Question

高分悬赏！！麻烦请帮忙翻译这一小篇文章！！（英翻中）

高分悬赏！！麻烦请帮忙翻译这一小篇文章！！（英翻中）

请勿使用翻译软体！！

文章如下：

DISCUSSION OF IMPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS

Implications for Theory

One goal of this study was to follow up on our previous finding (see Calantone and Schatzel 2000) that a firm’s desire to build competitive equity was a key driver of a firm’s preannouncement behavior. In short, do firms with greater levels of preannouncement behavior obtain their sought-after outcome—greater levels of competitive equity? Based on our model testing, the null result (Hypothesis 1) indicates that, contrary to the preannouncing firm’s intention, competitive equity is not affected. A possible explanation is that competitive equity, or a firm’s leadership position within its industry, is a function of its actual performance (e.g., product quality, financial performance, market share) and is thus less subject to manipulation by the use of preannouncements, which is an information-based influencing strategy. However, the proposed positive effects of competitive equity directly on new product success (Hypothesis 2), as well as indirectly through market anticipation (Hypothesis 5), are supported. These findings indicate that firms with greater levels of competitive equity may enjoy an “advantaged” market environment that fosters new product success.

For firms such as Sony and Dell, their status as industry leaders may positively affect their new product success in two ways. First, new product development has substantial risks, as most new products are failures, but firms with greater levels of competitive equity may be more attractive partners to investors, supply chain partners, and other firms (e.g., joint venturers). Their leadership position suggests that a new product is more likely to be successful, and doing business with such a firm may even elevate the partner’s status and provide a powerful qualification (e.g., Lear Corporation’s status as a preferred supplier to Ford Motor Company; Hambricht and Quist’s underwriting of Amazon.com’s latest bond offering). In short, they may face a receptive external environment when they solicit the necessary resources, either financial or managerial; to execute their NPD plans.

只要各位能够帮上我的忙，我给分绝对不会吝啬的。

那麼就麻烦各位了，谢谢！！
切记：请勿使用翻译软体！！

万事拜托了，谢谢合作！！

Answer 1

你的两个问题中的两段应该是连在一起的吧，我和在一起翻译了，个别名词因为专业性的原因，可能不准确，希望对你有帮助。

DISCUSSION OF IMPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS
意义和局限性

Implications for Theory
理论的意义

One goal of this study was to follow up on our previous finding (see Calantone and Schatzel 2000) that a firm’s desire to build competitive equity was a key driver of a firm’s preannouncement behavior. In short, do firms with greater levels of preannouncement behavior obtain their sought-after outcome—greater levels of competitive equity? Based on our model testing, the null result (Hypothesis 1) indicates that, contrary to the preannouncing firm’s intention, competitive equity is not affected. A possible explanation is that competitive equity, or a firm’s leadership position within its industry, is a function of its actual performance (e.g., product quality, financial performance, market share) and is thus less subject to manipulation by the use of preannouncements, which is an information-based influencing strategy.However, the proposed positive effects of competitive equity directly on new product success (Hypothesis 2), as well as indirectly through market anticipation (Hypothesis 5), are supported. These findings indicate that firms with greater levels of competitive equity may enjoy an “advantaged” market environment that fosters new product success.
这项研究的目的之一是承接我们之前的研究成果（参见Calantone and Schatzel2000）一个企业希望公平竞争的愿望是一个驱使企业预报行为（此处名词请自己根据专业及上下文酌情修改）的关键。简而言之，有更多预报行为的企业会如期望那样得到回报——相对多的竞争公平性吗？根据我们的模型测试，结果表明（假设1），实际情况与公司之前的预期不同，竞争力没有受到影响。一个可能的解释是，竞争资本，或者说一个企业在其行业的领导地位，是其业绩（例如，产品质量，财务业绩，市场份额）的函数，从而很少受预报这种仅以信息为基础的影响力战略的支配。然而，企业竞争力对于新产品成功的直接积极影响（假设2）和通过市场预期实现的间接积极影响（假设5）得到了支持。这些研究成果显示有更多竞争力的企业可能获得更好推进新产品成功的市场环境。

For firms such as Sony and Dell, their status as industry leaders may positively affect their new product success in two ways. First, new product development has substantial risks, as most new products are failures, but firms with greater levels of competitive equity may be more attractive partners to investors, supply chain partners, and other firms (e.g., joint venturers). Their leadership position suggests that a new product is more likely to be successful, and doing business with such a firm may even elevate the partner’s status and provide a powerful qualification (e.g., Lear Corporation’s status as a preferred supplier to Ford Motor Company; Hambricht and Quist’s underwriting of Amazon.com’s latest bond offering). In short, they may face a receptive external environment when they solicit恳求 the necessary resources, either financial or managerial; to execute their NPD plans.
对于像索尼和戴尔这样的企业，它们在行业中的领袖地位可能通过两个途径促进它们新产品的成功。其一，新产品开发存在固有的风险，因为大多数的新产品都会失败。但有更多竞争力的企业可能对于投资者、供应商和其他企业（比如合资企业）来说更有合作吸引力。它们的领袖地位暗示了新产品更容易成功，同时与这样的领袖企业合作可能也能提升合伙人自身的地位，为自己提供了有利的资格证明（比如，李尔公司作为福特汽车公司供应商的地位；Hambricht and Quist's托管线上零售商亚马逊的最新债券）。简而言之，当它们寻求新产品计划所必需的资源时，可以得到外部环境的支持，不论是财政上的，还是管理上的。

Second, firms with greater levels of competitive equity influence industry standards, and their products often serve as product class standards. As such, their new products would obtain product-level advantages favorably influencing their success. Similar to brand equity within the consumer domain, competitive equity may provide a significant and inimitable competitive advantage in business-to-business relationships. However, these questions are beyond the scope of this study, and thus, further research regarding these relationships is indicated.
其次，有高竞争力的企业影响行业标准，它们的产品通常作为行业的产品分类的依据。因此，它们的新产品必定获得有利于它们成功的产品层级上的优势。类似于品牌资产在消费者间的影响，在企业对企业的关系中，竞争资本提供了有效且独特的竞争优势。然而这些问题超出了这次讨论的范畴，因此，深入的研究中认为这些关系是已知。

In addition, the results support our hypothesis that a firm’s preannouncement behavior is related positively to market anticipation (Hypothesis 7). That is, the greater a firm’s preannouncement behavior, the greater is the favorable bias and interest of various market participants (e.g., buyers, distributors, suppliers, investors, media) toward the firm’s new products and future plans. Furthermore, the findings also indicate that market anticipation fosters new product success indirectly thorough（这个词是不是应该是through？） its positive relationship with a firm’s NPD resources (Hypothesis 8). Wind and Mahajan (1987) proposed that a “supportive and receptive atmosphere for new products” is a key contributor to new product success. This finding supports this notion and attests to the possible role of preannouncement as a factor indirectly influencing new product success.

此外，研究结果支持了我们的假设，一个企业的预告行为对于市场预期有积极影响（假设7）。也就是说，一个企业的预报行为越多，各种市场预期（例如，消费者，批发商，供应商，投资者，媒体）对于此公司新产品和未来计划的偏好和兴趣就越多。而且，研究结果还显示，市场预期通过与新产品开发资源的正相关 间接推动新产品的成功（假设8）。Wind and Mahajan (1987)提出“对新产品支持和接纳的环境”是新产品成功的关键。这个发现支持了该看法并证实了预报对于新产品开发潜在的间接影响

Answer 2

楼主很有诚意，我答复晚了，但请仔细审阅，并请放心采纳。
DISCUSSION OF IMPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS 对含义和限制的讨论
Implications for Theory 对理论的含义
One goal of this study was to follow up on our previous finding (see Calantone and Schatzel 2000) that a firm’s desire to build competitive equity was a key driver of a firm’s preannouncement behavior.本研究的一个目标是跟踪我们以前的发现（参见Calantone 和 Schatzel 2000)，即一个企业建立竞争资本的愿望是一个企业预告行为的关键推动力。 In short, do firms with greater levels of preannouncement behavior obtain their sought-after outcome—greater levels of competitive equity? 简言之，具有较高水平预告行为的企业是否就能获得他们最求的结果－较高水平的竞争资本？Based on our model testing, the null result (Hypothesis 1) indicates that, contrary to the preannouncing firm’s intention, competitive equity is not affected. 根据我们的模型测试，零结果（假设1）表明，与预告的企业意图相反，竞争资本不受影响。A possible explanation is that competitive equity, or a firm’s leadership position within its industry, is a function of its actual performance (e.g., product quality, financial performance, market share) and is thus less subject to manipulation by the use of preannouncements, which is an information-based influencing strategy. 一个可能的解释是，竞争资本，或者说企业在本行业的领导地位是其实际业绩（例如产品质量、财务业绩、市场份额）的函数，所以较少受到因采用预告操作的影响，这是一个以信息为基础的影响策略。However, the proposed positive effects of competitive equity directly on new product success (Hypothesis 2), as well as indirectly through market anticipation (Hypothesis 5), are supported. 然而，提出的竞争资本直接对新产品成功的正面影响（假设2）以及通过市场预期（前景）的间接影响（假设5）却得到了支持。These findings indicate that firms with greater levels of competitive equity may enjoy an “advantaged” market environment that fosters new product success.这些发现表明：具有较高水平竞争资本的企业可能享受能促进新产品成功“ 有利的”市场环境。
For firms such as Sony and Dell, their status as industry leaders may positively affect their new product success in two ways. 对于像索尼和戴尔这样的企业，他们作为行业领袖的状况可能从两个方面正面影响到他们的新产品成功。First, new product development has substantial risks, as most new products are failures, but firms with greater levels of competitive equity may be more attractive partners to investors, supply chain partners, and other firms (e.g., joint venturers). 第一方面，新产品研发有很大的风险，因为大多数新产品都是失败的，但是具有较高水平竞争资产的企业对投资者、供应链伙伴，以及其他企业（例如合资方）来说可能是更具吸引力的合作伙伴。Their leadership position suggests that a new product is more likely to be successful, and doing business with such a firm may even elevate the partner’s status and provide a powerful qualification (e.g., Lear Corporation’s status as a preferred supplier to Ford Motor Company;Hambricht and Quist’s underwriting of Amazon.com’s latest bond offering). 他们的领导地位使人想到，一样新产品更有可能取得成功，以及与这样的企业做生意甚至能提升合作伙伴的状况，并提供强有力的资格（例如李尔公司作为福特汽车公司优先供应商的地位，Hambricht and Quist对Amazon.com（亚马逊）公司最新债券发售的包销 ）；In short, they may face a receptive external environment when they solicit the necessary resources, either financial or managerial; to execute their NPD plans. 简而言之，他们在征集必要的资源（不管是财务上的，还是管理上的）时，可能面临一个能接受的外部环境；以便实施他们的NPD（新产品研发）计划

Answer 3

讨论的问题和局限性

理论的影响

目标之一，本研究后续我们以前的调查结果（见Calantone和Schatzel 2000年） ，一个坚定的愿望，建立有竞争力的股权是一个关键的司机，公司的预报行为。总之，这样的企业更大程度的预报行为获得他们所追求的结果，更大程度的公平竞争？根据我们的模型试验，结果无效（假设1 ）表明，违背了preannouncing公司的意图，公平竞争是不会受到影响。一种可能的解释是，竞争的公平，或公司的领导地位，在其产业，是一个功能，其实际表现（例如，产品质量，财务状况，市场份额） ，因此较少受操纵的使用预报，这是一个以信息为基础的战略影响。然而，拟议的积极影响公平竞争的直接在成功推出新产品（假设2 ） ，以及间接地通过市场预测（假设5 ） ，得到支持。这些结果表明，企业更大程度的公平竞争可以享受一个“优势”的市场环境，促进新产品的成功。

企业如索尼，戴尔，其地位的行业领导者可能会产生积极的影响他们的新产品成功的方法有两种。首先，新产品开发已具有相当大的风险，因为大多数新产品的失败，但企业更大程度的公平竞争可能会更具吸引力的合作伙伴给投资者，供应链合作伙伴，和其他企业（如合伙） 。他们的领导地位表明，一种新产品更可能是成功的，做生意这样的公司，甚至可能提高合作伙伴的地位，提供了有力的资格（例如，利尔公司的地位，作为一个首选供应商福特汽车公司公司; Hambricht和奎斯特的承保的Amazon.com的最新发行债券） 。简言之，他们可能面临的外部环境接受时，他们征求必要的资源，财政或管理;执行其NPD的计划。

Answer 4

DISCUSSION OF IMPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS

Implications for Theory

One goal of this study was to follow up on our previous finding (see Calantone and Schatzel 2000) that a firm’s desire to build competitive equity was a key driver of a firm’s preannouncement behavior. In short, do firms with greater levels of preannouncement behavior obtain their sought-after outcome—greater levels of competitive equity? Based on our model testing, the null result (Hypothesis 1) indicates that, contrary to the preannouncing firm’s intention, competitive equity is not affected. A possible explanation is that competitive equity, or a firm’s leadership position within its industry, is a function of its actual performance (e.g., product quality, financial performance, market share) and is thus less subject to manipulation by the use of preannouncements, which is an information-based influencing strategy. However, the proposed positive effects of competitive equity directly on new product success (Hypothesis 2), as well as indirectly through market anticipation (Hypothesis 5), are supported. These findings indicate that firms with greater levels of competitive equity may enjoy an “advantaged” market environment that fosters new product success.

For firms such as Sony and Dell, their status as industry leaders may positively affect their new product success in two ways. First, new product development has substantial risks, as most new products are failures, but firms with greater levels of competitive equity may be more attractive partners to investors, supply chain partners, and other firms (e.g., joint venturers). Their leadership position suggests that a new product is more likely to be successful, and doing business with such a firm may even elevate the partner’s status and provide a powerful qualification (e.g., Lear Corporation’s status as a preferred supplier to Ford Motor Company; Hambricht and Quist’s underwriting of Amazon.com’s latest bond offering). In short, they may face a receptive external environment when they solicit the necessary resources, either financial or managerial; to execute their NPD plans.如此的费用不是真实。 那相当多的练习民众政府对他们的工作的伦理的方面感兴趣; 然而, 那主题对他们活着变成只有当讨论的时候动作对操作的程度以及/ 或申请用它对于决定和行动的含意哪一情绪他们的生命。 议题大部分对开业者的重要性是否民众政府理论在某些方面，对他们是意义深长的当做他们尝试到做他们的工作在到处存在政治上和组织的世界中哪一个他们工作。 换句话说，道德规范的讨论一定是有关的。 情形面对被民众管理人时常礼物不一除了一些伦理的议题同时地, 藉由创造的每个议题分歧的和反驳的问题和解决。

Answer 5

关于涵义和局限的讨论
理论的Implications
这项研究的One目标是接着在我们早先发现(参见Calantone和Schatzel 2000) firm’s欲望建立竞争产权是firm’s preannouncement行为的一个关键司机。 简而言之，与preannouncement行为的更加了不起的水平的企业是否得到他们竞争产权的追寻的outcome—greater水平？ 凭我们的式样测试，空结果(假说1)表明，相背与preannouncing的firm’s意图，竞争产权不受影响。 可能解说是那竞争产权或者在它的产业之内的firm’s领导地位，是它的实际经济指标(即，产品质量、财政业绩，市场份额)的作用并且因而是较少受操作支配使用preannouncements，是一个信息化的影响的战略。 然而，竞争产权的提出的正面作用直接地对新产品成功(并且间接地的假说2)，通过销售预期(支持假说5)。 这些研究结果表明与竞争产权的更加了不起的水平的企业也许享受促进新产品成功的“advantaged”市场环境。

For企业例如索尼和Dell，他们的状态当行业领袖也许肯定地影响他们的新产品成功用二种方式。 首先，新产品开发有坚固风险，因为多数新产品是失败，但是与竞争产权的更加了不起的水平的企业也许是更加可爱的伙伴对投资者，供应链伙伴和其他企业(即，联合venturers)。 他们的领导地位建议一个新产品是可能是成功的，并且做与这样企业的生意也许甚而举起partner’s状态和提供一个强有力的资格(即，作为一个首选的供应商的Lear Corporation’s状态福特公司的; Hambricht和Quist’s署名Amazon.com后’s上市公债)。 简而言之，当他们恳求必要的资源，财政或管理时，他们也许面对一个易接收的外部环境; 执行他们