Question

求高手翻译下，谢谢！谢绝有道，谷歌上直接翻译的

The second form of modal competitive behaviour is competition. Competition
is perhaps best defined as "parallel striving". Competitors are both aiming for the same, often mutually exclusive, objective in the knowledge that they are doing so in concert with others who may win. The key difference from conflict is that the primary orientation is the object rather than the competitor. In market competition, the objective is clearly identified with the customer or, more precisely, a customer's business.
Competition, as defined above, is clearly a major, if not the dominant, mode of behaviour of firms in the industry under study. Firms display a strong customer, if not marketing, orientation. Respondents' own descriptions of their strategic orientations are couched in terms of market segments, customer trends and customer buying behaviour. Equally as important, the main source of knowledge about competitors is acknowledged to be customers. Competitors are defined as close or distant in terms of the number of times their products are "met" on customers' premises or are mentioned by customers in negotiations. It seems that customers are used to determine competitors rather than, or perhaps in conjunction with, firms' own perceptions of whom they are competing with.
Co-existence is the third form of competitive behaviour distinguished. Coexistence involves apparent competitors behaving independently from other competitors. In effect, firms act to minimise their continuing competitive interdependence.
Three forms of co-existential behaviour can be identified. The first occurs when competitors are simply unaware of each other's existence. In Figure 2, it is apparent that the firms in the Iron Triangle do not recognise some of the smaller share firms as competitors. They are often completely unaware of their existence and do not attempt to discover any more because they believe that such firms cannot materially affect them. Respondents perceived that there was a long "tail" of small "garage operations" in the industry, though they were never able to name them. Clearly, such small firms co-exist with the major firms in some sense.
A second form of co-existence occurs when competitors recognise other competitors as such, but choose to ignore their actions. This is clearly a statement of either pathological behaviour or a belief that the market is so segmented and decoupled that competitor behaviour is likely to be a very minor factor influencing behaviour in the marketplace. There was some evidence within Iron Triangle firms that they perceived themelves so far ahead of competitors, even fellow members of the Iron Triangle, that they could effectively ignore their actions.
如果好的话，再加分啊。比较急

Answer 1

译文：
模态竞争行为的第二种形式是“竞争”。或许竞争最好被解释为“平行比拼”。竞争参与者具有同样的目标并知晓其他竞争者的存在，且达到目标的收益不能共享。“竞争”和”冲突“的主要区别在于，”竞争“是以（利益）目标为导向的，而非把其他竞争者作为目标。在市场竞争中，”目标“通常是指客户，或者，准确地说，客户的业务。
竞争，如上定义，是当前研究的工业中主要的（甚至是最主要的）公司行为模式。公司表现出显著的市场导向，或者说顾客导向。被调查者对其自身战略导向的描述可归结为：市场细分、客户趋势和购买行为。同样重要的是，他们声称，了解竞争对手的最重要渠道也是来自消费者。按照竞争参与者的产品符合消费者预期的程度（频繁程度），将竞争参与者定义为”近的“或”远的“。
似乎更多的时候，一家公司是根据消费者的情况来确定其竞争对手是谁，而非公司固有的判断。
”共存“是第三种应当区分的竞争行为。”共存“涉及那些具有明显竞争关系且各自行为相互独立的竞争者。实际上，公司会努力减少在竞争中的相互依存度。
有三种形式的共存行为。第一种情形下，竞争参与者不知道其他参与者的存在。在图二中，很明显在”钢铁三角“中的那些公司并不认为一些更小的股份公司是他们的竞争对手。他们通常对这些小公司毫不在意，也不打算去了解更多的信息，因为他们认为这些小公司不能带给他们实质性的威胁。被调查者承认在行业内确实有很多”小规模运营“的存在，尽管他们从来说不上这些小企业的名字。很明显，这些小企业在某种程度上是和大企业”共存“的。
第二种形式的”共存“通常是指竞争参与者意识到这些小企业的存在，但他们选择无视后者的行为。这样的选择若非是决策上的失误的话，就意味着他们相信市场具有良好的区间型和独立性，以至于竞争者的行为对其在市场中的表现的影响微乎其微。有证据表明，在”钢铁三角“内的公司通常能够远在其竞争对手（甚至是同一三角内的伙伴）之前，察觉（和调整）自身的处境，因此他们完全可以无视其他竞争者的举措。

精心翻译，祝好！ 加点分吧╮(╯▽╰)╭

Answer 2

第二种形式的模态竞争行为是竞争。竞争
　　也许现在最好定义是“平行的奋进”。都是针对竞争对手一样,经常相互排斥的,目的是在知道他们是这样做在音乐会与那些可能赢。关键的区别从冲突是主定位对象而不是竞争对手。在市场竞争中,这样做的目的是明确的和客户或者,更准确地说,一个客户的业务。
比赛,就象定义以上,很明显是一个主要的,如果不占主导地位,行为的企业模式下的产业研究。公司显示一个强大的客户,如果不是营销、定位。受访者本身的描述他们的战略取向均措辞方面的市场细分,客户的趋势和满足客户的购买行为。同等重要的是,知识的主要来源是公认为是竞争对手的客户。竞争者被定义为关闭或遥远的条款的号码共存是第三种竞争行为加以区分。涉及到明显的竞争对手的行为并存独立于其他竞争者。在效果上,公司行为,尽量减少持续竞争相互依存。
三种形式的co-existential行为可以被确认。第一个是当竞争对手只是不知道对方的存在。在图2中,很明显,这些公司的铁三角不承认一些较小的竞争对手分享公司代理。他们通常是完全没有意识到它们的存在,不要试图发现任何的多,因为他们认为这些公司不能重大影响他们。受访者觉察到有一个长时间的“尾巴”的小“车库作业”我发生的第二种共处时承认其他对手的竞争对手正因为如此,但是选择无视他们的行动。这很明显是一个的陈述或信念不是病态行为的市场竞争对手的划分,所以解耦的行为可能会非常小的影响因素的行为在市场上交易。有一些证据表明,在他们察觉铁三角公司到目前为止themelves前方的竞争者,甚至其他成员的铁三角,

Answer 3

太多了，你去问问你的英语老师吧！