In other words, whereas the New Critics and Wolfgang Iser are interested in the roughening of form, they're interested in it for hermeneutic purposes.

新批评派成员和伊瑟尔,也对形式的粗糙化感兴趣，他们对它解释学的方面感兴趣。

耶鲁公开课 - 文学理论导论课程节选

It has to do particularly with the palpable or roughened form of that which defamiliarizes.

他们只对起到陌生化效果的,使语言粗糙化的形式在意。

耶鲁公开课 - 文学理论导论课程节选

Which is an unfortunate design decision made many years ago with this particular language.

正是因为用该语言写出来这些,粗糙的设计理念，纷繁的细节。

哈佛公开课 - 计算机科学课程节选

This is papier-mache, a fairly crude folk art. Anyone can do it.

而是纸型的，相当粗糙的民间艺术，任何人都能做。

耶鲁公开课 - 1945年后的美国小说课程节选

But, remember, this is a very rough estimate.

但，记住，这只是一些粗糙的计算估计。

麻省理工公开课 - 固态化学导论课程节选

And we've now seen that that's a bit crude, right?

现在我们觉得这有些粗糙，是吗？

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

But actually, the thing I want to think about is a crude pun there, a "fairy" tale. Proust is himself gay. One of his big subjects is homosexuality, and Nabokov's reaction to this is really homophobic. This is not just about Nabokov's personal prejudice.

但事实上，我想说的是这里的一个粗糙的双关语，一个“童话“故事，普鲁斯特是一个同性恋，他讨论的一个,话题就是同性恋，但纳博科夫对此是相当反感的,这仅仅是因为纳博科夫的个人偏见。

耶鲁公开课 - 1945年后的美国小说课程节选

Now as I say, I made this calculation some years ago It doesn't really matter how inaccurate it's going to be As we'll see it's very rough but it makes the point ? How many people are there?

现在就像我说的，我很多年前做了这个计算,到底它有多不精确其实无所谓,我们会看到,这个计算很粗糙,但却给出了一个说明,有多少人？

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Well, suppose there were 5 billion people Roughly half of them are men half of them are women What we want to know then is how many possible people could the 2 5 billion men make altogether ? with the 2 5 billion women?

假设这有50亿人,非常粗糙地分为一半男,一半女,我们下面想知道的是,25亿男人和,25亿女人总共在一起,能制造多少可能的人？

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选