Question

请帮我翻译以下的这段内容 100分

不要给我直接用翻译软件翻译的，我需要的是词句通顺的翻译，谢谢。
This study was designed to examine the extent to which the
appraisal-emotion relationships hypothesized in the appraisal the-
ory formulation of Smith and Lazarus (1993) occur in daily life.
Our study was guided by two interrelated questions. First, are the
appraisal-emotion relationships posited by Smith and Lazarus the
dominant relationships? Second, to what extent do such relation-
ships vary across individuals?
The results clearly supported Smith and Lazarus’s (1993) con-
tention that certain appraisal-emotion relationships are stronger
than others. Appraisals of Other-Blame led to feelings of anger,
appraisals of Self-Blame led to feelings of guilt, and so forth. Thisfinding is important because appraisal-emotion relationships were examined in vivo, during the ebb and flow of people’s daily
emotional lives, and most previous research has relied on vignettes
and autobiographical recall, methods that we believe are prone to
various biases.
Our results provide mixed support for the type of invariant
appraisal-emotion relationships such as those suggested by Rose-
man and Smith (2001). In support of such invariance, we note that
although there were relationships between “nonprimary” (i.e., not
hypothesized) appraisals and emotional responses, with the excep-
tion of Joy, these relationships were not as strong as the predicted,
primary relationships. Not only were such nonprimary relation-
ships statistically different from the primary relationship, they
were also meaningfully weaker in absolute terms. All were less
than 50% as strong, and most were much less than that. Moreover,
follow-up analyses in which only primary slopes were analyzed
found coefficients ranging from .4 to .5. Keeping in mind that all
coefficients in these analyses are unstandardized, this means that
experienced emotions changed about half point for every point
change in appraisals.
On the other hand, specific emotions were also significantly
associated with other, nonhypothesized appraisals. These results
suggest that although the appraisal-emotion associations described
in the cognitive appraisal theory of emotion are the dominant
associations, an appraisal may be associated with more than one
emotional response. As such, these findings do not suggest that
appraisals are invariantly related in one-to-one relationships to
emotional experience. Rather, they suggest that emotions can be
associated with different appraisal contents and that appraisals can
elicit different types of emotions.

Answer 1

太长了，虽然这种内容我看不大懂，但翻译应该是基本到位的，并杜绝机译，请楼主明鉴。

This study was designed to examine the extent to which the appraisal-emotion relationships hypothesized in the appraisal theory formulation of Smith and Lazarus (1993) occur in daily life.本研究旨在研究在Smith和Lararus（1993）的鉴定理论形成中假设的鉴定－情绪关系在日常生活中发生的程度。
Our study was guided by two interrelated questions. First, are the appraisal-emotion relationships posited by Smith and Lazarus the dominant relationships? Second, to what extent do such relationships vary across individuals?
我们的研究受两个相互关联的问题所引导。第一个是，由Smith和Lazarus假设的鉴定－情绪关系是占主导的关系吗？第二个是，这样的关系在不同个人中变化的程度如何？
The results clearly supported Smith and Lazarus’s (1993) contention that certain appraisal-emotion relationships are stronger than others. Appraisals of Other-Blame led to feelings of anger, appraisals of Self-Blame led to feelings of guilt, and so forth.
结果明确支持了Smith和Lazarus（1993）所持的论点，即一定的鉴定－情绪关系强于其他的鉴定－情绪关系。“其他过失责任”的鉴定导致了愤怒的感情，“自我过失责任”的鉴定则导致了内疚的感情，等等。
This finding is important because appraisal-emotion relationships were examined in vivo, during the ebb and flow of people’s daily emotional lives, and most previous research has relied on vignettes and autobiographical recall, methods that we believe are prone to
various biases.
这一发现很重要，因为鉴定－情绪关系是在人民们日常生活感情生活的低潮和流动过程中，在活体内研究的，而过去大部分的研究都依靠简介和自传体的回忆，即我们相信有各种偏见的方法。
Our results provide mixed support for the type of invariant appraisal-emotion relationships such as those suggested by Roseman and Smith (2001).
我们的结果对不变的鉴定－情绪关系的类型（例如由Roseman和Smith（2001）建议的关系类型）提供了混合的支持。
In support of such invariance, we note that although there were relationships between “nonprimary” (i.e., not hypothesized) appraisals and emotional responses, with the excep-
tion of Joy, these relationships were not as strong as the predicted, primary relationships.
在对这样的不变性的支持中，我们注意到，虽然在“非基本”（即非假设的）鉴定和情绪响应之间存在一些关系，欢乐是例外，但这些关系并没有预计的、基本关系那样强烈
Not only were such nonprimary relation-ships statistically different from the primary relationship, they were also meaningfully weaker in absolute terms. All were less
than 50% as strong, and most were much less than that.
这样的非基本关系不仅在统计上与基本关系不同，而且在绝对项上也明显要来得弱。其强度都只有50%不到，多数要比其小得多。
Moreover, follow-up analyses in which only primary slopes were analyzed found coefficients ranging from .4 to .5. Keeping in mind that all coefficients in these analyses are unstandardized, this means that experienced emotions changed about half point for every point change in appraisals.
而且，只分析基本斜率的随访分析发现，系数的范围在.4到.5。请记住，在这些分析中的所有系数都不是标准化的，这意味着所经历的情绪对于鉴定的每点变化来说改变了大约半点。
On the other hand, specific emotions were also significantly associated with other, nonhypothesized appraisals. These results suggest that although the appraisal-emotion associations described in the cognitive appraisal theory of emotion are the dominant
associations, an appraisal may be associated with more than one emotional response.
另一方面，特定的情绪和其他的、非假设的鉴定也明显相关。这些结果告诉我们，虽然在情绪的认知鉴定理论中描述的鉴定－情绪关系是主导性的关系，但一个鉴定可能与一个以上的情绪响应相关联。
As such, these findings do not suggest that
appraisals are invariantly related in one-to-one relationships to
emotional experience. Rather, they suggest that emotions can be
associated with different appraisal contents and that appraisals can
elicit different types of emotions.
照这样，这些发现并不能告诉我们说，鉴定与情绪的经历是在一对一关系上不变地相关的。相反，它们告诉我们的是，情绪可能与不同的鉴定内容相关，以及鉴定可能引起不同类型的情绪。

Answer 2

本研究旨在探讨在何种程度上的评价，情感的关系假设在评价的， 奥里制定史密斯和拉撒路（1993）在日常生活中发生的。 我们的研究为指导的两个相互关联的问题。首先，是评价，情感的关系假定，史密斯和拉撒路的占主导地位的关系？第二，在何种程度上做这种关系，船各有不同个人？结果清楚地支持史密斯和拉撒路（1993年）CON组，张力，某些评价，情感的关系是强比其他人。其他自责评议导致的愤怒情绪，的自责评估导致罪恶感，等等。这一发现非常重要，因为评价，情感关系进行了研究，在体内的消长与人们的日常生活流，感情生活，和过去大部分的研究都依赖护身符和自传记得，方法，我们认为是容易
各种偏见。我们的结果为混合型的不变支持如所建议的评价，情感的关系玫瑰
男子和史密斯（2001年）。在这种不变性的支持，我们注意到，虽然有与“非首要”（即不关系假设）评价和情绪反应，与的例外欢乐和灰，这些关系并没有预期的那么强劲，主要关系。不仅关系等非首要，船只从统计学的主要关系不同，他们也有意义的绝对值弱。均少超过50％强，最明显低于。此外，后续行动，其中只有小学斜坡进行了分析分析发现系数从0.4到0.5。铭记所有在这些分析系数是非标准，这意味着经验丰富的感情改变了点，每个点的一半变化的评价。
另一方面，具体的情绪也显着涉及其他的大小评价。这些结果评价表明，尽管抒情协会介绍是在情感认知评价理论的主导协会的评价可能与一个以上 情绪反应。因此，这些结果并不表明，评估是在一个有关不断变化到1的关系，以情感体验。相反，他们认为，情绪可与不同的评价内容和考核的可 情绪引起的不同类型。

Answer 3

本研究设计目的在于检验在日常生活中斯密斯与拉扎勒斯（1993）假定的评估理论公式，即情感评估关系的程度。研究由两条相关的问题引导出来。第一，斯密斯与拉扎勒斯假定的情感评估关系是否主导关系？第二，这种关系在个体之间的差异在何等程度？
研究结果充分证明斯密斯与拉扎勒斯的论点，即特定的情感评估关系比其他关系更强。他人责备评估导致愤怒感，自我责备评估导致愧疚感，诸如此类。此发现有重要意义。因为评估情感关系在活体中在人们日常情感生活的起伏中进行检验，我们认为大多数先前研究基于简介和自传回顾的研究方法容易产生各种偏见。
本研究结果为不变情感评估关系，如罗斯曼和斯密斯（2001）提出的那些关系提高综合支持。基于这种不变性，我们注意到在非主要（例如非假定的）评估和情感反应之间存在某些关系。除喜悦感之外，这些关系没有表现像预期的主要关系一样强烈。这种非主要关系不仅在数据上不同于主要关系，他们在绝对条件下同样在意义上更弱。所有都在强烈程度上少于50%，并且大多数都大大少于50%。此外，对于被分析的唯一主要斜线的后续分析，发现系数在4-5之间变动。留意在这些分析中的所有系数都是非标准化的，这意味着评估中每改变一点经历的情感就随着改变半点。

另一方面，某些特定的情感也与其他非假定的评估有很大的联系。这些结果表明虽然在情感的认知评估理论中描述的评估情感联系是主要联系，但是一种评估可能与一种以上的情感反应联系。正如此研究结果显示，这些发现没有表明这些评估是一对一的关系不变地与情感经历联系一起。并且，结果显示情感与不同的评估内容联系在一起，其中评估引起不同类型的情感。

翻译初级水平(*^__^*)

Answer 4

本研究では、范囲を検讨するように设计されたがする
审査-感情の関系は审査の仮说-
スミスとラザロのオリー策定（1993年）、日常生活で発生します。
我々の研究は2つの相互に関连する质问によって导かれた。まず、さ
审査-感情の関系はスミスとラザロの措定
支配的な関系？第2に、どの程度を行うような関系、
発送は、个人ごとに异なる？
结果は明らかにサポートされてスミスとLazarusの（1993年）コン-
ミニCTは、特定の审査-感情の関系が强い
他のものより。その他-非难の评価は怒りの感情につながった
自己责任の査定は、罪悪感、およびなどした。审査-感情の関系は、生体内で、干潮时に、人々の日常の流れを検讨したので、Thisfinding重要である
感情的な生活、ほとんど以前の研究では、ビネットに頼っている
自伝的リコール、メソッドを、私たちがしやすいと考えて
様々なバイアス。
我々の结果は、不変の种类の混合サポートを提供
これらによって提案されたなどの审査-感情の関系ローズ
男性と（2001）スミス。このような不変のサポートでは、我々は注意してください
そこに"非主"（すなわち、ないとの関系があったが、
と仮定）査定と感情的な反応、例外は、
喜びのションは、これらの関系が强いされなかったとして、予测
主な関系。だけでなく、されたような非主の関系、
発送统计的に主の関系とは异なる、彼ら
また、意味が绝対的に弱かった。すべての少なかった
50％以上强いとして、ほとんどのそれより少なかった。また、
フォローアップする唯一の主要な斜面が分析された分析
系数は0.5 0.4に至るまで発见した。心内のすべてのことを维持する
これらの分析の系数は规格化されていないですが、これはつまり、
経験豊富な感情が约半分のすべてのポイントのポイントを変更
査定の変化。
一方、特定の感情も有意に
他のnonhypothesized査定に関连付けられます。これらの结果
提案审査-感情の関连付けが记载ものの
感情の认知的评価理论にある支配的な
関连付けは、审査が関连付けられている可能性があります1つ以上の
感情的な反応。このように、これらの结果は示唆しないようにその
査定は、invariantly 1対1の関系に関连している
感情的な経験。むしろ、彼らは感情ができることを示唆
别の审査の内容に関连付けられて、その査定することができます
感情の引き出すさまざまな种类の。

Answer 5

翻译成哪国语言啊？？？

Answer 6

This study was designed to examine the extent to which the appraisal-emotion relationships hypothesized in the appraisal theory formulation of Smith and Lazarus (1993) occur in daily life.
设计这项研究的目的，是为了考察发生在日常生活当中的史密斯与拉扎勒斯（1993）所提出的评价理论构想里的虚拟的情绪评价关系的范围。
Our study was guided by two interrelated questions.
两个相互关联的问题指导着我们的研究。
First, are the appraisal-emotion relationships posited by Smith and Lazarus the dominant relationships?
其一，由史密斯与拉扎勒斯假想出的情绪评价关系是支配关系吗？
Second, to what extent do such relationships vary across individuals?
其二，这种关系中的个体差异范围有多大？
The results clearly supported Smith and Lazarus’s (1993) contention that certain appraisal-emotion relationships are stronger than others.
结果为史密斯与拉扎勒斯的观点提供了清晰的证据，情绪评价关系无疑要比其他的关系更为强大。
Appraisals of Other-Blame led to feelings of anger, appraisals of Self-Blame led to feelings of guilt, and so forth.
其他指责造成愤怒，自责造成愧疚，等等。
This finding is important because appraisal-emotion relationships were examined in vivo, during the ebb and flow of people’s daily emotional lives, and most previous research has relied on vignettes and autobiographical recall, methods that we believe are prone to various biases.
这项发现的重要性源于，在人们每天情感生活的起落中，对情绪评价关系进行活体考察，而之前的研究则是依赖于文字与自身回忆，我们相信其所使用的方法有着各种不同偏颇的倾向。
Our results provide mixed support for the type of invariant appraisal-emotion relationships such as those suggested by Roseman and Smith (2001).
我们的结果为那些就像罗斯曼与史密斯提出的不变的情绪评价关系的类型提供了综合的依据。
In support of such invariance, we note that although there were relationships between “nonprimary” (i.e., not hypothesized) appraisals and emotional responses, with the exception of Joy, these relationships were not as strong as the predicted, primary relationships.
对于不变性的证明，我们指出在非假设评价与情绪响应之间存在着一些关系，除了开心之外，这些关系并不像预计般是强大的基础关系。
Not only were such nonprimary relationships statistically different from the primary relationship, they were also meaningfully weaker in absolute terms.
不仅是非假设关系在统计上异于基础关系，他们在常数项的意义上也有所削弱。
All were less than 50% as strong, and most were much less than that.
在强大性上全部都不足50%，而且大多数比这更低。
Moreover, follow-up analyses in which only primary slopes were analyzed found coefficients ranging from .4 to .5.
此外，对于最基础的偏差的进一步分析显示系数从0.4变化到0.5。
Keeping in mind that all coefficients in these analyses are unstandardized, this means that experienced emotions changed about half point for every point change in appraisals.
记住，这些分析中的全部系数都是非标准化的，这就意味着对于评估中的每个变化点来说，常见的情绪会带来差不多半个点的改变。
On the other hand, specific emotions were also significantly associated with other, nonhypothesized appraisals.
从另一个角度来说，在非假设评估中，特定的情绪与其他情绪有显著的关联性。
These results suggest that although the appraisal-emotion associations described in the cognitive appraisal theory of emotion are the dominant associations, an appraisal may be associated with more than one emotional response.
这些结果表明，虽然在有关情绪的认知评价学说中被发现的情绪评价关系是支配关系，但一种评价可能与多种情绪响应相关联。
As such, these findings do not suggest that appraisals are invariantly related in one-to-one relationships to emotional experience.
这些发现本身无法表明，评价对情绪体验来说，是一对一的关系中不变的关联。
Rather, they suggest that emotions can be associated with different appraisal contents and that appraisals can elicit different types of emotions.
相反，他们表明情绪可以与不同的评价内容相关联，而评价可以引出不同类型的情绪。