and controversial practices in the money management business. The very term "soft dollars" suggests something shady and conjures up images of money exchanging hands in dark alleyways. Among laymen, soft dollars may be confused with "soft money" political contributions. There is a thin connection between "soft dollars" and "soft money." Since brokerage firms are not subject to the same rules pertaining to political contributions as municipal underwriting firms, large "soft money" contributions from owners of brokerage firms do find their way into politicians' coffers more easily than contributions from underwriters. However, it is important to not confuse the two terms.
    So what is "soft dollaring?" Soft dollaring is the practice whereby money managers use client brokerage commissions to purchase investment research. When a manager pays for products or services with his own money, directly from the research provider, this is referred to as "hard dollars." Payment with client commissions, financed through a brokerage firm, is referred to as "soft dollars." Through soft dollar arrangements money managers are permitted to shift an expense related to the management of assets they would otherwise have to bear, onto their clients. The amount of this research expense the money management industry transfers onto its clients is in the billions annually. As a result, any analysis of the economics of the money management industry should include the effects of soft dollaring; however, we are unaware of any that has. In the institutional marketplace, strange as it may seem, it is possible for a money manager to profit more from soft dollars than from the negotiated asset management fee he receives.
    The general rule under the federal and state securities laws is that a fiduciary, the money manager, cannot use client assets for his own benefit or the benefit of other clients. To simplify matters greatly, soft dollaring is a legally prescribed exception to this rule. Congress, the SEC and other regulators have agreed that as long as the research purchased assists the manager in making investment decisions, the clients benefit and its legally acceptable. A tremendous amount of strained analysis has gone into the precise policies and procedures that managers must follow in purchasing research with client commission dollars. Over the years a distinction has been made between "proprietary" research or in-house research distributed to brokerage customers without a price tag attached and "independent third-party" research or research written by a third party and sold to managers at a stated price. Third party research has been most frequently criticized because its cost is separately stated and the benefit to managers most obvious. In this latter case, a breach of fiduciary duty seems most glaring. However, it is well known that proprietary research, offered for "free, " is produced to stimulate sales of dealer inventory. So presumably this research lacks credibility and is less beneficial to clients. There have been distinctions drawn between products and services, such as computers, which are "mixed-use, " i.e., which may serve dual purposes, providing both research and administrative uses. An adviser must make a reasonable allocation of the cost of the product according to its uses, the SEC has said. Some portion must be paid for with "hard" dollars and the other with "soft." There are several articles in our Library of Articles that describe soft dollar practices, rule changes and our proposal to Chairman Levitt to reform the soft dollar business.
    The issue that soft dollaring raises is: when is it acceptable for a manager to benefit from his client's commissions? For purposes of this article we would like to introduce a new and more useful perspective for pensions in their analysis of soft dollars or any other brokerage issue. That is, all brokerage commissions controlled by managers, benefit managers in some way. Brokerage decision-making by managers rarely, if ever, is simply based upon what firm can execute the trade at the best price. Brokerage is a commodity. Almost all brokerage firms offer reasonably competent, "best execution" services. If they didn't, they'd get sued and soon be out of business. Most savvy brokerage marketers don't even try to differentiate their firms with long-winded explanations about best-execution capabilities. Best execution is a given and impossible to prove. If you want to understand how your money manager allocates brokerage, study his business as a whole, including his marketing and affiliates-not just the investment process.

    The new English-Russian dictionary of financial markets > soft dollaring

См. также в других словарях:

  • One-time pad — Excerpt from a one time pad In cryptography, the one time pad (OTP) is a type of encryption, which has been proven to be impossible to crack if used correctly. Each bit or character from the plaintext is encrypted by a modular addition with a bit …   Wikipedia

  • One Power — In The Wheel of Time fantasy series by Robert Jordan, the One Power is the force that maintains the continuous motion of the Wheel of Time. It comes from the True Source, and it is separated into two halves: saidin /saɪˈd …   Wikipedia

  • One Laptop per Child — OLPC redirects here. For other uses, see OLPC (disambiguation). One Laptop per Child Formation January 2005 Type Non profit Headquarters Cambridge, Massachuset …   Wikipedia

  • for all practical purposes — adverb in every practical sense (Freq. 1) to all intents and purposes the case is closed the rest are for all practical purposes useless • Syn: ↑to all intents and purposes, ↑for all intents and purposes * * * for all practical purposes phr …   Useful english dictionary

  • Glossary of professional wrestling terms — Professional wrestling has accrued a considerable amount of slang, in references, and jargon.[1] Much of it stems from the industry s origins in the days of carnivals and circuses,[2] and the slang itself is often referred to as carny talk. In… …   Wikipedia

  • MEDICINE AND LAW — This article is arranged according to the following outline: introduction Judicial Decision – A Value Determination the values of a jewish and democratic state in the image of god PHYSICIAN S DUTIES AND PATIENTS RIGHTS the physician and the judge …   Encyclopedia of Judaism

  • Erosion prediction — Soil erosion prediction models play an important role both in meeting practical needs of soil conservation goals and in advancing the scientific understanding of soil erosion processes. They are used to help land managers choose practices to… …   Wikipedia

  • Info-gap decision theory — is a non probabilistic decision theory that seeks to optimize robustness to failure – or opportuneness for windfall – under severe uncertainty,[1][2] in particular applying sensitivity analysis of the stability radius type[3] to perturbations in… …   Wikipedia

  • Software documentation — or source code documentation is written text that accompanies computer software. It either explains how it operates or how to use it, and may mean different things to people in different roles. Contents 1 Role of documentation in software… …   Wikipedia

  • Pitch accent — is a linguistic term of convenience for a variety of restricted tone systems that use variations in pitch to give prominence to a syllable or mora within a word. The placement of this tone or the way it is realized can give different meanings to… …   Wikipedia

  • RESPONSES — the victims the world THE VICTIMS Behavior of the Victims In a chapter entitled Auschwitz: The Death of Choice in Versions of Survival: The Holocaust and the Human Spirit, the Holocaust scholar lawrence langer writes: After we peel the veneer of… …   Encyclopedia of Judaism

Поделиться ссылкой на выделенное

Прямая ссылка:
… Нажмите правой клавишей мыши и выберите «Копировать ссылку»