学年

質問の種類

英語 高校生

40行目のForは接続詞として働いているのでしょうか? それと、問2の答えの②が謝りな理由が分からないので教えて頂きたいです。よろしくお願いいたします。

-第 13 講 however, is no. experience "Red" is not a color contained in an object. It is an 30 involving reflected light, a human eye, and a human brain. We experience red only when light of a certain wavelength (say, 600 nanometers) reflects from an object (in ② the midst of other reflections at other wavelengths), and only while a receiver translates this contrasting range of light into visual sensations. Our receiver is the 対をなす 15248 human *retina, (which uses its three types of photoreceptors, called *cones, to convert 35 the reflected light into electrical signals made meaningful by a brain. In a retina that's missing a medium or long cone, light at 600 nanometers is experienced as gray. And in the absence of a brain, there is no experience of color at all, only reflected light in the world. 脳の欠 (2) Even with the right equipment in place, the experience of a red apple is not a ST 40 done deal. For the brain to convert a visual sensation into the experience of red, it must possess the concept "Red." This concept can come from prior experience with apples, roses, and other objects you perceive as red, or from learning about red from other people. (Even people who are blind since birth have a concept of "Red" that they learn from conversations and books.) (Without this concept, the apple would be 45 experienced differently. For instance, to the Berinmo people of Papua New Guinea, apples reflecting light at 600 nanometers are experienced as brownish, because Berinmo concepts for color divide up the continuous *spectrum differently. These riddles about apples and trees invite us, as perceivers to

解決済み 回答数: 1
英語 高校生

以前画像3枚目の様に修飾限定予告のthatというものを習ったので今回もその形なのかと思い、それらのと入れずに訳してしまったのですがこのthoseの識別は文脈判断ということでしょうか? 教えて頂きたいです。よろしくお願いいたします。

実理 K The starting point for today's *meritocracy, of course, is the idea that intelligence exists and can be measured, like weight or strength or fluency in French. The most obvious difference between intelligence and these other traits is that all the others are presumably changeable. If someone weighs too much, he can go on a その人 →Heyで受けるのが一般的 5 diet; if he's weak, he can lift weights; if he wants to learn French, he can take a course. But in principle he can't change his intelligence. There is another important difference 原則として MV between intelligence and other traits. Height and weight and speed and strength and サフィス体例 関係性が強い文がくる even conversational fluency are real things; there's no doubt about what's being 間違いなん measured. Intelligence is a much murkier concept. Some people are generally (2) m2 Vogue 10 smarter than others, and some are obviously talented in specific ways; they're chess 天才 S masters, math *prodigies. But can the factors that make one person seem quicker than another be measured precisely, like height and weight? Can we confidently say that one person is 10 percent smarter than another, in the same way we can say he's 10 へんて、いつだっ S percent faster in the hundred-yard dash? And can we be confident that two thirds of 櫂へん 言いかえ 15 all people have IQs within one standard deviation of the norm that is, between 90 ように and 110 - - as we can be sure that two thirds of all people have heights within one standard deviation of the norm for height? Yes, they can, and yes, we can. besure least, are the answers that the IQ part of the meritocracy rests on. Those, at (3)-

解決済み 回答数: 2