経済英語の訳をお願いできますか?

このQ&Aのポイント
  • 経済英語の訳をお願いできますか?
  • 多くの企業に関する情報は、年次報告書や他の企業報告書、政府の出版物、定期刊行物の記事、そして時折、企業の歴史や伝記などの読みやすい資料から得られています。重要な企業のうち18社では、高位役員へのインタビューを通じて印刷物の補完を行いました。
  • 一方、デュポン、ゼネラルモーターズ、スタンダードオイル(ニュージャージー)およびシアーズ、ローバックにおける組織的なイノベーションのより詳細な分析は、主に会社内の記録(業務文書、報告書、内部通信、会議録など)に基づいています。これらの歴史的な文書には、組織変革に参加した人々へのインタビューも補完されています。
回答を見る
  • ベストアンサー

経済英語の訳をお願いできますか?

下記の部分を教えていただけると助かります・・・。お願いします。 The information on these many companies came primarily from readily available materials such as annual and other company reports, government publications, articles in periodicals, and occasionally business histories and biographies. In eighteen of the more significant of these companies, interviews with senior executives helped supplement the printed record. The far more detailed analyses of organizational innovation at du Pont, General Motors, Standard Oil (New Jersey), and Sears, Roebuck were based, on the other hand, largely on internal company records-business correspondence, reports, memoranda, minutes of meetings, and the like. These historical documents were supplemented by interviews with men who had participated in the oraganizational changes.

  • 英語
  • 回答数1
  • ありがとう数1

質問者が選んだベストアンサー

  • ベストアンサー
  • sayshe
  • ベストアンサー率77% (4555/5904)
回答No.1

これらの多くの会社に関する情報は、主に年次報告や他社の報告、政府出版物、定期刊行物の記事、そして、時には、社史や伝記が元になっています。 これらの会社のより重要な18社においては、重役とのインタビューは、印刷された記録を補うのに役立ちました。他方、デュポン、ゼネラル・モーターズ、スタンダード・オイル(ニュージャージー)、シアーズ・ローバックの組織的革新のはるかに詳細な分析は、主に社内記録 ― 業務用通信文、レポート、メモ、会議の議事録、など ― に基づきました。 これらの歴史的文書は、組織改革に参加した人々とのインタビューによって補われました。

ko0523ki0923
質問者

お礼

ありがとうございます。 本当に助かりました。

関連するQ&A

  • 経済英語の訳をお願いします・・。

    この部分を調べることができなかったので、訳をお願いできませんか? To carry out these broader objectives, the administrative histories of close to a hundred of America's largest industrial enterprises were briefly examined. The companies included the fifty with the largest assets in 1909 and seventy of the largest by assets in 1948. The latter group consisted of the fifty used in the preliminary atudy which had determined what was the most modern administrative from and who were its innovators. Twenty of the next largest were added in order to get a wider representation in various industries. These companies and their relative sizes are listed in Tables Iand 2. (For the second group, size in 1959 as well as in 1948 is indicated.)

  • 経済英語の訳をお願いできませんか?

    経済英語なので、難しいかもしれないですが、次の部分の訳をお願いできないでしょうか? 英語が苦手なので教えていただけると助かります・・・・。 This need to enlarge the scope of the study made possible a broadening of its objectives. One way to ascertain the impact of the more general economic and administrative developments on the growth and organization of these industrial enterprises was to compare the experience of the four studied with that of many other similar large corporations. Such an expanded comparison not only could make the process of innovation in the four selected companies more comprehensible, but could also provide information on which generalizations might be made about the history of the industrial enterprise as an institution, and one of the most critically important of modern institutions at thet. In this way what began as an experiment in comparative business history was broadened into one in the writing of institutional history.

  • 英語の訳をお願いします・・。

    経済英語なのですが、冷やかし無しでお願いします・・。簡単な感じでも大丈夫です・・。 At the same time, by carefully and explisitly comparing the separate chronoligical stories with one another and then with similar developments in other great industrial companies, these stories can become more than mere case studies in the meeting and solving of administrative problems resulting from growth. They can provide otherwise unobtainable information essential to the understanding of the history of one of the most significant of today's institutions. Such a comparative and institutional study of American business would seem to have some real advantages over the more traditional histories of individual firms or the more general surveys of the American business economy. Not only does it permit an analysis of significant decisions in far greater depth and detail than is possible even in a multivolume history of a single great company, but it also makes it possible to relate these detailed analyses more clearly and more precisely to broader historical developments. On the other hand, complex decisions, actions, and events are not taken out of context and presented as mere illustrations as they would have to be in a general history of American business or of the American economy. They are not used to illustrate generalizations; they are the date from which the generalizations are derived.

  • 経済英語なのですが、訳をお願いできますか?

    下の部分の訳を教えてください。お願いします・・・。 Using these data, I have attempted to say something about the history of the large industrial enterprise as a basic, modern American institution. In so doing, this book also provides information about the history of business administration in the United States and about changes in the larger American economy. It tells still more about the history of the individual companies examined. The book attempts to provide this information by focusing on the innovation and apread of the modern "decentralized" form of organization in American industry. The major portion of the work is devoted to the administrative histories of the four companies that first created the new form.

  • 準備が間に合わないので経済英語の訳をお願いします。

    下記の部分が間に合いません・・・。 訳をお願いします・・・。 少々長いですが優しい方の回答お待ちしてます・・。 As studies in organizational innovation, these stories indicate why du Pont, General Motors, Standard Oil (New Jersey), and Sears, Roebuck enlarged their business, took on new functions, moved into new lines of businesses, and why each such move required a new design for administration. They trace the way in which busy executives worked out, often slowly and painfully, new methods and means for coordinating, appraising, and planning the effective use of vast and varied assortments of men, money, and materials. To make the case studies more meaningful, they are preceded by a broad survey of changing patterns in the growth and administration of the large enterprise in the United States, based on the experience of many of the largest companies. The case studies are then followed, first by a comparative analysis of organizational innovation in the four companies, and then by an estensive investigation into what other industrial enterprise accepted or rejected the new "decentralized" structure, and why and how they did so.

  • 経済英語の訳を教えてください・・。

    冷やかし無しでお願いします・・。だいたいの訳で構わないのでお願いします・・・。 The story of how each of the four innovators met its changing administrative needs and problems which resulted from the expansion of its business has been told as though it were a chapter in the company's history. Each case study presents the events from the point of view of the busy men responsible for the destiny of their enterprise. Only by showing these executives as they handled what appeared to them to be unique problems and issues can the process of innovation and change be meaningfully presented. Only in this way can the trials of harassed executives faced with novel and extremely complex problems be clearly pictured, and the impact of specific personalities and of historical or accidental situations on over-all change be adequately presented. Moreover, if the chronological development of the story is kept intact and if it can be presented as it appeared to the actors in the story, the date should have more value to businessmen and scholars interested in the growth and goverment of the great industrial corporation than if they were selected and arranged to develop or illustrate one particular historian's theses.

  • 経済英語ですが、この段落を訳してもらえませんか?

    This need to enlarge the scope of the study made possible a broadening of its objectives. One way to ascertain the impact of the more general economic and administrative developments on the growth and organization of these industrial enterprises was to compare the experience of the four studied with that of many other similar large corporations. Such an expanded comparison not only could make the process of innovation in the four selected companies more comprehensible, but could also provide information on which generalizations might be made about the history of the industrial enterprise as an institution, and one of the most critically important of modern institutions at that. In this way what began as an experiment in comparative business history was broadened into one in the writing of institutional history.

  • 経済英語を訳していただけないでしょうか?

    As my investigation of organizational in these four companies progressed, several important facts became clear. First, a meaningful analysis of the creation of the new administrative from called for accurate knowledge about the firm's previous organization and in fact about its entire administrative history. Second, changes in organizational strusture were intimately related to the ways in which the enterprise had expanded. An evaluation of administrative changes, therefore, demanded a detailed understanding of the company's methods of growth. Third, these patterns of growth, in turn, reflected changes in the over-all American economy, particularly those affecting the market or demand for the enterprise's products. Finally, the reorganizations were influenced by the state of the administrative art in the United States at the time they were being carried out. The first two of these points required further investigation into the history of the four companies selected. The third and fourth called for a broader awareness of the history of the American business economy.

  • 経済英語の和訳をお願いします・・

    長いと思うので、簡単な感じでも大丈夫です。 冷やかし無しでお願いします。 勉強不足ですみません・・・。 The initial proposition is, then, that administration is an identifiable activity, that it differs from the actual buying, selling, processing, or transporting of the goods, and that in the large industrial enterprise the concern of the executives is more with administration than with the performance of functional work. In a small firm, the same man or group of men buy materials, sell finished goods, and supervise manufacturing as well as coordinate, plan, and appraise these different functions. In a large company, however, administration usually becomes a specialized, full-time job. A second proposition is that the administrator must handle two types of administrative tasks when he is coordinating, appraising, and planning the activities of the enterprise. At times he must be concerhed with the long-run health of his company, at other times with its amooth and efficient day-to-day operation. The first type of activity calls for concentration on long-term planning and appraisal, the second for meeting immediate problems and needs and for handling unexpected contingencies or crises. To be sure, in real life the distinction between these two types of activities or decisions is often not clear cut. Yet some decisions clearly deal very largely with defining basic goals and the course of action and procedures necessary to achieve these goals, while other decisions have more to do with the day-to-day operations carried out within the broader framework of goals, policies, and procedures.

  • 英語の訳をお願いします・・。

    簡単にでもいいので、冷やかし無しで和訳お願いします・・。 If useful comparisons are to be made among four companies and then fourscore more, and if decisions and actions in these firms are to indicate something about the history of the industrial enterprise as an institution, the terms and concepts used in these comparisons and analyses must be carefully and precisely defined. Otherwise comparisons and findings can be more misleading than instructive. The fillowing set of general or theoretical propositions attempts to provide some sort of conceptual precision. Without reference to historical reality, they try to explain in fairly clear-cut, over simplified terms how the modern, "decentralized" structure came into being.