Results for i say a lot of bad words translation from English to Korean

i have a lot of discharge.
나는 물이 많아요.

today, i have a lot of homework.
오늘 숙제가 너무 많아요.

i have a lots of bags
나는 친구가 많다

i've had a lot of trouble today
오늘 하루도 고생 많았어요

i hate it when there are a lot of people.
사람 많은 거 싫어요.

eat a lot of, the less work ...
많이 먹고, 적게 일..

a theme with a lot of contrast
명도가 높은 테마name

that job takes a lot of strength.
그 일은 많은 힘이 필요하다.

the teacher gives a lot of homework
ㅣㅑㅅㅅㅣㄷ ㄹㅕㅊㅏㄷㄱ

the souvenir shop sold a lot of old wolgeons
기념품 가게에서는 옛날 울건들옮 많이 팔았어요

and who then spread a lot of turmoil in them.
그곳에서 해악을 더해만 갔 으니

seebytouch - feel pictures and have a lot of fun!
seebytouch - 그림을 느끼면서 즐기십시오! name

and indeed the news which had a lot of deterrence, came to them.
이미 그들을 경고한 이야기들 이 그들에게 이르렀으며

yes, it is. there’s a lot of moisture in the air.
네, 그래요. 공기 중에 습기가 너무 많아요.

there is a lot of opportunity for process improvements in the small business sector.
소상공인 분야에서 공정 개선의 기회가 많습니다.

suggest running scandisk to see if your hard drive has a lot of lost clusters and other anomalies.
디스크 검사를 실행하여 하드 드라이브에 손실된 클러스터나 기타 변종이 많은지 여부를 확인하는 것이 좋습니다.

jeffrey friedl 's book contains a lot of discussion about optimizing regular expressions for efficient performance.
with both maximizing and minimizing repetition, failure of what follows normally causes the repeated item to be re- evaluated to see if a different number of repeats allows the rest of the pattern to match. sometimes it is useful to prevent this, either to change the nature of the match, or to cause it fail earlier than it otherwise might, when the author of the pattern knows there is no point in carrying on. consider, for example, the pattern \d+foo when applied to the subject line 123456bar after matching all 6 digits and then failing to match "foo", the normal action of the matcher is to try again with only 5 digits matching the \d+ item, and then with 4, and so on, before ultimately failing. once-only subpatterns provide the means for specifying that once a portion of the pattern has matched, it is not to be re-evaluated in this way, so the matcher would give up immediately on failing to match "foo" the first time. the notation is another kind of special parenthesis, starting with (? as in this example: (? \d+)bar this kind of parenthesis "locks up" the part of the pattern it contains once it has matched, and a failure further into the pattern is prevented from backtracking into it. back- tracking past it to previous items, however, works as normal. an alternative description is that a subpattern of this type matches the string of characters that an identical standalone pattern would match, if anchored at the current point in the subject string. once-only subpatterns are not capturing subpatterns. simple cases such as the above example can be thought of as a maximizing repeat that must swallow everything it can. so, while both \d+ and \d+? are prepared to adjust the number of digits they match in order to make the rest of the pattern match, (? \d+) can only match an entire sequence of digits. this construction can of course contain arbitrarily complicated subpatterns, and it can be nested. once-only subpatterns can be used in conjunction with look- behind assertions to specify efficient matching at the end of the subject string. consider a simple pattern such as abcd$ when applied to a long string which does not match. because matching proceeds from left to right, pcre will look for each "a" in the subject and then see if what follows matches the rest of the pattern. if the pattern is specified as ^.*abcd$ then the initial .* matches the entire string at first, but when this fails (because there is no following "a"), it backtracks to match all but the last character, then all but the last two characters, and so on. once again the search for "a" covers the entire string, from right to left, so we are no better off. however, if the pattern is written as ^(? .*)(? =abcd) then there can be no backtracking for the .* item; it can match only the entire string. the subsequent lookbehind assertion does a single test on the last four characters. if it fails, the match fails immediately. for long strings, this approach makes a significant difference to the processing time. when a pattern contains an unlimited repeat inside a subpattern that can itself be repeated an unlimited number of times, the use of a once-only subpattern is the only way to avoid some failing matches taking a very long time indeed. the pattern (\d+_bar_ \d+ )*[!?] matches an unlimited number of substrings that either consist of non-digits, or digits enclosed in, followed by either! or?. when it matches, it runs quickly. however, if it is applied to aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa it takes a long time before reporting failure. this is because the string can be divided between the two repeats in a large number of ways, and all have to be tried. (the example used [!?] rather than a single character at the end, because both pcre and perl have an optimization that allows for fast failure when a single character is used. they remember the last single character that is required for a match, and fail early if it is not present in the string.) if the pattern is changed to ((? \d+)_bar_ \d+ )*[!?] sequences of non-digits cannot be broken, and failure happens quickly.

while this is a feature of a lot of innovation and should drive a business to anticipate market and technological driven change and evolve accordingly.
이는 많은 혁신의 특징이며, 시장과 기술 중심의 변화를 예측하고 그에 따라 진화하도록 비즈니스를 이끌어야 합니다.

leaders also see a lot of value in the unique qualities of blockchain technology to enhance their internal processes and deliver better services to their customers.
리더들은 또한 내부 프로세스를 개선하고 고객에게 더 나은 서비스를 제공하기 위한 블록체인 기술의 고유한 품질에서 많은 가치를 발견합니다.

he gives wisdom to whom he will, and he who is given wisdom has been given a lot of good. yet none will remember except the owners of minds.
그분은 그분의 뜻이 있는자 에게 그리고 지혜를 받을 자에게 지혜를 주시니라 진실로 은혜가 넘쳐 흐르도다 그러나 이성을 가 진자 외에는 그 메시지를 이해하 지 못하도다