Premise: With respect to the point that you made as it relates to their testimony at trial, that is a very valid point. However, I will tell you that the sense of my opinion as it related to their deposition testimony and as reconsidered and as honed in the reconsideration, was that it was meant to apply -- the general thrust of that, the protections, if you will, in that opinion were meant to apply in the same sense to their testimony at trial, if they chose to testify, and they would be protected in every way by the Court, and they would not be questioned in the broader sense.

Hypothesis: Testifying is considered optional.

The statement says, "if they chose to testify". The system was confused by the wording.

Berkenaan dengan perkara yang anda buat yang berkaitan dengan keterangan mereka semasa perbicaraan, itu adalah perkara yang sangat sah. Walau bagaimanapun, saya akan memberitahu anda bahawa pengertian pendapat saya kerana ia berkaitan dengan keterangan pemendapan mereka dan seperti yang dipertimbangkan semula dan seperti yang diasah dalam pertimbangan semula, adalah bahawa ia bertujuan untuk digunakan -- teras umum itu, perlindungan, jika anda mahu , pada pendapat itu dimaksudkan untuk digunakan dalam erti kata yang sama untuk keterangan mereka di perbicaraan, jika mereka memilih untuk memberi keterangan, dan mereka akan dilindungi dalam semua cara oleh Mahkamah, dan mereka tidak akan dipersoalkan dalam erti kata yang lebih luas.

Memberi keterangan dianggap sebagai pilihan.


Premise: Honourable senators, what can we do when one can fairly conclude, after a fair read of the current controversy between Mr. Justice McClung and Madam Justice L'Heureux-Dub and their respective decision, that both justices fell below standards of appropriate judicial self-restraint - Justice McClung in his obviously injudicious letter, and Madam Justice L'Heureux-Dub in her injudicious or intemperate language in her decision?

Hypothesis: The two justices involved are different genders

One is addressed as Mr. and the other as Madam. I think the system got it wrong because I introduced an unfamiliar concept

Yang dihormati Senator, apa yang boleh kita lakukan apabila seseorang boleh membuat kesimpulan secara adil, selepas membaca dengan saksama kontroversi semasa antara Encik Hakim McClung dan Puan Hakim L'Heureux-Dub dan keputusan masing-masing, bahawa kedua-dua hakim itu jatuh di bawah piawaian kehakiman yang sesuai. menahan diri - Hakim McClung dalam suratnya yang jelas tidak adil, dan Puan Hakim L'Heureux-Dub dalam bahasanya yang tidak adil atau tidak sopan dalam keputusannya?

Kedua-dua hakim terbabit adalah berlainan jantina


Premise: So it's one of my top priorities. Now, I know that we have some disagreements on this. And I'm sorry to tell you that, you know, there is a record here. And Texas ranks 49th out of the 50 states in health care -- in children with health care. 49th for women with health care, and 50th for families with health care.

Hypothesis: texas is one of the worst states in terms of health care

Jadi ia adalah salah satu keutamaan saya. Sekarang, saya tahu bahawa kita mempunyai beberapa perselisihan faham tentang perkara ini. Dan saya minta maaf untuk memberitahu anda bahawa, anda tahu, terdapat rekod di sini. Dan Texas menduduki tempat ke-49 daripada 50 negeri dalam penjagaan kesihatan -- dalam kanak-kanak dengan penjagaan kesihatan. Ke-49 untuk wanita dengan penjagaan kesihatan, dan ke-50 untuk keluarga dengan penjagaan kesihatan.

texas adalah salah satu negeri yang paling teruk dari segi penjagaan kesihatan


Premise: Well, to my understanding, intelligent design just presupposes that everything in life is too complex, that it has to be designed. But I also know that creationism was used repeatedly with the term -or, I'm sorry, not with the term "intelligent design." Intelligent design came up after the fact. But I do know that, in its original context, it was creationism that was being used. And when I think of creationists, again, I think of Young Earth creationists, and I do not subscribe to that way of thinking.

Hypothesis: The statement has less than 228 words

The statement definitely has less the 228 words, just count it! I think the model got confused because it doesnt have the number of words on hand which is why.

Nah, pada pemahaman saya, reka bentuk pintar hanya mengandaikan bahawa segala-galanya dalam kehidupan adalah terlalu kompleks, sehingga ia perlu direka. Tetapi saya juga tahu bahawa penciptaan telah digunakan berulang kali dengan istilah -atau, saya minta maaf, bukan dengan istilah "reka bentuk pintar." Reka bentuk pintar muncul selepas fakta itu. Tetapi saya tahu bahawa, dalam konteks asalnya, ia adalah penciptaan yang digunakan. Dan apabila saya berfikir tentang penciptaan, sekali lagi, saya memikirkan pencipta Bumi Muda, dan saya tidak melanggan cara berfikir itu.

Penyataan mempunyai kurang daripada 228 patah perkataan


Premise: Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to move a motion to refer the matter of the minister's actions to the committee, if you find that there is a prima facie case, and there is no mandate from this House and no one has the right to represent that they may act for members of this House without specific authority from this House.

Hypothesis: The House follows particular rules of order.

Someone is asking the House Speaker for permission to move something to a committee. This means there are specific rules that each member of the House must follow in order to get work done. It's not a free-for-all, where anyone can pass a law by any means.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya bersedia untuk mengemukakan usul untuk merujuk perkara tindakan menteri kepada jawatankuasa, sekiranya terdapat kes prima facie, dan tiada mandat daripada Dewan ini dan tiada siapa yang berhak mewakili. supaya mereka boleh bertindak bagi ahli Dewan ini tanpa kebenaran khusus daripada Dewan ini.


Premise: As a result of the increased taxes announced on February 13, 1998, excise taxes on cigarettes and tobacco sticks vary from $2.25 to $5.35 for a carton of cigarettes and from $1.85 to $2.93 for a carton of tobacco sticks, depending in which province the tobacco products are offered for sale.

Hypothesis: Taxes on cigarettes and tobacco sticks used to be lower

The context state that there are increased taxes, so the taxes did used to be lower as increase means to rise. The system could likely not understand that taxes can go up and down over time?

Hasil daripada kenaikan cukai yang diumumkan pada 13 Februari 1998, cukai eksais ke atas rokok dan batang tembakau berbeza-beza dari $2.25 hingga $5.35 untuk satu karton rokok dan dari $1.85 hingga $2.93 untuk satu karton batang tembakau, bergantung di wilayah mana produk tembakau ditawarkan untuk dijual.

Cukai rokok dan batang tembakau dulu lebih rendah


Premise: Even youths will fade and be weary and the young will fall exhausted, but those who wait for the Lord shall renew their strength, they shall mount up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint, but Sandra, they'll have to be in good shape to keep up with you.

Hypothesis: Sandra is in excellent physical condition.

Sandra must be in very good condition, but the passage remarks that people will have to be in good shape to keep up with her.  The system was likely confused by my reference to Sandra which was only a small part of the passage.

Orang-orang muda pun akan menjadi pudar dan letih, dan orang-orang muda akan jatuh lelah, tetapi orang-orang yang menanti-nantikan Tuhan akan diperbaharui kekuatannya, mereka akan terbang dengan sayap seperti burung rajawali, mereka akan berlari dan tidak menjadi lesu, mereka berjalan dan tidak menjadi lesu, tetapi Sandra, mereka perlu berada dalam keadaan yang baik untuk bersaing dengan anda.

Sandra berada dalam keadaan fizikal yang sangat baik.


Premise: In addition, I have a child who is in the ninth-grade biology class, and this has spilled over into other classes. It's not just the biology class that has been affected by this. My child has heard comments from other students, school board member students in her classroom about evolution being against their religion, and do you think we came from monkeys, how can you think we came from monkeys.

Hypothesis: The parent is expressing disgust

Di samping itu, saya mempunyai seorang anak yang berada di kelas biologi gred sembilan, dan ini telah merebak ke kelas lain. Ia bukan hanya kelas biologi yang telah terjejas oleh ini. Anak saya telah mendengar komen daripada pelajar lain, pelajar ahli lembaga sekolah di dalam bilik darjahnya tentang evolusi bertentangan dengan agama mereka, dan adakah anda fikir kami datang dari monyet, bagaimana anda boleh fikir kami datang dari monyet.


Premise: But I think it's about his priorities. And let me tell you exactly why I think that the choice he made to give a tax cut for the oil companies and others before addressing this -- I mean, if you were the governor of a state that was dead last in health care for families, and all of a sudden you found yourself with the biggest surplus your state had ever had in its history, wouldn't you want to maybe use some of it to climb from 50th to, say, 45 or 40 or something or maybe better?

Hypothesis: he wanted to improve the status of the state

The scenario states that, hypothetically, if you were in the same position you would want to continue pushing from 50th to 4th or 40th and beyond. It is likely that the governor thought along the same lines. The model probably wasn't sure who 'he' was

Tetapi saya fikir ia adalah mengenai keutamaannya. Dan izinkan saya memberitahu anda dengan tepat mengapa saya berpendapat bahawa pilihan yang dia buat untuk memberikan potongan cukai untuk syarikat minyak dan lain-lain sebelum menangani perkara ini -- maksud saya, jika anda adalah gabenor negeri yang terakhir mati dalam penjagaan kesihatan untuk keluarga , dan tiba-tiba anda mendapati diri anda mempunyai lebihan terbesar yang pernah dialami oleh negeri anda dalam sejarahnya, tidakkah anda mahu menggunakan sebahagian daripadanya untuk mendaki dari tangga ke-50 kepada, katakan, 45 atau 40 atau sesuatu atau mungkin lebih baik?


Premise: I would support the Orrin Hatch version of it, not the Senator Kennedy version. But let me say to you, Mr. Vice President, we're happy with our laws on our books. That bill did -- there was another bill that did die in committee. But I want to repeat, if you have a state that fully supports the law like we do in Texas, we're going to go after all crime. And we're going to make sure people get punished for the crime. And in this case we can't enhance the penalty any more than putting those three thugs to deaths. And that's what's gonna happen in the State of Texas.

Hypothesis: Senator Kennedy was elected

Saya akan menyokong versi Orrin Hatch itu, bukan versi Senator Kennedy. Tetapi biar saya katakan kepada anda, Tuan Naib Presiden, kami gembira dengan undang-undang kami pada buku kami. Rang undang-undang itu berlaku -- terdapat satu lagi rang undang-undang yang telah mati dalam jawatankuasa. Tetapi saya ingin ulangi, jika anda mempunyai negeri yang menyokong sepenuhnya undang-undang seperti yang kami lakukan di Texas, kami akan pergi selepas semua jenayah. Dan kami akan memastikan orang ramai dihukum kerana jenayah itu. Dan dalam kes ini kita tidak boleh meningkatkan hukuman lebih daripada membunuh tiga samseng itu. Dan itulah yang akan berlaku di Negeri Texas.


Premise: Michel Dupont, of the FTQ; Michel Angers, of the CSN; Yves St-Pierre, of Action-Chmage; Jean-Louis Lavoie, of the Mauricie St-Jean-Baptiste society; Franois Brunette, of the AQDR; Martin Roy, of the UQTR students' association; and Brian Barton, of the Trois-Rivires Solidarit populaire.

Hypothesis: the names of less than eight people are listed

the names of seven individual people are listed, less than eight

Michel Dupont, daripada FTQ; Michel Angers, daripada CSN; Yves St-Pierre, daripada Action-Chmage; Jean-Louis Lavoie, daripada masyarakat Mauricie St-Jean-Baptiste; Franois Brunette, daripada AQDR; Martin Roy, daripada persatuan pelajar UQTR; dan Brian Barton, dari Trois-Rivires Solidarit populaire.

nama yang kurang daripada lapan orang disenaraikan


Premise: In the Senate we passed the right of Americans to import drugs from Canada. But the president and his friends took it out in the House, and now you don't have that right. The president blocked you from the right to have less expensive drugs from Canada.

Hypothesis: the new law helps us citizens

Di Senat kami meluluskan hak rakyat Amerika untuk mengimport dadah dari Kanada. Tetapi presiden dan rakan-rakannya mengeluarkannya di Dewan, dan kini anda tidak mempunyai hak itu. Presiden menghalang anda daripada hak untuk mendapatkan ubat yang lebih murah dari Kanada.


Premise: Well, I've been kind of a hard-liner on this issue for more than eight years. When I was in the senate before I became vice president I was pushing for stronger action against Milosevic. He caused the death of so many people. He was the last communist party boss there and then he became a dictator that by some other label he was still essentially a communist dictator.

Hypothesis: The person is second in line for the presidency

Baiklah, saya telah menjadi seorang yang tegas dalam isu ini selama lebih daripada lapan tahun. Semasa saya berada di senat sebelum saya menjadi naib presiden, saya mendesak tindakan yang lebih tegas terhadap Milosevic. Dia menyebabkan kematian ramai orang. Dia adalah ketua parti komunis terakhir di sana dan kemudian dia menjadi diktator yang oleh beberapa label lain dia pada dasarnya adalah diktator komunis.

Orang itu berada di barisan kedua untuk jawatan presiden


Premise: Bill C-6 creates three new board levels: a five-member land use planning board in the Gwich'in and Sahtu settlement areas; a Mackenzie Valley land and water board, subject to the creation of additional panels which will have up to 17 members, including a five-member permanent regional panel in each of the settlement areas; and an eleven-member environmental impact review board for the entire Mackenzie Valley.

Hypothesis: The new bill creates more positions and jobs.

If there are new boards people have to 'fill the chairs' or work on them - thus creating jobs,.

Rang Undang-Undang C-6 mewujudkan tiga peringkat lembaga baharu: lembaga perancangan guna tanah lima ahli di kawasan penempatan Gwich'in dan Sahtu; papan tanah dan air Lembah Mackenzie, tertakluk kepada penciptaan panel tambahan yang akan mempunyai sehingga 17 ahli, termasuk panel wilayah tetap lima ahli di setiap kawasan penempatan; dan sebelas ahli lembaga semakan kesan alam sekitar untuk seluruh Lembah Mackenzie.

Rang undang-undang baru mewujudkan lebih banyak jawatan dan pekerjaan.


Premise: What I've done is, it says that there's no extraneous unpublished material questioning. That's the clarity that I need. And then, quite frankly, my mindset is, if the issue of the defendants is that we were biased in our reporting because we either misquoted somebody or whatever, well, this isn't a jury trial.

Hypothesis: No one will be summoned to jury duty in this trial

This is correct because it is stated it is not a jury trial. Therefore, no one will be in the jury and no on can be summoned for jury duty when a jury doesn't exist on this trial. The system doesn't realize a jury has people on it I think

Apa yang saya lakukan ialah, ia mengatakan bahawa tidak ada pertanyaan bahan yang tidak diterbitkan. Itulah kejelasan yang saya perlukan. Dan kemudian, terus terang, pemikiran saya adalah, jika isu defendan adalah bahawa kami berat sebelah dalam pelaporan kami kerana kami salah petik seseorang atau apa sahaja, ini bukan perbicaraan juri.

Tiada siapa yang akan dipanggil bertugas sebagai juri dalam perbicaraan ini


Premise: So gun laws are important, no question about it, but so is loving children, and character education classes, and faith-based programs being a part of after-school programs. Some desperate child needs to have somebody put their arm around them and say, we love you.

Hypothesis: This person loves children.

The person says loving children is important; it follows logically they love children.

Jadi undang-undang senjata api adalah penting, tiada persoalan mengenainya, tetapi begitu juga dengan kanak-kanak yang menyayangi, dan kelas pendidikan watak, dan program berasaskan kepercayaan menjadi sebahagian daripada program selepas sekolah. Sesetengah kanak-kanak yang terdesak perlu meminta seseorang memeluk mereka dan berkata, kami sayang kamu.


Premise: Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court: The questions today, especially the initial questions, suggest one of the many insurmountable obstacles to petitioners' petition in, position in this case. That is that the first Congress explicitly gave copyright protection to the authors of any books already printed as well as explicitly the owners of existing copyrights.

Hypothesis: The Chief Just is not speaking.

The speaker addresses the chief justice, so we know the chief justice is not speaking.

Tuan Ketua Hakim Negara, dan semoga ia menggembirakan Mahkamah: Soalan hari ini, terutamanya soalan awal, mencadangkan salah satu daripada banyak halangan yang tidak dapat diatasi kepada petisyen pempetisyen dalam, kedudukan dalam kes ini. Iaitu Kongres pertama secara eksplisit memberikan perlindungan hak cipta kepada pengarang mana-mana buku yang telah dicetak serta pemilik hak cipta sedia ada secara jelas.


Premise: In 1996 the governments of Canada and the Northwest Territories, the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, the Inuvialuit Game Council, the Paulatuk Community Corporation and the Paulatuk Hunters and Trappers Committee signed an agreement to establish a national park in the Inuvialuit settlement region near Paulatuk in the Northwest Territories.

Hypothesis: Canada has at least one new national park since 1996.

The text states it was agreed to establish in 1996.

Pada tahun 1996 kerajaan Kanada dan Wilayah Barat Laut, Perbadanan Serantau Inuvialuit, Majlis Permainan Inuvialuit, Perbadanan Komuniti Paulatuk dan Jawatankuasa Pemburu dan Penjebak Paulatuk menandatangani perjanjian untuk menubuhkan taman negara di wilayah penempatan Inuvialuit berhampiran Paulatuk di Barat Laut. Wilayah.

Kanada mempunyai sekurang-kurangnya satu taman negara baharu sejak 1996.


Premise: That the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications have power to sit at 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday December 9, 1997, for its study of Bill S-4, An Act to amend the Canada Shipping Act (maritime liability), even though the Senate may then be sitting and that rule 95(4) be suspended in relation thereto.

Hypothesis: The Senate has more power than committees.

It says in the agents text that the senate can suspend rules that the committees rely on, also how can my first statement be 99.89% correct? Thin margin for such convoluted content I dont know what else to write :(

Bahawa Jawatankuasa Tetap Senat Pengangkutan dan Komunikasi mempunyai kuasa untuk bersidang pada pukul 4:00 petang. pada hari Selasa 9 Disember 1997, untuk kajiannya terhadap Rang Undang-Undang S-4, Suatu Akta untuk meminda Akta Perkapalan Kanada (liabiliti maritim), walaupun Senat mungkin bersidang dan peraturan 95(4) itu digantung berhubung dengannya.

Senat mempunyai kuasa lebih daripada jawatankuasa.


Premise: I hope the minister will not forget that, if there ever was a government on this earth that has worked, that has recognized aboriginal governments, and that has paid tribute to, made things easier for and given space to aboriginal communities, to the first nations, because they are nations, it is the Government of Quebec that did it, as early as 1985.

Hypothesis: Something happened in 1890+95

The statement mentions that the government of quebec did something in 1985, 1890+95 = 1895.

Saya harap menteri tidak akan lupa bahawa, jika ada kerajaan di bumi ini yang telah bekerja, yang telah mengiktiraf kerajaan orang asli, dan yang telah memberi penghormatan kepada, memudahkan dan memberi ruang kepada masyarakat orang asli, kepada negara-negara pertama. , kerana mereka adalah negara, Kerajaan Quebec yang melakukannya, seawal tahun 1985.


Premise: Leading the movement which has always been more in evidence in all classes of Quebec society, the Pro-Dmocratie group makes a point of condemning the initiative of the federal government in the following terms: ``We share the conviction that the constitutional debate is first of all a political debate and that it should be resolved by political means.

Hypothesis: Political debates are resolved in political environment

Article states that constitutional debates should be classed as political therefore resolved within political environment meaning that's the right way to resolve political debates

Mengetuai gerakan yang sentiasa menjadi bukti dalam semua kelas masyarakat Quebec, kumpulan Pro-Dmocratie mengutuk inisiatif kerajaan persekutuan dalam terma berikut: ``Kami berkongsi keyakinan bahawa perbahasan perlembagaan adalah yang pertama. semua perdebatan politik dan ia harus diselesaikan dengan cara politik.

Perdebatan politik diselesaikan dalam persekitaran politik


Premise: As for the banking purpose of the proposal, society's interest in solving crimes by extending the pool of contributors to the DNA bank to include all persons arrested or charged with a designated offence, does not sufficiently outweigh "the intrusive nature of bodily sample seizures."

Hypothesis: The DNA bank would be increased if there were more people added that had been charged with a crime.

This is definitely correct, as stated in the sentence, however the system found that it was neither correct or incorrect.

Bagi tujuan perbankan cadangan itu, kepentingan masyarakat dalam menyelesaikan jenayah dengan memperluaskan kumpulan penyumbang kepada bank DNA untuk memasukkan semua orang yang ditangkap atau didakwa dengan kesalahan yang ditetapkan, tidak cukup mengatasi "sifat penyitaan sampel badan yang mengganggu."

Bank DNA akan ditingkatkan jika terdapat lebih ramai orang yang ditambah yang telah didakwa melakukan jenayah.


Premise: General Olson, you say that the functional equivalent of an unlimited time would be a violation, but that's precisely the argument that's being made by petitioners here, that a limited time which is extendable is the functionable, functional equivalent of an unlimited time, a limited time that 10 years from now can be extended, and then extended again, and extended again. Why -- their argument is precisely that, a limited time doesn't mean anything unless it means, once you have established the limit for works that have been created under that limit, that's the end.

Hypothesis: The unlimited time can be extended after ten years.

The story says 10 years from now, so we can potentially assume that anything after 10 years also works.

Jeneral Olson, anda mengatakan bahawa kesetaraan fungsi masa tanpa had akan menjadi pelanggaran, tetapi itulah hujah yang dibuat oleh pempetisyen di sini, bahawa masa terhad yang boleh dilanjutkan ialah setara berfungsi, berfungsi dengan masa tanpa had, masa terhad masa yang 10 tahun dari sekarang boleh dilanjutkan, dan kemudian dilanjutkan lagi, dan dilanjutkan lagi. Mengapa -- hujah mereka adalah tepat bahawa, masa yang terhad tidak bermakna apa-apa melainkan ia bermakna, setelah anda menetapkan had untuk karya yang telah dibuat di bawah had itu, itulah penghujungnya.

Masa tanpa had boleh dilanjutkan selepas sepuluh tahun.


Premise: I remember Casey Brown, one of the board members at the time, discussing, during the board meeting with the board, that she felt they were, I'm paraphrasing, treading, you know, on -- they were treading closely to violating the Pennsylvania State Board of Education regulations on religion in the classroom.

Hypothesis: Casey Brown is a former member of a local Board of Education from the state of Pennsylvania.

Casey Brown was a "board member" and each local jurisdiction has a board of education that typically follow a over-riding state board of education statute.

Saya masih ingat Casey Brown, salah seorang ahli lembaga pada masa itu, berbincang, semasa mesyuarat lembaga dengan lembaga itu, bahawa dia merasakan mereka, saya menghuraikan, menginjak, anda tahu, pada -- mereka sedang menginjak rapat untuk melanggar Peraturan Lembaga Pendidikan Negeri Pennsylvania mengenai agama di dalam bilik darjah.

Casey Brown ialah bekas ahli Lembaga Pendidikan tempatan dari negeri Pennsylvania.


Premise: We have to be bold. We have to provide leadership. Now it's true that we disagree on this. The governor said that he doesn't think this problem is necessarily caused by people. He's for letting the oil companies into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Houston has just become the smoggiest city in the country.

Hypothesis: Houston has air polution

Smog refers to air pollution, so this statement is definitely correct. The system may not have understood the concept of pollution.

Kita kena berani. Kita perlu menyediakan kepimpinan. Sekarang adalah benar bahawa kita tidak bersetuju mengenai perkara ini. Gabenor berkata bahawa dia tidak fikir masalah ini semestinya disebabkan oleh orang. Dia kerana membenarkan syarikat minyak masuk ke Perlindungan Hidupan Liar Kebangsaan Artik. Houston baru sahaja menjadi bandar paling berasap di negara ini.


Premise: I think we ought to raise the age at which a juvenile can carry a handgun from 18 to 21. I disagree with the vice president on this issue. He is for registration of guns. I think the only people that are going to show up to register or get a license -- I guess licensing like a driver's license for a gun, the only people that are going to show up are law-abiding citizens.

Hypothesis: We ought to raise the age at which someone can legally carry a handgun by 3 years

This is correct because there is a 3 year difference between 18 and 21.

Saya fikir kita patut meningkatkan umur di mana seorang remaja boleh membawa pistol daripada 18 kepada 21. Saya tidak bersetuju dengan naib presiden dalam isu ini. Dia adalah untuk pendaftaran senjata api. Saya rasa satu-satunya orang yang akan hadir untuk mendaftar atau mendapatkan lesen -- Saya rasa pelesenan seperti lesen memandu untuk pistol, satu-satunya orang yang akan muncul adalah warganegara yang mematuhi undang-undang.

Kita sepatutnya menaikkan umur seseorang boleh membawa pistol secara sah sebanyak 3 tahun


Premise: Okay. Some of the -- I attended a lot of meetings, so facts blur together. What I do recall, I -- as my husband said yesterday, I was pregnant at the time, so I have some reason to remember certain things. But I recall Barrie Callahan speaking about the textbook.

Hypothesis: The narrator is a female.

The person speaking was pregnant so therefore has to be a woman. I think the system may have a hard time with gender.

Baik. Sebahagian daripada -- saya menghadiri banyak mesyuarat, jadi fakta kabur bersama-sama. Apa yang saya ingat, saya -- seperti yang suami saya katakan semalam, saya mengandung pada masa itu, jadi saya mempunyai sebab untuk mengingati perkara-perkara tertentu. Tetapi saya masih ingat Barrie Callahan bercakap tentang buku teks.


Premise: If we look at the thrust of the bill we can see that the key things this bill is trying to do is to make sure that telemarketers give fair and reasonable disclosure of information at the beginning of each call, including the identity of the company, the purpose of the communication, the nature of the product, business or interest, the price, material restrictions and any terms and conditions applicable to delivery.

Hypothesis: the bill will help the telemarketer problem.

the goal of the bill is to stop shady activity from the telemarketers. i think the system could recognize the synonyms i used.

Jika kita melihat teras rang undang-undang itu, kita dapat melihat bahawa perkara utama yang cuba dilakukan oleh rang undang-undang ini adalah untuk memastikan bahawa telemarketer memberikan pendedahan maklumat yang adil dan munasabah pada permulaan setiap panggilan, termasuk identiti syarikat, tujuan komunikasi, sifat produk, perniagaan atau kepentingan, harga, sekatan material dan sebarang terma dan syarat yang terpakai untuk penghantaran.


Premise: Judge, if I may, there are some things here that we can agree with, but there are others that we can't. And this is why, in our opinion, Judge. You know, if our clients are believed, the reporters did talk to them but took misrepresentative statements so that they left things out to put them in a false light and in so doing have created articles that, if they were admitted for the truth of the matter asserted, would be misrepresentative.

Hypothesis: Judge knows the law

Hakim, kalau boleh, ada beberapa perkara di sini yang kita boleh bersetuju, tetapi ada yang tidak boleh. Dan inilah sebabnya, pada pendapat kami, Hakim. Anda tahu, jika pelanggan kami dipercayai, wartawan memang bercakap dengan mereka tetapi mengambil kenyataan yang salah nyata sehingga mereka meninggalkan perkara untuk meletakkan mereka dalam cahaya palsu dan dengan berbuat demikian telah mencipta artikel yang, jika mereka diterima untuk kebenaran perkara yang ditegaskan, akan menjadi salah nyata.


Premise: I want to acknowledge the work of the Canadian Institute of Child Health, the Learning Disabilities Association of Canada, Greenpeace, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, the Canadian Association of Family Resource Programs and the Canadian Child Care Federation.

Hypothesis: These organizations are important to this person

This is definitely correct as their want to acknowledge these organizations indicates that they find these organizations to be important.

Saya ingin mengiktiraf hasil kerja Institut Kesihatan Kanak-Kanak Kanada, Persatuan Kurang Upaya Pembelajaran Kanada, Greenpeace, Persatuan Pakar Perubatan Kanada untuk Alam Sekitar, Persatuan Program Sumber Keluarga Kanada dan Persekutuan Penjagaan Kanak-Kanak Kanada.


Premise: And we're not doing what we ought to do in terms of the technology. We have iris-identification technology. We have thumbprint, fingerprint technology today. We can know who the people are, that they're really the people they say they are when they cross the border.

Hypothesis: The text does not say that fingerprint technology does not exist today.

The text says that fingerprint technology exists today, therefore the text does not say that it does not exist today. It's difficult because it's a sentence phrased with double negatives which is confusing to parse even for humans.

Dan kami tidak melakukan apa yang sepatutnya kami lakukan dari segi teknologi. Kami mempunyai teknologi pengenalan iris. Kami mempunyai cap ibu jari, teknologi cap jari hari ini. Kita boleh tahu siapa orang itu, bahawa mereka benar-benar orang yang mereka katakan apabila mereka melintasi sempadan.

Teks itu tidak mengatakan bahawa teknologi cap jari tidak wujud hari ini.


Premise: At this milestone in our history, I encourage honourable senators to reflect on the events of December 6, 1989, and to do what you can to ensure that we have -and to the extent that we have not, that we strive to have - a society where there is respect and harmony between men and women.

Hypothesis: December 6, 1989 is in the past.

My statement is correct because the original context describes December 6, 1989 as a past event. The system struggled with this because it has trouble differentiating between different subtypes of nouns.

Pada peristiwa penting ini dalam sejarah kita, saya menggalakkan para senator yang berhormat untuk merenung peristiwa 6 Disember 1989, dan melakukan apa yang anda boleh untuk memastikan bahawa kita mempunyai - dan setakat yang kita tidak, yang kita berusaha untuk mempunyai - a masyarakat di mana wujudnya rasa hormat dan keharmonian antara lelaki dan wanita.


Premise: Mrs. Smith, my name is Richard Thompson. I represent the defendants in this case. And do you recall in April where your deposition was taken by another member of the Thomas More Law Center, Patrick Gillen? Do you remember being involved in that deposition?

Hypothesis: The statement is written from first-person perspective.

The statement uses pronouns such as "my" and "I," implying that it was written from the first-person perspective. The system was fooled by this statement because it was not taking the writing perspective into account.

Puan Smith, nama saya Richard Thompson. Saya mewakili defendan dalam kes ini. Dan adakah anda masih ingat pada bulan April di mana pemendapan anda telah diambil oleh seorang lagi ahli Pusat Undang-undang Thomas More, Patrick Gillen? Adakah anda masih ingat terlibat dalam pemendapan itu?

Kenyataan itu ditulis dari perspektif orang pertama.


Premise: We want the right to copy verbatim works that should be in the public domain and would be in the public domain but for a statute that cannot be justified under ordinary First Amendment analysis or under a proper reading of the limits built into the Copyright 16 Clause.

Hypothesis: The public domain does not feature all the works the writer wants.

The writer is arguing that there are works that should be in the public domain but are not, for whatever reason. The system probably had trouble understanding what was doing the action in this sentence.

Kami mahukan hak untuk menyalin karya verbatim yang sepatutnya berada dalam domain awam dan akan berada dalam domain awam tetapi untuk statut yang tidak boleh dibenarkan di bawah analisis Pindaan Pertama biasa atau di bawah bacaan yang betul tentang had yang terbina dalam Klausa Hak Cipta 16.

Domain awam tidak menampilkan semua karya yang penulis inginkan.


Premise: It's an important priority, because now is the time to act and we're going to say to our seniors, our promises we've made to you will be promises kept. But younger workers, in order to make sure the system exists tomorrow, younger workers ought to be able to take some of your own money and invest it in safe securities to get a better rate of return on that money.

Hypothesis: All the promises will be kept

It says the promises will be kept, therefor making it correct.

Ia adalah keutamaan yang penting, kerana sekarang adalah masa untuk bertindak dan kami akan berkata kepada senior kami, janji kami yang telah kami buat kepada anda akan menjadi janji yang ditepati. Tetapi pekerja yang lebih muda, untuk memastikan sistem itu wujud esok, pekerja yang lebih muda sepatutnya boleh mengambil sebahagian daripada wang anda sendiri dan melaburkannya dalam sekuriti selamat untuk mendapatkan kadar pulangan yang lebih baik bagi wang tersebut.


Premise: All ministers I met with this week know it is our obligation to show leadership and to work together to come up with a package of risk management tools that the government could be involved in to encourage producers to get involved in what I refer to as commercial risk management.

Hypothesis: There is more than a solitary producer.

According to the context Producers, i.e. more than one, can be encouraged, therefore it is definitely correct to say there is more than a solitary producer.

Semua menteri yang saya temui minggu ini tahu bahawa adalah menjadi tanggungjawab kita untuk menunjukkan kepimpinan dan bekerjasama untuk menghasilkan pakej alat pengurusan risiko yang kerajaan boleh terlibat untuk menggalakkan pengeluar terlibat dalam apa yang saya sebut sebagai risiko komersial. pengurusan.

Terdapat lebih daripada pengeluar bersendirian.


Premise: On the other hand, a couple of days ago the member who sits opposite, the member who is running off at the mouth over there, during a very emotional vote in this House was crying her eyes out simply because her party and her leader had threatened her and coerced her into voting the party line.

Hypothesis: The woman's party and the party leader was emotionally abusive

Sebaliknya, beberapa hari lalu ahli yang duduk bertentangan, ahli yang lari mulut di sana, semasa pengundian yang sangat emosional di Dewan ini menangis kerana partinya dan ketuanya telah mengancam dia dan memaksanya untuk mengundi barisan parti.

Parti wanita dan ketua parti itu secara emosi mendera


Premise: No. We've got one in Texas. And guess what? The three men who murdered James Byrd, guess what's going to happen to them? They're going to be put to death. A jury found them guilty. It's going to be hard to punish them any worse after they get put to death.

Hypothesis: James Byrd was murdered in Texas

The writer is talking about Texas and related it to the James Byrd murder, therefore it can be concluded that the murder took place in Texas (which it absolutely did)

Tidak. Kami ada di Texas. Dan rasa apa? Tiga lelaki yang membunuh James Byrd, rasa apa yang akan berlaku kepada mereka? Mereka akan dihukum mati. Juri mendapati mereka bersalah. Ia akan menjadi sukar untuk menghukum mereka lebih teruk selepas mereka dihukum mati.


Premise: To allay Mr. Benn's concerns, I think it is not fair game to talk about all the other things that they heard and why they wrote the article the way they did and why they excluded quotes. I sincerely believe that that gets into journalistic integrity, and that's problematic, and it's not my intent to allow that, nor would I allow any questioning on anything personal to the reporters. I think I spelled that out in detail in the prior orders.

Hypothesis: Quotes were excluded from an article and prompted this letter

It's spelled out in the statement that "they wrote the article the way they did and why they excluded quotes."

Untuk meredakan kebimbangan En. Benn, saya fikir bukan permainan yang adil untuk bercakap tentang semua perkara lain yang mereka dengar dan mengapa mereka menulis artikel itu seperti yang mereka lakukan dan mengapa mereka mengecualikan petikan. Saya benar-benar percaya bahawa perkara itu melibatkan integriti kewartawanan, dan itu bermasalah, dan bukan niat saya untuk membenarkannya, dan saya juga tidak akan membenarkan sebarang pertanyaan mengenai perkara peribadi kepada wartawan. Saya rasa saya telah menyatakannya secara terperinci dalam pesanan sebelumnya.

Petikan telah dikecualikan daripada artikel dan mendorong surat ini


Premise: I will be pleased to associate with my colleague from Hochelaga-Maisonneuve, as I have in other circumstances, moreover, in offering some views, some enlightenment arising out of my training as a professor of international and constitutional law, as someone who has spent a number of years in a university teaching about legislation such as this Citizenship Act. Someone who wants to take a constructive look at improving this legislation, clarifying some of its provisions, making that contribution for the most part within a parliamentary committee, which will examine it clause by clause.

Hypothesis: The provisions that are clarified in the legislation cannot be eaten.

Provisions can mean food however clarifying a provision in legislation does not refer to food in any sense therefore this cannot be eaten making the statement correct.

Saya berbesar hati untuk bergaul dengan rakan sekerja saya dari Hochelaga-Maisonneuve, seperti yang saya lakukan dalam keadaan lain, lebih-lebih lagi, dalam menawarkan beberapa pandangan, beberapa pencerahan yang timbul daripada latihan saya sebagai seorang profesor undang-undang antarabangsa dan perlembagaan, sebagai seseorang yang telah menghabiskan bilangan tahun di universiti mengajar tentang perundangan seperti Akta Kewarganegaraan ini. Seseorang yang ingin melihat secara konstruktif untuk menambah baik perundangan ini, menjelaskan beberapa peruntukannya, membuat sumbangan itu sebahagian besarnya dalam jawatankuasa parlimen, yang akan menelitinya fasal demi fasal.

Peruntukan yang dijelaskan dalam perundangan tidak boleh dimakan.


Premise: And not only the training in police procedures, but human relations. And I think that racial profiling is part of a larger issue of how we deal with race in America. And as for singling people out because of race, you know, James Byrd was singled out because of his race in Texas.

Hypothesis: america need to deal with the issue of racial profiling

Dan bukan sahaja latihan dalam prosedur polis, tetapi hubungan manusia. Dan saya berpendapat bahawa profil kaum adalah sebahagian daripada isu yang lebih besar tentang cara kita menangani kaum di Amerika. Dan untuk menyisih orang kerana bangsa, anda tahu, James Byrd telah dipilih kerana bangsanya di Texas.

amerika perlu menangani isu pemprofilan kaum


Premise: No, I would make some changes. I think there need to be reforms in the IMF. I've generally supported it, but I've seen them make some calls that I thought were highly questionable. And I think that there's a general agreement in many parts of the world now that there ought to be changes in the IMF.

Hypothesis: The IMF have attracted international criticism.

The text says that many from around the world seem to think reforms are necessary.

Tidak, saya akan membuat beberapa perubahan. Saya fikir perlu ada pembaharuan dalam IMF. Saya secara amnya menyokongnya, tetapi saya telah melihat mereka membuat beberapa panggilan yang saya fikir sangat meragukan. Dan saya berpendapat bahawa terdapat perjanjian umum di banyak bahagian dunia sekarang bahawa sepatutnya ada perubahan dalam IMF.

IMF telah menarik kritikan antarabangsa.


Premise: It contains -- the clause itself contains limitations, limited times, authors, exclusive rights and things of that nature. I don't think -- and the petitioners expressly disclaim the assertion that any substantive limitations in the "Promote the- Clause. What the Framers were saying is, we want to give Congress the authority to promote the progress of useful arts and sciences, and --

Hypothesis: The clause is said to definitely contain limitations

This is correct because the clause contains limitations

Ia mengandungi -- klausa itu sendiri mengandungi had, masa terhad, pengarang, hak eksklusif dan perkara yang bersifat itu. Saya tidak fikir -- dan pempetisyen secara jelas menafikan dakwaan bahawa sebarang batasan substantif dalam "Promote the- Clause. Apa yang diperkatakan oleh Framers ialah, kami mahu memberikan Kongres kuasa untuk mempromosikan kemajuan seni dan sains yang berguna, dan --

Klausa tersebut dikatakan pasti mengandungi batasan


Premise: Well, I suppose implicit in the argument that the '76 act, too, should have been declared void, and that we might leave it alone because of the disruption, is that for all these years the act has impeded progress in science and the useful arts. I just don't see any empirical evidence for that.

Hypothesis: The Ac tin discussion refers to an act that wasn't passed in 2076.

Baiklah, saya rasa tersirat dalam hujah bahawa akta '76, juga, sepatutnya telah diisytiharkan tidak sah, dan kita mungkin membiarkannya begitu sahaja kerana gangguan itu, adalah bahawa selama bertahun-tahun akta itu telah menghalang kemajuan dalam sains dan yang berguna. seni. Saya hanya tidak melihat sebarang bukti empirikal untuk itu.

Perbincangan Ac tin merujuk kepada akta yang tidak diluluskan pada 2076.


Premise: For example, by suggesting that the Minister of Labour uses parliamentary immunity to take an unfair action against a person, he is implying that if he spoke outside the House of Commons the Minister of Labour would be subject to some kind of civil suit, so he is imputing motives to the Minister of Labour.

Hypothesis: The Minister of Labour is a man.

The article uses he pronouns (if he spoke outside the house of commons) so the Minister of Labour is a man. I think this is difficult for the system because you really have to work to get that from context as the sentence is structured poorly.

Sebagai contoh, dengan mencadangkan bahawa Menteri Buruh menggunakan kekebalan parlimen untuk mengambil tindakan yang tidak adil terhadap seseorang, dia membayangkan bahawa jika dia bercakap di luar Dewan Rakyat, Menteri Buruh akan dikenakan beberapa jenis saman sivil, jadi dia adalah mengaitkan motif kepada Menteri Buruh.


Premise: I certainly want to add my thanks and congratulations to Dr. Henry Friesen, who has provided leadership to the country as head of the Medical Research Council for a long period of time, and who has worked very hard to move that model toward the one we have today, and who in fact talked himself out of a job.

Hypothesis: Dr. Henry Friesen was dilligent.

he worked very hard according to the Agent, so yes, dilligent.

Saya pastinya ingin menambahkan ucapan terima kasih dan tahniah kepada Dr. Henry Friesen, yang telah memberikan kepimpinan kepada negara sebagai ketua Majlis Penyelidikan Perubatan untuk jangka masa yang panjang, dan yang telah bekerja keras untuk menggerakkan model itu ke arah yang kita mempunyai hari ini, dan yang sebenarnya bercakap dirinya keluar dari pekerjaan.


Premise: In addition, I'm going to double the number of Special Forces so that we can fight a more effective war on terror, with less pressure on the National Guard and Reserve. And what I would like to do is see the National Guard and Reserve be deployed differently here in our own country. There's much we can do with them with respect to homeland security. We ought to be doing that. And that would relieve an enormous amount of pressure.

Hypothesis: Right now, special forces are half of what the candidate expects

The candidate wants to double the special forces, so right now its half what he thinks it should be

Di samping itu, saya akan menggandakan bilangan Pasukan Khas supaya kita boleh memerangi perang keganasan yang lebih berkesan, dengan kurang tekanan terhadap Pengawal dan Simpanan Kebangsaan. Dan apa yang saya ingin lakukan ialah melihat Pengawal dan Simpanan Kebangsaan dikerahkan secara berbeza di sini di negara kita sendiri. Banyak yang boleh kita lakukan dengan mereka berkenaan dengan keselamatan tanah air. Kita sepatutnya berbuat demikian. Dan itu akan melegakan sejumlah besar tekanan.

Pada masa ini, pasukan khas adalah separuh daripada apa yang calon jangkakan


Premise: I am sure I speak on behalf of all hon. members in also congratulating the parliamentary secretary who has done such a fantastic job of piloting the bill through the House and in committee in the face of the filibuster put up almost exclusively by the Reform Party, which does not want to see labour legislation advance in parliament.

Hypothesis: Labour legislation has advanced in the House.

Maybe the system did not see that advanced and piloting mean similar things in this context.

Saya pasti saya bercakap bagi pihak hon semua. ahli-ahli juga mengucapkan tahniah kepada setiausaha parlimen yang telah melakukan kerja yang hebat untuk merintis rang undang-undang melalui Dewan dan dalam jawatankuasa dalam menghadapi filibuster yang ditubuhkan hampir secara eksklusif oleh Parti Reformasi, yang tidak mahu melihat undang-undang buruh maju di parlimen .


Premise: Therefore I am very pleased to indicate to the member that within the next couple of weeks we will make available a service charge calculator free of charge on our website, Strategis, that will enable consumers to compare the charges levied against them by a variety of financial institutions and see in a very transparent and rapid way where the best services charges can be obtained.

Hypothesis: The calculator will be beneficial to the member.

I'm not sure why it was difficult. The calculator will help the customer in a variety of ways and the agent providing it is pleased to help his customer by offering it, therefore the calculator is a beneficial offering and the statement is correct.

Oleh itu, saya amat berbesar hati untuk menyatakan kepada ahli bahawa dalam beberapa minggu akan datang kami akan menyediakan kalkulator caj perkhidmatan secara percuma di laman web kami, Strategis, yang akan membolehkan pengguna membandingkan caj yang dikenakan terhadap mereka oleh pelbagai jenis kewangan. institusi dan lihat dengan cara yang sangat telus dan pantas di mana caj perkhidmatan terbaik boleh diperolehi.

Kalkulator akan memberi manfaat kepada ahli.


Premise: Jim, thank you very much. Mr. Vice President, thank you very much, and I would like to thank the folks here at Wake Forest, and I want to thank you all for listening. I'm running to get some things done for America. There's too many issues left unresolved.

Hypothesis: Jim is not Mr.Vice President.

The speaker is thanking a series of people: "Jim, thank you very much. Mr. Vice President, thank you very much,..." The model confuses them with the same person.

Jim, terima kasih banyak. Naib Presiden, terima kasih banyak, dan saya ingin mengucapkan terima kasih kepada orang -orang di Wake Forest, dan saya ingin mengucapkan terima kasih kepada semua untuk mendengar. Saya berlari untuk menyelesaikan beberapa perkara untuk Amerika. Terlalu banyak masalah yang tidak dapat diselesaikan.


Premise: Well, when I got to be a part of the current administration, it was right after -- I was one of the few members of my political party to support former President Bush in the Persian Gulf War resolution, and at the end of that war, for whatever reason, it was not finished in a way that removed Saddam Hussein from power.

Hypothesis: Saddam Hussein's heart was still beating when I supported former President Bush in a decision.

Saddam Hussein was still alive at the end of the war and so his heart would have to be beating for that to be correct.

Nah, apabila saya menjadi sebahagian daripada pentadbiran semasa, ia sejurus selepas -- saya adalah salah seorang daripada segelintir ahli parti politik saya yang menyokong bekas Presiden Bush dalam resolusi Perang Teluk Parsi, dan pada akhir perang itu. , atas sebab apa pun, ia tidak diselesaikan dengan cara yang menyingkirkan Saddam Hussein daripada kuasa.

Jantung Saddam Hussein masih berdegup kencang apabila saya menyokong bekas Presiden Bush dalam satu keputusan.


Premise: Bill C-3 provides a dangerous and unnecessary exemption authorizing judges not to issue warrants for the taking of a sample if they believe that in doing so the impact on the individual's privacy and security would be grossly disproportionate to the public interest in the protection of society.

Hypothesis: The bill issued immediately before C-4 authorizes judges to not issue warrants and is dangerous

The bill right before C-4 would be C-3, the one in question, so it's correct

Rang Undang-Undang C-3 menyediakan pengecualian berbahaya dan tidak perlu yang membenarkan hakim untuk tidak mengeluarkan waran untuk pengambilan sampel jika mereka percaya bahawa dengan berbuat demikian kesan ke atas privasi dan keselamatan individu akan menjadi sangat tidak seimbang dengan kepentingan awam dalam perlindungan masyarakat .

Rang undang-undang yang dikeluarkan sejurus sebelum C-4 memberi kuasa kepada hakim untuk tidak mengeluarkan waran dan berbahaya


Premise: It may come as a shock for somebody who has been in Washington for so long. But actually limited government can work in the second largest state in the union. And therefore Congress passes the bill after our session in 1997 ended, we passed an enabling legislation in 1999.

Hypothesis: Congress passed the bill two years prior to being enabled.

And therefore Congress passes the bill after our session in 1997 ended, we passed an enabling legislation in 1999. The system was confused by the context.

Ia mungkin mengejutkan seseorang yang telah berada di Washington untuk sekian lama. Tetapi sebenarnya kerajaan terhad boleh bekerja di negeri kedua terbesar dalam kesatuan itu. Oleh itu Kongres meluluskan rang undang-undang itu selepas sesi kami pada tahun 1997 berakhir, kami meluluskan undang-undang yang membolehkan pada tahun 1999.

Kongres meluluskan rang undang-undang itu dua tahun sebelum didayakan.


Premise: But the people are going to have to make up their mind on this issue. And I am going to continue to defend my record and defend my propositions against what I think are exaggerations. Exaggerations like, for example, only 5% of seniors receive benefits under my Medicare reform package.

Hypothesis: The narrator is a politician

Yes, he is talking about his Medicare reform package and defending his record and propositions

Tetapi rakyat perlu membuat keputusan dalam isu ini. Dan saya akan terus mempertahankan rekod saya dan mempertahankan cadangan saya terhadap apa yang saya fikir adalah keterlaluan. Keterlaluan seperti, sebagai contoh, hanya 5% warga emas menerima faedah di bawah pakej pembaharuan Medicare saya.


Premise: (d) to persons of Canadian citizenship who were members of the Privy Council of the United Kingdom including the Prime Ministers of Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justices, and some Cabinet Ministers of Canada including the Leader of the Government in the Senate 1921-1930 and 1935-1942 the Right Honourable Senator Raoul Dandurand appointed to the United Kingdom Privy Council in 1941;

Hypothesis: he was leader in 1924

he was as it said between 1921-1930 therefroe 1924 is counted

(d) kepada orang berkewarganegaraan Kanada yang menjadi ahli Majlis Privy United Kingdom termasuk Perdana Menteri Kanada, Ketua Hakim Negara Mahkamah Agung Kanada, dan beberapa Menteri Kabinet Kanada termasuk Ketua Kerajaan di Senat 1921 -1930 dan 1935-1942 Yang Amat Berhormat Senator Raoul Dandurand dilantik ke Majlis Privy United Kingdom pada tahun 1941;


Premise: Second, the aim of the initiative is to expand the category of offences for which a young offender may be brought before a regular court, which will include, in addition to murder, attempted murder, manslaughter and violent sexual assault, the reiteration of the facts of the crime and will lower from 16 to 14 the age at which young offenders may be transferred to an ordinary court.

Hypothesis: 14-year-olds commit crimes.

The passage talks about lowering the age limit to 14, which means that 14-year-olds do, in fact, commit crimes.

Kedua, matlamat inisiatif ini adalah untuk memperluaskan kategori kesalahan yang mana pesalah muda boleh dihadapkan ke mahkamah biasa, yang akan termasuk, sebagai tambahan kepada pembunuhan, percubaan membunuh, pembunuhan tanpa sengaja dan serangan seksual ganas, pengulangan fakta. jenayah itu dan akan menurunkan daripada 16 kepada 14 umur di mana pesalah muda boleh dipindahkan ke mahkamah biasa.

Kanak-kanak berumur 14 tahun melakukan jenayah.


Premise: As much as I know about the scientific community -- and, you know, you have to remember that's not my discipline. But as much as I know about what the high school science standards say, it would be in standing with that. As far as the scientific community, I really can't go there, because I know that there is a lot more about Darwin than is in that textbook. I mean, I can absolutely say that without knowing everything about Darwin or knowing everything about science.

Hypothesis: The speaker doesn't not know who Charles Darwin is

doesn't not is a double negative, so the speaker does infact know who Darwin is as stated in this piece

Setakat yang saya tahu tentang komuniti saintifik -- dan, anda tahu, anda perlu ingat itu bukan disiplin saya. Tetapi seberapa banyak yang saya tahu tentang apa yang dikatakan oleh piawaian sains sekolah tinggi, ia adalah selaras dengan itu. Setakat komuniti saintifik, saya benar-benar tidak boleh pergi ke sana, kerana saya tahu bahawa terdapat banyak lagi tentang Darwin daripada dalam buku teks itu. Maksud saya, saya benar-benar boleh mengatakan bahawa tanpa mengetahui segala-galanya tentang Darwin atau mengetahui segala-galanya tentang sains.

Penceramah tidak tahu siapa Charles Darwin


Premise: Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Kirby, seconded by the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., for the second reading of Bill C-2, to establish the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and to amend the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

Hypothesis: Senator Joyal, PC agrees with Senator Kirby.

Joyal wouldn't have seconded if they didn't agree it should be debated.

Menyambung semula perbahasan mengenai usul Yang Berhormat Senator Kirby, disokong oleh Yang Berhormat Senator Joyal, P.C., untuk bacaan kedua Rang Undang-Undang C-2, untuk menubuhkan Lembaga Pelaburan Pelan Pencen Kanada dan untuk meminda Pelan Pencen Kanada dan Keselamatan Umur Tua. Bertindak dan membuat pindaan berbangkit kepada Akta lain.

Senator Joyal, PC bersetuju dengan Senator Kirby.


Premise: Actually, Mr. Muise may be at a disadvantage here. I did agree with Steve that we -he has an affidavit from someone who has indicated they have collected newspaper articles. So with respect to that issue, there's no objection. I have agreed that she has authenticated what she did to produce this article.

Hypothesis: Mr. Muise is a man

Sebenarnya, Encik Muise mungkin berada dalam keadaan yang kurang baik di sini. Saya memang bersetuju dengan Steve bahawa kami -dia mempunyai afidavit daripada seseorang yang telah menyatakan mereka telah mengumpul artikel akhbar. Jadi berkenaan dengan isu itu, tiada bantahan. Saya telah bersetuju bahawa dia telah mengesahkan apa yang dia lakukan untuk menghasilkan artikel ini.


Premise: I think that we also have to keep a weather eye toward Saddam Hussein because he is taking advantage of this situation to once again make threats, and he needs to understand that he's not only dealing with Israel, he is dealing -- he's dealing with us if he is making the kind of threats that he's talking about there.

Hypothesis: Saddam Hussein was a source of consternation for other world leaders.

Threatening countries would be cause for Hussein to be a source of frustration and consternation for other leaders

Saya fikir kita juga perlu mengawasi cuaca terhadap Saddam Hussein kerana dia mengambil kesempatan daripada keadaan ini sekali lagi membuat ancaman, dan dia perlu memahami bahawa dia bukan sahaja berurusan dengan Israel, dia berurusan - dia berurusan dengan kita Jika dia membuat jenis ancaman yang dia bicarakan di sana.

Saddam Hussein menjadi punca kegusaran bagi pemimpin dunia yang lain.


Premise: Well, I think that you reserved that argument. We've had that discussion. I'm inclined -- because it's a bench trial, I'll admit it conditionally. Whether I'll consider it in my ultimate determination will be a function of the argument that I'm allowing you to reserve and make.

Hypothesis: argument  contains a n

Nah, saya fikir anda menyimpan hujah itu. Kami telah mengadakan perbincangan itu. Saya cenderung -- kerana ia adalah perbicaraan bangku simpanan, saya akan mengakuinya dengan bersyarat. Sama ada saya akan mempertimbangkannya dalam penentuan muktamad saya akan menjadi fungsi hujah yang saya benarkan anda tempah dan buat.


Premise: I hope the Minister of Human Resources Development and her officials will really take note of what I said, will follow up on the issue that I raised and will amend the employment insurance program, so as to meet the needs of workers and, above all, eliminate child poverty in this country.

Hypothesis: The minister is a female.

"I hope the Minister of Human Resources Development and her officials". The system was confused by the context.

Saya berharap Menteri Pembangunan Sumber Manusia dan pegawai-pegawainya benar-benar mengambil perhatian apa yang saya katakan, akan membuat susulan terhadap isu yang saya bangkitkan dan akan meminda program insurans pekerjaan, supaya dapat memenuhi keperluan pekerja dan, terutama sekali, menghapuskan kemiskinan kanak-kanak di negara ini.


Premise: So how do I make it better? Well, we provided an affidavit, and that affidavit indicated that we, if called upon to testify, would validate the authenticity of the articles that were written. We did that, in effect, to offer to both sides so that we wouldn't otherwise have to testify. Accepted by the plaintiffs, not accepted by the defendants. Defendants wanted to have the right of cross-examination.

Hypothesis: The plaintiffs and defendants aren't in agreement about everything

The plaintiffs and defendants aren't in agreement about the affidavit

Jadi bagaimana saya boleh menjadikannya lebih baik? Nah, kami menyediakan afidavit, dan afidavit itu menunjukkan bahawa kami, jika dipanggil untuk memberi keterangan, akan mengesahkan kesahihan artikel yang ditulis. Kami melakukan itu, sebenarnya, untuk menawarkan kepada kedua-dua pihak supaya kami tidak perlu memberi keterangan. Diterima oleh plaintif, tidak diterima oleh defendan. Defendan mahu mempunyai hak pemeriksaan balas.

Plaintif dan defendan tidak bersetuju tentang segala-galanya


Premise: Can I say, if I could just say a word about a woman that you didn't ask about, but my mom passed away a couple years ago, just before I was deciding to run. And she was in the hospital, and I went in to talk to her and tell her what I was thinking of doing.

Hypothesis: They are going off topic

Bolehkah saya katakan, jika saya boleh mengatakan sepatah kata tentang seorang wanita yang anda tidak bertanya tentangnya, tetapi ibu saya telah meninggal dunia beberapa tahun yang lalu, sebelum saya memutuskan untuk lari. Dan dia berada di hospital, dan saya masuk untuk bercakap dengannya dan memberitahunya apa yang saya fikirkan untuk lakukan.


Premise: Well, there was -- at this point in time it was the change in the curriculum that was being proposed and voted on that evening. And, again, this was a heated meeting. There were many members of the community who stood to speak, science department members. Jen Miller spoke, although I didn't really know who she was at the time. I recall her speaking on behalf of her biology course. I recall Bertha Spahr again speaking. My husband again spoke at this meeting. And, again, other members of the community spoke at that meeting.

Hypothesis: The members who spoke at this meeting were primarily members of the science department

Nah, ada -- pada masa ini perubahan dalam kurikulum yang dicadangkan dan diundi pada petang itu. Dan, sekali lagi, ini adalah pertemuan yang hangat. Terdapat ramai ahli masyarakat yang berdiri untuk berucap, ahli jabatan sains. Jen Miller bercakap, walaupun saya tidak tahu siapa dia pada masa itu. Saya masih ingat dia bercakap bagi pihak kursus biologinya. Saya ingat lagi Bertha Spahr bercakap. Suami saya sekali lagi bercakap pada mesyuarat ini. Dan, sekali lagi, ahli komuniti lain bercakap pada mesyuarat itu.

Ahli-ahli yang bercakap pada mesyuarat ini kebanyakannya adalah ahli jabatan sains


Premise: Justice, we do not believe that the very first act extended terms at all. Speaking technically, which for a lawyer means speaking accurately, the 1790 act did not extend a Federal term. The 1790 act granted a term for works that already existed in precisely the pattern that the English parliament had done in the Statute of Anne in 1710, and that the English parliament did with monopolies, general monopolies in the statute.

Hypothesis: The decision in 1710 dealt specifically with monopolies.

Keadilan, kami tidak percaya bahawa akta pertama dilanjutkan sama sekali. Bercakap secara teknikal, yang bagi seorang peguam bermakna bercakap dengan tepat, akta 1790 tidak melanjutkan tempoh Persekutuan. Akta 1790 memberikan istilah untuk kerja-kerja yang telah wujud dengan tepat seperti yang telah dilakukan oleh parlimen Inggeris dalam Statut Anne pada tahun 1710, dan yang dilakukan oleh parlimen Inggeris dengan monopoli, monopoli umum dalam statut itu.

Keputusan pada tahun 1710 menangani monopoli secara khusus.


Premise: Madam Speaker, I would like to start by congratulating the hon. member for Rosemont for this initiative and for the role he has played in encouraging the federal government and the Minister of Health to take steps to allow the legal use of marijuana for health and medical purposes.

Hypothesis: Madam Speaker is a woman.

The use of the word madam, indicates the sex of the speaker. The model may have missed this logic.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya mulakan dengan mengucapkan tahniah kepada Yang Berhormat. ahli untuk Rosemont untuk inisiatif ini dan untuk peranan yang telah dimainkannya dalam menggalakkan kerajaan persekutuan dan Menteri Kesihatan mengambil langkah untuk membenarkan penggunaan ganja secara sah untuk tujuan kesihatan dan perubatan.


Premise: Well, because I don't think that a per -- I don't think there is a per se rule that should apply here because this is a grant of Congress, to Congress to exercise its judgment as to what may be beneficial. There may be other constitutional provisions that come into play, or there may be other existing --

Hypothesis: Congress has a s

Baiklah, kerana saya tidak fikir bahawa per -- saya tidak fikir ada peraturan per se yang harus digunakan di sini kerana ini adalah pemberian Kongres, kepada Kongres untuk melaksanakan pertimbangannya tentang perkara yang mungkin bermanfaat. Mungkin terdapat peruntukan perlembagaan lain yang mula dimainkan, atau mungkin terdapat peruntukan lain yang sedia ada --


Premise: In the PC plan for growth we call for government to allow Canadians to have more flexibility with their RESP contributions and transfers from their RRSPs, but only as part of a holistic policy toward economic growth, one that combines tax relief, lower income taxes, lower payroll taxes, greater opportunities for jobs and growth in Canada that would keep young people here where they belong.

Hypothesis: They are concerned with young people leaving Canada.

They want greater opportunities for jobs and growth in Canada to keep young people 'here' where they belong - in Canada; the model missed this logical conclusion.

Dalam rancangan PC untuk pertumbuhan, kami menyeru kerajaan membenarkan rakyat Kanada mempunyai lebih fleksibiliti dengan sumbangan RESP dan pemindahan mereka daripada RRSP mereka, tetapi hanya sebagai sebahagian daripada dasar holistik ke arah pertumbuhan ekonomi, yang menggabungkan pelepasan cukai, cukai pendapatan yang lebih rendah, lebih rendah. cukai gaji, peluang yang lebih besar untuk pekerjaan dan pertumbuhan di Kanada yang akan mengekalkan golongan muda di sini di mana mereka berada.

Mereka bimbang dengan anak muda yang meninggalkan Kanada.


Premise: When an agreement of this nature was being negotiated, the governments of the day, both governments-because I hold the Government of British Columbia equally responsible-should have understood from the very beginning that if they wanted it accepted by the people of British Columbia they had to include the people of British Columbia in the negotiations so that there would be an acceptance level there.

Hypothesis: Both governments should be responsible says the author.

"the governments of the day, both governments-because I hold the Government of British Columbia equally responsible" which makes the answer correct.

Apabila persetujuan sifat ini dirundingkan, kerajaan pada hari itu, kedua-dua kerajaan-kerana saya memegang kerajaan British Columbia sama-sama bertanggungjawab-harus difahami dari awal lagi bahawa jika mereka menginginkannya diterima oleh rakyat British Columbia, mereka Perlu memasukkan rakyat British Columbia dalam rundingan supaya akan ada tahap penerimaan di sana.

Kedua-dua kerajaan harus bertanggungjawab kata penulis.


Premise: -federal, provincial and territorial governments to collaborate with Aboriginal governments, organizations or educational authorities, as appropriate, to support the development of Aboriginally controlled education systems by introducing, adapting or ensuring the flexible application of legislation to facilitate self-starting initiatives by Aboriginal nations and their communities in the field of education.

Hypothesis: The Aboriginal nations mentioned are subordinate to a greater nation that is creating laws to help them create local programs that promote education.

The original statement is convoluted legalese. I just did my best to restate the original statement, but the original statement was complex enough that even that confused the system.

-kerajaan persekutuan, wilayah dan wilayah untuk bekerjasama dengan kerajaan Orang Asli, organisasi atau pihak berkuasa pendidikan, mengikut kesesuaian, untuk menyokong pembangunan sistem pendidikan dikawal Orang Asli dengan memperkenalkan, menyesuaikan atau memastikan penggunaan perundangan yang fleksibel untuk memudahkan inisiatif permulaan sendiri oleh negara Orang Asli dan komuniti mereka dalam bidang pendidikan.

Negara-negara Orang Asli yang disebutkan adalah bawahan kepada negara yang lebih besar yang mencipta undang-undang untuk membantu mereka mencipta program tempatan yang mempromosikan pendidikan.


Premise: He talks about middle-class tax cuts. That's exactly where the tax cuts went. Most of the tax cuts went to low- and middle-income Americans. And now the tax code is more fair. Twenty percent of the upper-income people pay about 80 percent of the taxes in America today because of how we structured the tax cuts. People listening out there know the benefits of the tax cuts we passed. If you have a child, you got tax relief. If you're married, you got tax relief. If you pay any tax at all, you got tax relief. All of which was opposed by my opponent.

Hypothesis: The bottom 80% of Americans pay 20% of taxes

Dia bercakap tentang pemotongan cukai kelas pertengahan. Di situlah pemotongan cukai berlaku. Kebanyakan pemotongan cukai diberikan kepada rakyat Amerika yang berpendapatan rendah dan sederhana. Dan kini kod cukai lebih adil. Dua puluh peratus daripada orang berpendapatan tinggi membayar kira-kira 80 peratus daripada cukai di Amerika hari ini kerana cara kami menstrukturkan pemotongan cukai. Orang yang mendengar di luar sana tahu faedah pemotongan cukai yang kami lalui. Jika anda mempunyai anak, anda mendapat pelepasan cukai. Jika anda sudah berkahwin, anda mendapat pelepasan cukai. Jika anda membayar apa-apa cukai sama sekali, anda mendapat pelepasan cukai. Semuanya ditentang oleh lawan saya.

80% rakyat Amerika terbawah membayar 20% cukai


Premise: Bob, we relied upon a company out of England to provide about half of the flu vaccines for the United States citizen, and it turned out that the vaccine they were producing was contaminated. And so we took the right action and didn't allow contaminated medicine into our country. We're working with Canada to hopefully -- that they'll produce a -- help us realize the vaccine necessary to make sure our citizens have got flu vaccinations during this upcoming season.

Hypothesis: flu vaccines has a f

Bob, kami bergantung kepada sebuah syarikat dari England untuk menyediakan kira-kira separuh daripada vaksin selesema untuk warga Amerika Syarikat, dan ternyata vaksin yang mereka hasilkan telah tercemar. Jadi kami mengambil tindakan yang betul dan tidak membenarkan ubat tercemar masuk ke negara kami. Kami sedang bekerjasama dengan Kanada untuk berharap -- mereka akan menghasilkan -- membantu kami menyedari vaksin yang diperlukan untuk memastikan rakyat kami mendapat vaksin selesema pada musim akan datang ini.


Premise: The policies of the Reform Party, the policies of the new Canadian alliance, are such that I believe Quebecers could live with them if they took the time to read them, study them and give them careful thought, and not simply say with a prejudiced point of view ``We are not going to listen to them''.

Hypothesis: quebecers are prejudiced against the reform party

Dasar Parti Pembaharuan, dasar pakatan baharu Kanada, adalah sedemikian rupa sehingga saya percaya orang Quebec boleh hidup bersama mereka jika mereka meluangkan masa untuk membacanya, mengkajinya dan memberi mereka pemikiran yang teliti, dan tidak hanya berkata dengan pandangan yang berprasangka. pandangan ``Kami tidak akan mendengar mereka''.


Premise: Will the Leader of the Government in the Senate tell us if his government is seriously looking into this very desperate situation, and if they will consider undertaking a major study to determine what direction we as a country should take to alleviate this crisis situation which could explode across the country just as it did here this morning?

Hypothesis: The speaker would like a study to be done

He said he wanted the government to undertake a study

Adakah Pemimpin Kerajaan di Dewan Negara akan memberitahu kita jika kerajaannya serius melihat keadaan yang sangat terdesak ini, dan jika mereka akan mempertimbangkan untuk menjalankan kajian besar untuk menentukan hala tuju yang kita sebagai sebuah negara harus ambil untuk mengurangkan situasi krisis yang boleh meletup ini di seluruh negara sama seperti yang berlaku di sini pagi ini?


Premise: Five million Americans have lost their health insurance in this country. You've got about a million right here in Arizona, just shy, 950,000, who have no health insurance at all. 82,000 Arizonians lost their health insurance under President Bush's watch. 223,000 kids in Arizona have no health insurance at all.

Hypothesis: Most Arizonians without health insurance did not lose it under President Bush's watch

950,000 in Arizona have no health insurance at all, but just 82,000 Arizonians lost their health insurance under President Bush's watch. The model didn't do the math.

Lima juta rakyat Amerika telah kehilangan insurans kesihatan mereka di negara ini. Anda mempunyai kira-kira satu juta di sini di Arizona, hanya pemalu, 950,000, yang tidak mempunyai insurans kesihatan langsung. 82,000 warga Arizona kehilangan insurans kesihatan mereka di bawah pengawasan Presiden Bush. 223,000 kanak-kanak di Arizona tidak mempunyai insurans kesihatan sama sekali.

Kebanyakan warga Arizona tanpa insurans kesihatan tidak kehilangannya di bawah pengawasan Presiden Bush


Premise: In summary, honourable senators, Bill C-40 makes our extradition process more accessible to foreign states, brings our extradition procedures and practices closer to those of other countries and, most important, prevents Canada from becoming a safe haven for fugitives from justice.

Hypothesis: Canada is a focus of the bill.

The text mentions that preventing Canada from becoming a safe haven for criminals is one of the most important points. I'm not sure why the system missed this one.

Ringkasnya, senator yang dihormati, Rang Undang-Undang C-40 menjadikan proses ekstradisi kami lebih mudah diakses oleh negara asing, membawa prosedur dan amalan ekstradisi kami lebih dekat dengan negara lain dan, yang paling penting, menghalang Kanada daripada menjadi tempat selamat bagi pelarian daripada keadilan.

Kanada adalah tumpuan rang undang-undang.


Premise: No. There were statements made by many of the school board members that I found objectionable. It's just that Mr. Buckingham always seemed to say very inappropriate things. But in addition, Alan Bonsell said very inappropriate things, and Noel Weinrich said very inappropriate things. It's just that I didn't give much credit to Noel Weinrich's comments because he would say things like, Darwin's at least what, 60 years old, a theory becomes a theory if you say it over and over again. Those are the kind of things he would say. But they were all very outspoken.

Hypothesis: Darwin is at least in the 60 age range according to this article

THis is correct because it states that he's at least 60

Tidak. Terdapat kenyataan yang dibuat oleh ramai ahli lembaga sekolah yang saya rasa tidak menyenangkan. Cuma En. Buckingham nampaknya selalu berkata perkara yang sangat tidak patut. Tetapi sebagai tambahan, Alan Bonsell mengatakan perkara yang sangat tidak sesuai, dan Noel Weinrich berkata perkara yang sangat tidak sesuai. Cuma saya tidak memberi banyak kredit kepada komen Noel Weinrich kerana dia akan berkata seperti, Darwin sekurang-kurangnya apa, 60 tahun, teori menjadi teori jika anda mengatakannya berulang kali. Itulah jenis perkara yang akan dia katakan. Tetapi mereka semua sangat lantang.

Darwin sekurang-kurangnya dalam lingkungan 60 tahun mengikut artikel ini


Premise: But it's very important that we not overstep our bounds and I think most people -- most police officers are good, dedicated, honorable citizens who are doing their job, putting their lives at risk who aren't bigoted or aren't prejudiced. I don't think they ought to be held guilty.

Hypothesis: The police are accused of a crime

The person does not think the police should be guilty and guilt is only determined in criminal proceedings.

Tetapi adalah sangat penting untuk kita tidak melampaui batas dan saya fikir kebanyakan orang -- kebanyakan pegawai polis adalah warganegara yang baik, berdedikasi, mulia yang menjalankan tugas mereka, meletakkan nyawa mereka dalam bahaya yang tidak taksub atau tidak prejudis. Saya rasa mereka tidak patut dihukum.


Premise: But it's important to have credibility and credibility is formed by being strong with your friends and resoluting your determination. One of the reasons why I think it's important for this nation to develop an anti-ballistic missile system that we can share with our allies in the Middle East if need be to keep the peace is to be able to say to the Saddam Husseins of the world or the Iranians, don't dare threaten our friends.

Hypothesis: One of the reasons why I think it's important for this nation to develop a (rocket defense) (rocket-fired weapon/high-speed flying weapon) system that we can share with our friends in the Middle East if need be to keep the peace is to be able to say to the Saddam Husseins of the world or the Iranians, would never threaten our friends.

I don't understand why the AI struggled with a simply rewording of the concept of an anti-ballistic missile system - maybe the specialist language?

Tetapi adalah penting untuk mempunyai kredibiliti dan kredibiliti dibentuk dengan menjadi kuat dengan rakan anda dan menetapkan keazaman anda. Salah satu sebab mengapa saya fikir adalah penting bagi negara ini untuk membangunkan sistem peluru berpandu anti-balistik yang boleh kita kongsi dengan sekutu kita di Timur Tengah jika perlu untuk menjaga keamanan adalah untuk dapat berkata kepada Saddam Hussein dunia atau orang Iran, jangan berani mengancam kawan kita.

Salah satu sebab mengapa saya fikir adalah penting bagi negara ini untuk membangunkan sistem (pertahanan roket) (senjata roket/senjata terbang berkelajuan tinggi) yang boleh kita kongsi dengan rakan-rakan kita di Timur Tengah jika perlu untuk menjaga keamanan. adalah untuk dapat berkata kepada Saddam Hussein dunia atau Iran, tidak akan pernah mengancam rakan-rakan kita.


Premise: What I have done is what every member of parliament has an obligation to do and that is to make sure that the programs that apply to the constituents under the job creation program apply to the people who voted for the member for Saint-Maurice just as the programs apply to the members for Prince George-Peace River, Kootenay-Columbia, Kootenay-Boundary-Okanagan, Dauphin-Swan River, Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca, Cariboo-Chilcotin, and so on.

Hypothesis: The writer is concerned that parliament will not apply the programs to all areas.

The writer stated that they have done what every member of parliament had an obligation to do expressing concern that they would not have done it.  Taking into consideration the thoughts of the writer likely confused the system.

Apa yang saya lakukan adalah tanggungjawab setiap ahli parlimen dan itu adalah untuk memastikan bahawa program yang terpakai kepada pengundi di bawah program penciptaan pekerjaan terpakai kepada orang yang mengundi ahli untuk Saint-Maurice sama seperti program dikenakan kepada ahli untuk Prince George-Peace River, Kootenay-Columbia, Kootenay-Boundary-Okanagan, Dauphin-Swan River, Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca, Cariboo-Chilcotin, dan sebagainya.

Penulis bimbang parlimen tidak akan menggunakan program tersebut di semua kawasan.


Premise: I understand that that's not what the defendants want in this case, but I don't think it's called for. And, as a matter of fact, I think if I did that and I ordered that and if -- I assume that the reporters would not testify and I would predict, if it went to the Third Circuit on that basis, I would be reversed. I don't think that that's a fair area of inquiry to get into.

Hypothesis: There is no justice in going into that area of inquiry

that's not a fair area of inquiry to get into.

Saya faham bahawa bukan itu yang defendan mahukan dalam kes ini, tetapi saya rasa ia tidak diperlukan. Dan, pada hakikatnya, saya fikir jika saya melakukan itu dan saya mengarahkannya dan jika -- saya menganggap bahawa wartawan tidak akan memberi keterangan dan saya akan meramalkan, jika ia pergi ke Litar Ketiga atas dasar itu, saya akan diterbalikkan . Saya tidak fikir bahawa itu adalah bidang siasatan yang adil untuk masuk.

Tidak ada keadilan untuk memasuki bidang siasatan itu


Premise: When we look at unemployment, the minister is boasting of fantastic surpluses in the unemployment insurance fund, which he is putting toward reduction of the deficit, when we look at the restrictions which have helped accumulate the unemployment insurance fund surplus, the restrictions to the new employment insurance program, we see that this is no joke.

Hypothesis: There more money than originally planned for in the unemployment insurance fund

The unemployment insurance fund has a surplus, which means there is more money in there now than when it was originally set up.

Apabila kita melihat pengangguran, menteri bermegah dengan lebihan yang hebat dalam dana insurans pengangguran, yang dia lakukan untuk mengurangkan defisit, apabila kita melihat sekatan yang telah membantu mengumpul lebihan dana insurans pengangguran, sekatan kepada yang baru. program insurans pekerjaan, kita melihat bahawa ini bukan jenaka.

Terdapat lebih banyak wang daripada yang asalnya dirancang untuk dalam dana insurans pengangguran


Premise: It is also an occasion to salute the many people who give their time and skills to promote the personal growth and development of our children and young adults, and it is a time to remember the founders of the international scouting and guiding movement, Lord and Lady Baden-Powell, who started scouting in 1907 and guiding in 1909.

Hypothesis: The statement contains less than 28 sentences

The statement does't have any where near 28 sentences, making this correct I think the model got confused because it does not recognize what a sentence is probably

Ia juga merupakan satu kesempatan untuk memberi hormat kepada ramai orang yang meluangkan masa dan kemahiran mereka untuk menggalakkan pertumbuhan dan perkembangan peribadi anak-anak dan orang dewasa muda kita, dan ia adalah masa untuk mengingati pengasas pergerakan pengakap dan pembimbing antarabangsa, Tuan dan Puan. Baden-Powell, yang memulakan pengakap pada tahun 1907 dan membimbing pada tahun 1909.

Penyataan mengandungi kurang daripada 28 ayat


Premise: I say to the government, to the people of this country and certainly to members of parliament that it is our duty and responsibility to ensure that we are not led down the garden path by ideologies put forward by extremely passionate interventionists, if I can use the term used by the member for Broadview-Greenwood.

Hypothesis: The term has been used by another party

The narrator states he is using the same term used by a member of Broadview-Greenwood

Saya berkata kepada kerajaan, kepada rakyat negara ini dan sudah tentu kepada ahli parlimen bahawa adalah menjadi tugas dan tanggungjawab kita untuk memastikan bahawa kita tidak dibawa ke jalan taman oleh ideologi yang dikemukakan oleh campur tangan yang sangat bersemangat, jika saya boleh menggunakan istilah yang digunakan oleh ahli untuk Broadview-Greenwood.

Istilah itu telah digunakan oleh pihak lain


Premise: I don't want to jump in. I may have been misled by all the news reports about this matter, because the law that was proposed in Texas that had the support of the Byrd family and a whole lot of people in Texas did, in fact, die in committee. There may be some other statute that was already on the books, but certainly the advocates of the hate crimes law felt that a tough new law was needed.

Hypothesis: A minority of the committee supported the bill.

If it died in committee, the minority supported it.

Saya tidak mahu ikut campur. Saya mungkin telah terpedaya dengan semua laporan berita tentang perkara ini, kerana undang-undang yang dicadangkan di Texas yang mendapat sokongan keluarga Byrd dan ramai orang di Texas melakukannya, di hakikatnya, mati dalam jawatankuasa. Mungkin terdapat beberapa undang-undang lain yang sudah ada dalam buku, tetapi pastinya penyokong undang-undang jenayah benci merasakan bahawa undang-undang baharu yang sukar diperlukan.

Minoriti jawatankuasa itu menyokong rang undang-undang itu.


Premise: The idea of pension funds as funds that are more or less guaranteed by government, through Canada deposit insurance and so on, and all the other things that the federal government has introduced to protect one's pension funds are not available if foreign investments are made although, admittedly, you are only losing 30 per cent.

Hypothesis: Foreign investments do not carry assurance by the US government

changing words simply by their meaning or using a simile, helps to fool the AI

Idea dana pencen sebagai dana yang lebih kurang dijamin oleh kerajaan, melalui insurans deposit Kanada dan sebagainya, dan semua perkara lain yang kerajaan persekutuan telah diperkenalkan untuk melindungi dana pencen seseorang tidak tersedia jika pelaburan asing dibuat walaupun, diakui, anda hanya kehilangan 30 peratus.

Pelaburan asing tidak membawa jaminan oleh kerajaan AS


Premise: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his intervention, but I want to clarify that Bill C-11 does not make any changes to the current automotive tariff policy; rather it continues to ensure that all auto manufacturers in Canada, auto pact and non-auto pact companies, import parts duty free.

Hypothesis: Automotive tariff policy will remain the same if everything goes according to plan with the bill.

The speaker says the bill does not change current automotive tariff policy

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya ucapkan terima kasih kepada Yang Berhormat. ahli untuk campur tangan beliau, tetapi saya ingin menjelaskan bahawa Rang Undang-undang C-11 tidak membuat sebarang perubahan kepada dasar tarif automotif semasa; sebaliknya ia terus memastikan semua pengeluar kereta di Kanada, syarikat pakatan auto dan bukan pakatan auto, mengimport alat ganti bebas cukai.

Dasar tarif automotif akan kekal sama jika semuanya berjalan mengikut rancangan dengan bil.


Premise: But I think in retrospect we were too late getting in there. We could have saved more lives if we had acted earlier. But I do not think that it was an example of a conflict where we should have put our troops in to try to separate the parties for this reason, Jim.

Hypothesis: The troops had to fight to save lives.

The mention of the word conflict denotes a fight of sorts took place.

Tetapi saya fikir jika difikirkan semula kita sudah terlambat untuk masuk ke sana. Kami boleh menyelamatkan lebih banyak nyawa jika kami bertindak lebih awal. Tetapi saya tidak fikir ia adalah contoh konflik di mana kita sepatutnya meletakkan tentera kita untuk cuba memisahkan pihak atas sebab ini, Jim.

Tentera terpaksa berjuang untuk menyelamatkan nyawa.


Premise: It was the first time that I had really ever been around Barrie Callahan, so she strikes me -that memory strikes me because my mother had known her previously. And she was speaking about the textbook, just questioning them. I don't remember her exact words.

Hypothesis: Barrie Callahan contains a h

Ia adalah kali pertama saya benar-benar berada di sekitar Barrie Callahan, jadi dia menyerang saya - ingatan itu menyerang saya kerana ibu saya mengenalinya sebelum ini. Dan dia bercakap tentang buku teks, hanya menyoal mereka. Saya tidak ingat kata-kata tepatnya.


Premise: Now, what happens is when you begin to get people covered like that -- for instance in diabetes, if you diagnose diabetes early, you could save $50 billion in the health care system of America by avoiding surgery and dialysis. It works. And I'm going to offer it to America.

Hypothesis: Some people with diabetes in America have surgery.

According to the statement, diagnosing diabetes early could save $50 billion in the health care system of America by avoiding surgery - therefore, some people with diabetes in America has surgery, otherwise there would be no savings from diagnosing them early.

Sekarang, apa yang berlaku ialah apabila anda mula mendapatkan orang yang dilindungi seperti itu -- contohnya dalam diabetes, jika anda mendiagnosis diabetes lebih awal, anda boleh menjimatkan $50 bilion dalam sistem penjagaan kesihatan Amerika dengan mengelakkan pembedahan dan dialisis. Ianya berfungsi. Dan saya akan menawarkannya kepada Amerika.

Sesetengah orang yang menghidap diabetes di Amerika menjalani pembedahan.


Premise: So I would like to ask him how he could expect me as a member on this side of the House who is most interested in getting to the root of government documents, in getting to examine the way government functions and indeed who has had legislation before this House that would enable members to better do their job in this regard, to take this motion seriously when his party has deliberately blocked the very kind of legislation that we need in this House to enable backbenchers and opposition members to assess how government operates?

Hypothesis: The speaker is interested in understanding the finer nuances of Government documents

The context states the person is 'interested in getting to the root of government documents' getting 'to the root' of something is the same as understanding the finer nuances - e.g. focusing on the fine detail. The system did likely not understand that the two phrases more or less mean the same.

Jadi saya ingin bertanya kepadanya bagaimana dia boleh mengharapkan saya sebagai ahli di sebelah Dewan ini yang paling berminat untuk mendapatkan ke akar umbi dokumen kerajaan, untuk meneliti cara kerajaan berfungsi dan sememangnya yang mempunyai undang-undang sebelum ini Dewan yang akan membolehkan ahli-ahli menjalankan tugas mereka dengan lebih baik dalam hal ini, untuk mengambil serius usul ini apabila partinya sengaja menyekat undang-undang yang kita perlukan dalam Dewan ini untuk membolehkan ahli parlimen dan ahli pembangkang menilai bagaimana kerajaan beroperasi?

Penceramah berminat untuk memahami nuansa dokumen Kerajaan yang lebih halus


Premise: I hope very much, on the basis of this report and with the facts, we will be able to establish a healthy dialogue in the House to make sure the employment insurance system in Canada and the other programs built around it, to compliment it, continue to best serve Canadian citizens.

Hypothesis: The agent wants to do what is best for the Canadian people.

The agent does want to do what is best for the Canadian citizens, as he says that the policy should best serve Canadian citizens.  The system was likely confused by the verbiage in the response.

Saya amat berharap, berdasarkan laporan ini dan dengan fakta, kita akan dapat mewujudkan dialog yang sihat di Dewan untuk memastikan sistem insurans pekerjaan di Kanada dan program lain yang dibina di sekelilingnya, untuk memujinya, diteruskan. untuk memberi perkhidmatan terbaik kepada warga Kanada.

Ejen itu mahu melakukan yang terbaik untuk rakyat Kanada.


Premise: In fact, I may have been walking out of the room at the time and in close proximity to her. And so at the time when Max was speaking -- I believe that there were people who spoke in between she and Max Pell. But at the time when he stood to speak, I was in the restroom and sort of coming back from the restroom, so I don't really recall exactly what his comments were.

Hypothesis: They were using the bathroom when Max got up to speak.

The context states that ‘at the time when Max was speaking […] I was in the restroom’ The system could likely not understand the sentences as the clauses used to illustrate the speech made it difficult to understand and it was written confusingly.

Sebenarnya, saya mungkin sedang berjalan keluar dari bilik pada masa itu dan berdekatan dengannya. Begitu juga pada masa Max bercakap -- saya percaya ada orang yang bercakap di antara dia dan Max Pell. Tetapi pada masa dia berdiri untuk bercakap, saya berada di dalam tandas dan seperti kembali dari tandas, jadi saya tidak begitu ingat apa komennya.

Mereka sedang menggunakan bilik air apabila Max bangun untuk bercakap.


Premise: If the hon. gentleman took the time to read the article, he would find quotes from me talking about the minister of heritage who last week publicly said that if there are meaningful amendments while preserving the very essence of the bill, that she is open to hearing them from the committee.

Hypothesis: Hon. gentleman is a man.

"If the hon. gentleman took the time to read the article, he would find quotes". The system was confused by the gender.

Jika hon. lelaki itu meluangkan masa untuk membaca artikel itu, dia akan menemui petikan daripada saya bercakap tentang menteri warisan yang minggu lalu secara terbuka mengatakan bahawa jika terdapat pindaan yang bermakna sambil mengekalkan intipati rang undang-undang itu, dia terbuka untuk mendengarnya daripada jawatankuasa.

Yang Berhormat lelaki budiman adalah lelaki.


Premise: But they see a compassionate, strong, great first lady in Laura Bush. I can't tell you how lucky I am. When I met her in the backyard at Joe and Jan O'Neill's in Midland, Texas, it was the classic backyard barbecue. O'Neill said, "Come on over. I think you'll find somebody who might interest you. "So I said all right. Bopped over there. There was only four of us there. And not only did she interest me, I guess you would say it was love at first sight.

Hypothesis: Laura Bush has a r

Tetapi mereka melihat seorang wanita pertama yang penuh belas kasihan, kuat dan hebat dalam Laura Bush. Saya tidak boleh memberitahu anda betapa bertuahnya saya. Apabila saya bertemu dengannya di halaman belakang rumah Joe dan Jan O'Neill di Midland, Texas, ia adalah barbeku belakang rumah klasik. O'Neill berkata, "Mari ke sini. Saya rasa anda akan menemui seseorang yang mungkin menarik minat anda. "Jadi saya berkata baik. Bopped di sana. Hanya kami berempat di sana. Dan bukan sahaja dia menarik minat saya, saya rasa anda akan mengatakan itu cinta pandang pertama.


Premise: I still believe it is very essential to once again look at what we have been able to achieve to judge where we want to go in the future and also to look at the kind of priorities and targets we can set in the forthcoming years in order to ensure that the investment and the commitment which Canadians have made over the past several years both under the UN and NATO can be fulfilled.

Hypothesis: Deciding where a country must head toward in the future can be a difficult decision. There are different ways to decide where to go and one of those ways is to look back in the past and see what has already been done.

It must be true because it states that it is just "one essential" way so there must be others.

Saya masih percaya adalah sangat penting untuk sekali lagi melihat apa yang telah kita capai untuk menilai ke mana kita mahu pergi pada masa hadapan dan juga untuk melihat jenis keutamaan dan sasaran yang boleh kita tetapkan pada tahun-tahun akan datang untuk memastikan bahawa pelaburan dan komitmen yang telah dibuat oleh warga Kanada sejak beberapa tahun lalu di bawah PBB dan NATO dapat dipenuhi.

Memutuskan ke mana negara mesti menuju pada masa depan boleh menjadi keputusan yang sukar. Terdapat pelbagai cara untuk memutuskan ke mana hendak pergi dan salah satu daripada cara itu ialah melihat ke belakang pada masa lalu dan melihat perkara yang telah dilakukan.


Premise: (d) to persons of Canadian citizenship who were members of the Privy Council of the United Kingdom, including the Prime Ministers of Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justices, and some Cabinet Ministers of Canada, including the Leader of the Government in the Senate 1921-1930, and 1935-1940, the Right Honourable Senator Raoul Dandurand, appointed to the United Kingdom Privy Council in 1941;

Hypothesis: only some of the cabinet ministers of canada are included.

the statement states that some Cabinet Ministers of Canada - not all.

(d) kepada orang berkewarganegaraan Kanada yang menjadi ahli Majlis Privy United Kingdom, termasuk Perdana Menteri Kanada, Ketua Hakim Negara Mahkamah Agung Kanada, dan beberapa Menteri Kabinet Kanada, termasuk Ketua Kerajaan dalam Senat 1921-1930, dan 1935-1940, Yang Amat Berhormat Senator Raoul Dandurand, dilantik ke Majlis Privy United Kingdom pada tahun 1941;

hanya beberapa menteri kabinet kanada sahaja yang disertakan.


Premise: For example, in some jurisdictions the police may provide a card to all victims they come into contact with which refers victims to victim witness services and/or which refers to the victim impact statement program, or the crown may have a notation in the file that the victim has indeed been advised.

Hypothesis: The victim card is only available in some jurisdictions.

Not sure why it was difficult for the system.  The statement is correct, the paragraph reads "For example, in some jurisdictions"

Sebagai contoh, dalam sesetengah bidang kuasa polis boleh memberikan kad kepada semua mangsa yang mereka hubungi yang merujuk mangsa kepada perkhidmatan saksi mangsa dan/atau yang merujuk kepada program kenyataan kesan mangsa, atau mahkota mungkin mempunyai notasi dalam fail yang mangsa memang telah dinasihatkan.

Kad mangsa hanya tersedia di beberapa bidang kuasa.


Premise: Well, that vote wasn't exactly -- a lot of the supporters of the Kyoto Treaty actually ended up voting for that because the way it was worded. But there's no doubt there's a lot of opposition to it in the Senate. I'm not for command and control techniques either.

Hypothesis: The Kyoto Treaty was despised by the Senate

Nah, undian itu tidak betul -- ramai penyokong Perjanjian Kyoto sebenarnya akhirnya mengundi untuk itu kerana cara perkataannya. Tetapi tidak syak lagi terdapat banyak tentangan terhadapnya di Dewan Negara. Saya juga bukan untuk teknik arahan dan kawalan.


Premise: Now right here in Arizona, that difference would have been $131 million to the state of Arizona to help its kids be able to have better education and to lift the property tax burden from its citizens. The president reneged on his promise to fund No Child Left Behind.

Hypothesis: Kids can be helped.

It is clearly stated that they want to help the kids of Arizona state.

Sekarang, di Arizona, perbezaan itu ialah $131 juta kepada negeri Arizona untuk membantu anak-anaknya mendapat pendidikan yang lebih baik dan mengurangkan beban cukai harta daripada warganya. Presiden mengingkari janjinya untuk membiayai No Child Left Behind.