Why do we need to word

---

Подборка по базе: THE NEED FOR LAW.docx, PART I.CHAPTER 1. UNIT 2. WHY DO WE NEED LAW.docx, Your needs, Monster in me — фанфик по фэндому «Bangtan Boys (BTS, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.docx, Желнова Happiness эссе 1 needs correcting.docx, big p needs some help.docx, What films do we need.docx, There is an opinion that people need to stop building new cities, Business Culture in Malaysia and What You Need to Know to Succee

---

TEXT 1

Why do We Need Law?

Vocabulary

to alter our behaviour — вносить изменения в наше поведение

to impose (the rules) — предписывать

to pay damage – возместить ущерб

to choose at random – выбирать по желанию, наугад

to safeguard our personal property and our lives — охранять нашу личную собственность и наши жизни

a well-ordered society — высокоорганизованное общество

arbitrary laws – произвольные законы

to punish people without trial — наказывать людей без суда и следствия

orderly manner — упорядоченно

to give effect to social policies — оказывать влияние на социальную политику

to provide for benefits – обеспечивать пособие

to take advantage of – пользоваться (воспользоваться) чем-то

to flaw – портиться, иметь изъян

1. Read and translate the text.

Almost everything we do is governed by some set of rules. There are rules for games, for social clubs, for sports and for adults in the workplace. There are also rules imposed by morality and custom that play an important role in telling us what we should and should not do. However, some rules — those made by the state or the courts — are called “laws”. Laws resemble morality because they are designed to control or alter our behavior. But unlike rules of morality, laws are enforced by the courts; if you break a law — whether you like that law or not — you may be forced to pay a fine, pay damages, or go to prison.

Why are some rules so special that they are made into laws? Why do we need rules that everyone must obey? In short, what is the purpose of law?

If we did not live in a structured society with other people, laws would not be necessary. We would simply do as we please, with little regard for others. But ever since individuals began to associate with other people — to live in society — laws have been the glue that has kept society together. For example, the law in our country states that we must drive our cars on the right-hand side of a two-way street. If people were allowed to choose at random which side of the street to drive on, driving would be dangerous and chaotic. Laws regulating our business affairs help to ensure that people keep their promises. Laws against criminal conduct help to safeguard our personal property and our lives.

Even in a well-ordered society, people have disagreements and conflicts arise. The law must provide a way to resolve these disputes peacefully. If two people claim to own the same piece of property, we do not want the matter settled by a duel: we turn to the law and to institutions like the courts to decide who is the real owner and to make sure that the real owner’s rights are respected.

We need law, then, to ensure a safe and peaceful society in which individuals’ rights are respected. But we expect even more from our law. Some totalitarian governments have cruel and arbitrary laws, enforced by police forces free to arrest and punish people without trial. Strong-arm tactics may provide a great deal of order, but we reject this form of control. The legal system should respect individual rights while, at the same time, ensuring that society operates in an orderly manner. And society should believe in the Rule of Law, which means that the law applies to every person, including members of the police and other public officials, who must carry out their public duties in accordance with the law.

In our society, laws are not only designed to govern our conduct: they are also intended to give effect to social policies. For example, some laws provide for benefits when workers are injured on the job, for health care, as well as for loans to students who otherwise might not be able to go to university.

Another goal of the law is fairness. This means that the law should recognize and protect certain basic individual rights and freedoms, such as liberty and equality. The law also serves to ensure that strong groups and individuals do not use their powerful positions in society to take unfair advantage of weaker individuals.

However, despite the best intentions, laws are sometimes created that people later recognize as being unjust or unfair. In a democratic society, laws are not carved in stone, but must reflect the changing needs of society. In a democracy, anyone who feels that a particular law is flawed has the right to speak out publicly and to seek to change the law by lawful means.

Ответ.

Почти все, что мы делаем регулируется определёнными правилами . Существуют правила для игр, для общественных клубов, для занятий спортом и для взрослых на рабочем месте. Есть также правила, связанные с моралью и обычаями, которые играют важную роль в том, чтобы подсказать нам, что мы должны и не должны делать. Однако некоторые правила, принятые государством или судами — называются «законами». Законы связаны с нормами моралью, потому что они предназначены для контроля или изменения нашего поведения. Но в отличие от норм морали, законы находятся в компетенции суда; если вы нарушаете закон — нравится вам этот закон или нет — вас могут заставить заплатить штраф, возместить ущерб или отправить в тюрьму.

Почему некоторые правила настолько важны, что они превращаются в законы? Зачем нужны правила, которым все должны подчиняться? Короче говоря, какова цель закона?

Если бы мы не жили в структурированном обществе с другими людьми, в законах не было бы необходимости. Мы просто делали бы все, что захотим, не обращая внимания на других. Но с тех пор, как люди начали общаться с другими людьми — жить в обществе — законы стали связующим звеном, которое поддерживает общество. Например, закон в нашей стране гласит, что мы должны ездить на машинах по правой стороне улицы с двусторонним движением. Если бы людям было позволено выбирать наугад, по какой стороне улицы ехать, вождение было бы опасным и хаотичным. Законы, регулирующие наши деловые отношения, помогают людям выполнять свои обещания. Законы против преступного поведения помогают защитить нашу личную собственность и нашу жизнь.

Даже в упорядоченном обществе у людей возникают разногласия и конфликты. Закон должен предусматривать пути мирного разрешения этих споров. Если два человека заявят, что имеют права на один и тот же участок, мы не хотим, чтобы вопрос был решен поединком: мы обратимся к закону и институтам, таким как суды, чтобы решить, кто является реальным владельцем и убедиться, что реальный владелец прав.

Поэтому нам нужен закон для обеспечения безопасного и мирного общества, в котором уважаются права человека. Но мы ожидаем от нашего закона еще большего. Некоторые тоталитарные правительства имеют жестокие и произвольные законы, применяемые полицейскими силами, свободными арестовывать и наказывать людей без суда и следствия. Тактика сильного оружия может обеспечить большой порядок, но мы отвергаем эту форму контроля. Правовая система должна уважать права личности и в то же время обеспечивать упорядоченное функционирование общества. И общество должно верить в верховенство Закона; что означает, что закон распространяется на каждого человека, включая сотрудников полиции и других государственных должностных лиц, которые должны выполнять свои общественные обязанности в соответствии с законом.

В нашем обществе законы предназначены не только для регулирования нашего поведения, но и для осуществления социальной политики. Например, некоторые законы предусматривают льготы, когда работники получают травмы на рабочем месте, в области здравоохранения, а также ссуды студентам, которые в противном случае не могли бы поступить в университет.

Еще одна цель закона-справедливость. Это означает, что закон должен признавать и защищать некоторые основные права и свободы личности, такие, как свобода и равенство. Закон также служит обеспечению того, чтобы сильные группы и отдельные лица не использовали свое влиятельное положение в обществе для несправедливого использования преимуществ более слабых лиц.

Однако, несмотря на лучшие намерения, иногда создаются законы, которые люди позже признают неправильными или несправедливыми. В демократическом обществе законы не высечены на камне, и они должны отражать меняющиеся потребности общества. В условиях демократии любой, кто считает, что тот или иной закон несовершенен, имеет право открыто высказываться и пытаться изменить закон законными средствами.

2. Find in the text the equivalents of the following words and word combinations:

1. уважать права отдельного человека; 2. назначение (цель) права(; 3. жить в обществе; 4. иметь сходство (быть похожим); 5. мораль, нравственное поведение; 6. объединяться (в общество), присоединяться; 7. верить в верховенство закона; 8. иметь разногласия и конфликты; 9. несмотря на, вопреки; 10. хаотический, хаотичный; 11. устанавливать, точно определять; 12. в соответствии с законом; 13. решать споры миром; 14. заявлять права; 15. иметь целью; 16. защищать основные права и свободы; 17. намерение, цель; 18. отражать изменяющиеся потребности общества; 19. свобода; 20. иметь право открыто высказать свое мнение; 21. равенство, равноправие; 22. стремиться изменить закон законными средствами; 23. заплатить штраф; 24. гарантировать, обеспечивать; 25. отвергать, отклонять.

1. the purpose of law; 2. to resolve disputes peacefully; 3. to respect individual rights; 7. to safeguard our personal property and our lives; 8. to choose at random; 18. to live in society; 16. to have disagreements and conflicts; 20. to turn to the law; 22. to believe in the Rule of Law

3. Find in the text expressions with the word LAW and add some to the list using a dictionary or any other source. Use them in the sentences of your own.

4. Finish up the sentences using the text.

1. Almost everything we do is governed by …

a) rules imposed by morality.

b) the courts.

c) some set of rules.

2. If we didn’t live in a structured society with other people …

a) we would simply do as we please.

b) we would simply do with little regard for others.

c) laws would not be necessary.

3. Laws against criminal conduct help …

a) to protect our property.

b) to take advantage of other individuals.

c) to safeguard our personal property and our lives.

4. We turn to the law …

a) to resolve disputes peacefully.

b) to decide who is the real owner.

c) to force people to keep their promises.

5. Another goal of the law is …

a) to protect certain basic individual rights and freedoms.

b) fairness.

c) to provide for benefits.

5. Translate the verbs. Fill in the gaps with the appropriate verb.

1)to make laws

2) to repeal laws

3) to break laws

4) to obey laws

5) to enforce laws

6) to apply laws

7) to be against the law

to study law

9) to amend the law

10) to turn to the law

11) to propose laws

1. The government

amend laws and repeal them if they are bad.

2. The police

enforce laws.

3. Courts and judges

apply laws.

4. Law-abiding people

obey laws.

5. Criminals

break laws.

6. The students of universities

study law.

7. The actions of this company

propose against the law.

8. Mr. Smith had to

turn to the law because he could not bear his neighbour’s behavior any more.

9. The State Duma of the Russian Federation

make laws.

6. Answer the questions.

1. What kind of society do we live in?

2. What is the society governed by?

3. What is the difference between laws and rules of morality?

4. Why do rules of morality and custom play an important role in our life?

5. Why are laws designed to control our behaviour?

6. What are the goals of law?

7. When do people turn to the law?

8. Why do we need law?

7. Translate the following sentence, pay attention to the highlighted words.

1. A judge is a court officer authorized to decide legal cases. But who are they to judge us? The judge may also rule on motions made before or during a trial. Don’t judge a book by its cover.

2. In this office, hard work is the rule, not the exception. When a court rules, the decision is called a ruling. The high destiny of the individual is to serve rather than to rule.

3. The state is distinguished from other institutions by its purpose (establishment of order and security), methods (its laws and their enforcement), territory (its area of jurisdiction), and sovereignty. Another standard question is “What’s the state of the world?” meaning “What’s new?” or “What’s going on?” The Bill of Rights is stated in 463 words.

4. What we now call gravity was not identified as a universal force until the work of Isaac Newton. Nobody can force me to do it.

5. After the storm, the Johnsons filed a claim against their home insurance in order to repair damage to the roof. He claimed he won the race, though the video showed otherwise.

6. In folk beliefs, good luck is regularly associated with the right side: it is lucky to see the new moon to one’s right, to put the right stocking or shoe on first, while in each case the left is unlucky. Each legal right that an individual possesses relates to a corresponding legal duty imposed on another.

Ответ:

1. Судья является судебным должностным лицом, уполномоченным принимать решения по судебным делам. Но кто они такие, чтобы судить нас? Судья также может выносить решения в отношении ходатайств, сделанных до или во время судебного разбирательства. Не судите книгу по обложке.

2. В этом офисе тяжелая работа является правилом, а не исключением. Когда суд выносит решение, решение называется постановлением. Высокая судьба человека — служить, а не править.

3. Государство отличается от других институтов своим назначением (установление порядка и безопасности), методами (его законы и их применение), территорией (его юрисдикция). и суверенитет. Другой стандартный вопрос: «Каково состояние мира?», Что означает «Что нового?» Или «Что происходит? Билль о правах изложен в 463 палатах.

4. То, что мы сейчас называем гравитацией, не было идентифицировано как универсальная сила до работы Исаака Ньютона. Никто не может предвидеть меня, чтобы сделать это.

5. После урагана «Джонсонс» подали иск против своей страховки на дом, чтобы исправить ущерб, причиненный бунтуру. Он утверждал, что выиграл гонку, хотя видео показало обратное.

6. В народных поверьях удача регулярно ассоциируется с правой стороной: ей повезло увидеть новолуние справа от себя, сначала надеть правый чулок или туфлю, в то время как в каждом случае левому не повезло. Каждое юридическое право, которым обладает одно лицо, относится к соответствующей юридической обязанности, налагаемой на другого.

8. Open the brackets using the verb in the correct form.

1. Students (are studying, study) law at the university. 2. He already (graduated, has graduated) from the university. 3. Last year he (graduated, has graduated) from the university. 4. The police (didn’t find, haven’t found) the killer yet. 5. For about 10 years legislators (discussed, have been discussing) the bill. 6. Every year the State Duma of the RF (is passing, passes) a lot of laws. 7. In 1992 our country (ratified, had ratified) the treaty. 8. Lawyers (came, have come) to the agreement by the end of the present session. 9. You (are looking, look) very thoughtful. What (do you think, are you thinking) about? — I (think, am thinking) about retirement. — But you are only 25. You only just (started, have started) your career. — I (know, am knowing), but I (read, have read) an article which (says, is saying) that a sensible man (started, starts) thinking about retirement at 25.

Ответ.

1.study 7. ratified
2.has graduated 8. have come
3.graduated 9. look, are you thinking about, I am
4.haven’t found thinking
5.have been discussing 25. have started, know, have read, 6.passes says, starts.

9. Put the words in the right order to make sentences.

1. have/ in any society/ several characteristics/ laws.
2. these rules/ sometimes/ break/ we/ without suffering any penalty.
3. for a variety of reasons/ arise/ conflicts between individuals.
4. people/ enable/ to feel secure/ laws / in their lives.
5. to forbid / the first aim of law/ certain ways of behaving/ is / like murder, terrorism, or smoking in public places
6. the second aim of law /to provide/ to make their own arrangements/ facilities for people/ is.
7. to settle/ the third aim of law/ disputes among citizens / is.
8. restrictions on people/ certain guarantees/ imposes/ them / the law/ but also gives.

1. Laws have several characteristics in any society.

В любом обществе законы неоднозначны.

2. We sometimes break these rules without suffering any penalty.

Иногда мы нарушаем эти правила, но нам ничего за это не бывает.

3. Conflicts between individuals arise for a variety of reasons.

Есть масса причин, почему люди начинают конфликтовать.

4. People enable laws in their lives to feel secure. либо: People enable laws to feel secure in their lives. Люди придумывают законы, чтобы им спокойно жилось.

5. The first aim of law is to forbid certain ways of behaving like murder, terrorism, or smoking in public places. Первой задачей законодательства является запрет на определенные виды поведения, такие как убийство, терроризм, курение в общественных местах

6. To provide facilities for people to make their own arrangements is the second aim of law. Второй задачей законодательства является предоставить людям возможность самостоятельно принимать меры

7.The third aim of law is to settle disputes among citizens. Третьей задачей законодательства является разрешение споров между гражданами.

8. The law imposes restrictions on people but also gives them certain guarantees. Законодательство ограничивает людей, но также предоставляет определенные гарантии. .
10. Translate the following sentences into English.

1. Не каждый может работать для общего блага.

2. Юрист — это лицо, чья профессия заключается в том, чтобы подавать судебные иски или консультировать клиентов и действовать от их имени по различным юридическим вопросам.

3. Право — это нормы поведения, установленные государством и применяемые в обществе в форме закона или обычая.

4. Закон — это любая норма или предписание, которым надо следовать.

5. Мы следуем определенным нормам поведения, если принадлежим определенным социальным институтам.

6. Я посоветуюсь с юристом.

7. Она обратилась в суд.

8. Судья отправляет правосудие.

9. Какие факторы повлияли на Ваше решение?

10. Эти же законы касаются и Вас.
1. Not everyone can work for the common good.

2. A lawyer is a person whose profession is to file lawsuits or advise clients and act on their behalf on various legal issues.

3. Law — these are the norms of behavior established by the state and applied in society in the form of law or custom.

4. Law is any rule or regulation to be followed.

5. We follow certain standards of behavior if we belong to certain social institutions.

6. I will consult a lawyer.

7. She went to court.

8. The judge administers justice.

9. What factors influenced your decision?
11. Make a summary of the text.

Results: 142,
Time: 0.028

Short answer: both lines define a property, but one has an initialiser while the other overrides the getter method.

In Kotlin, a property always has a getter method (and, if it’s mutable, a setter method). When you refer to the property (e.g. myExampleGet.p), you’re actually calling the getter method. (This is unlike Java.) A property will usually (though not always) have a private field to store the value, as well (known as the ‘backing field’).

Let’s take your two cases in reverse order. Your second case has an initialiser, which is the most common form:

val p2: String = "Black"

This defines a property called p2, of type String, and assigns it the initial value "Black". You don’t specify a setter method, so you get the default one, which just returns the backing field.

Your first case provides a setter method, instead of an initialiser:

val p: String get() = "Black"

This says that p is a property with type String, and that its getter method always returns the hard-coded value "Black".

This property doesn’t need a backing field, because it would never be used.

So, what’s the difference? In your example, very little. The main one is that every instance of ExampleGet has a field called p2, all of which contain the same reference (to the hard-coded string); they do not have a field p. So p is more memory-efficient.

However, in other situations, the difference is much less subtle! For example, the setter might not return a constant value, e.g.:

class ExampleGet {
    val p: String get() = (++counter).toString()
    val p2: String = (++counter).toString()

    private var counter = 0
}

Here p2 would always have the same value it was initialised with (probably "1"), while p would give a different value each time: "2", then "3", then "4", and so on. (In practice, such a getter might perform some calculation on another property, or get it from some other source, but I hope this illustrates the point.)

Another situation making the difference obvious would be if the properties were mutable, i.e. var instead of val:

class ExampleGet {
    var p: String get() = "Black"
    var p2: String = "Black"
}

Here p2 would behave as you expect, returning the value you set:

val eg = ExampleGet()
println(eg.p2) // prints "Black"
eg.p2 = "White"
println(eg.p2) // prints "White"

But p would always return the same value:

eg.p = "White"
println(eg.p) // prints "Black"

(I think p would have a backing field in this case, which would store whatever value you set — but you’d never be able to see that value, because the setter would always return the hard-coded value.)

So the two cases are doing very different things, even though the effect is practically the same in the code in the question.

Implemented word2vec CBOW using just one vector space W of shape (V, D) where V is the number of vocabulary and D is the number of features in a word-vector.

In short, it did not work well.

Let (word, context) is a pair and create BoW (Bag of Words) from the context. For instance the pairs for a sentence I love dogs that meaw, is (dogs, I love that meaw) when the context length is 4.

Use bold italic word to indicate that it is the word in a (word, context) pair.

The steps of training are as below feeding N number of (word, context) pairs as a batch.

Positive score

Calculate BoW from the word-vectors extracted from W for the context, and take the dot product with the word-vector for the word as the positive score.

E-1. Extract a word-vector We where We = W[index_of_word] where index_of_word is the index to the word in W.
E-2. Extract context vectors Wc where Wc = W[indices_of_context] and create the BoW Bc = sum(Wc, axis=0).
E-3. Calculate the Score of We and Bc as Ye = dot(Bc, We).
E-4. Calculate the loss Le = -log(sigmoid(Ye)).
E-5. Back-propagate dLe/dYe to We as dLe/dWe = dLe/dYe * dYe/dWe = dLe/dYe * Bc.
E-6. Back-propagate dLe/dYe to Wc as dLe/dWc = dLe/dYe * dYe/dWc = dLe/dYe * We.

In the actual auto-difference calculation, the derivative of sum needs to be considered to apply the * operation.

Negative score and its loss value

Take SL number of negative sample words and calculate a negative score for each negative sample by taking a dot product with the BoW as the negative score. The result is SL number of negative scores.

S-1. Take the SL number of negative sampling words, excluding those words in (word, context).
S-2. Extract word-vectors for negative samples Ws where Ws = W[indices_of_samples].
S-3. Calculate the negative scores from Ws and Bc as Ys = einsum("nd,nsd->ns",Bc, Ws)
* n is for the batch size N, d is for the word-vector size D, and s is for the negative sample size SL.
S-4. Calculate the loss Ls = -log(1 - sigmoid(Ys)).
S-5. Back-propagate dLs/dYs to Ws as dLs/dWs = dLs/dYs * dYs/dWs = dLs/dYs * Bc.
S-6. Back-propagate dLe/dYe to Wc as dLe/dWc = dLs/dYs * dYs/dWs = dLs/dYs * Ws.

In the actual auto-difference calculation, the derivative of einsum needs to be considered to apply the * operation.

Problem

I think the causes of single W not working result from updating the same W with multiple back-propagations in a batch at the same time:

• positive score back-propagations dLe/dWe and dLe/dWc
• negative score back-propagations dLs/dWs and dLs/dWc.

In a batch that has multiple (word, context) pairs, one pair may have X as the word for a positive score. But it can be used as a negative sample for other pairs in the same batch. Hence during the gradient-descent in a batch, word X would be used for a positive score as well as for negative scores.

Therefore, the back-propagation would update the same word-vector W[X] both for positive and negative at the same time.

Suppose in the 1st row in a batch, the word dogs is the word for a (word, context) pair, and is used for a positive score. W[index_for_dogs] gets updated by dLe/dWe.

Then for the 2nd pair in the batch, dogs is sampled as a negative sample. Then W[index_for_dogs] gets updated by dLs/dWs. It would be possible to exclude all the words in (word, context) pairs in a batch, but it will cause a narrow or skewed set of words available for the negative samples.

Also, a same word-vector in W will be word for a pair, and in a context in another pair, and is a negative sample for yet another pair.

I believe these mixture could be an act of confusion

• rewarding (positive score back-prop) and penalizing (negative score back-prop) on the same W
• using the same word as word, context, and negative sample.

Hence, it would require the separation into different vector spaces to give a clear role, e.g one vector space Wc for context.

It may be possible to have a separate vector space for word and one for negative samples. Using one vector space for both would also cause back-propagation for positive and negative at the same time. I think this could be a reason why the vector space used for negative samples are not used as the result model for the word2vec.