Perfect 1 Exchange
Randell Magtoto
The hardest part about filling out the exchange application form is deciding where to go. ANU has so many partner universities and exchange destinations that it becomes quite an arduous task to only write down a list of five institutions. Of course, it gets even tougher when you realise that you can just experience life at one of those universities. To make it easier, here is a list of things you should consider when determining which partner university is best suited for you:
Living in the residences was a very different experience from living at Unilodge ANU. I initially had a roommate from South Korea and the fact that we had to sleep in the same room enabled us to become friends very quickly. However, it was a little difficult, at first, to adjust to this lifestyle after having my own bathroom and kitchen at ANU. However, one aspect of living at the residences that I liked was that people would often leave their doors open and so it was easier to interact with other students in the corridors and make new friends.
I went through my entire English and French educations learning nothing about aspect. We only learned about tenses and a little bit about mood. With that K12* vocabulary, we'd call J'avais mang l'orange and I had eaten the orange the plus-que-parfait or indicative past perfect tense.
I'm now giving teaching support at a linguistics and translation school and the instructors insist that my previous teachers were wrong; my colleagues would call J'avais mang l'orange and I had eaten the orange the indicative, past tense, perfect aspect.
I've tried googling around for arguments on either side of the debate, but everyone I've found seems to be talking past each other. I can't find any sources that recognize that there is a debate. Is that because the K12 language teachers are truly clueless or are they so right that people don't think it's worth talking about?
NB1: My confusion isn't helped by the fact that I'm seeing three terms used that could be relevant to the above example: "perfect tense," "perfect aspect," and "perfective aspect." I can't help but notice that perfective doesn't exist as a tag on this site.
NB2: I think my colleagues' main point is that K12 language teachers should teach aspect. There remains a possibility that I'm misunderstanding them and putting words in their mouths. On that note, Khan Academy has an aspect lesson mapped to Common Core's CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.5.
Examples:This link seems consistent with how K12 teachers see it. This link is mostly consistent with how I think my colleagues see it. I've more found cite-worth documents which seem consistent with this, but these linguists are so gunshy when it comes to prescribing their viewpoint.
The pluperfect is traditionally described as a tense; in modern linguistic terminology it may be said to combine tense with grammatical aspect; namely past tense (reference to past time) and perfect aspect (state of being completed). It is used to refer to an occurrence that was already in the past (completed) at a past time.
While the perfect sentence indicates the action is still having an effect on the reference point (the miltary is still in power), this does not follow from the non-perfect sentence (the military took over leadership at some point in the time, but the resulting state might not extend up to today).
Velupillai (2012) treats perfect as an instance tense and not of aspect, under the assumption that it is the defining property of the perfect to express than an event is still relevant/having an effect to some later location on a timeline, thereby making the event span between two locations on a timeline:
Under this account, perfect is be considered a tense, rather than an aspect, because it has the function of locating an event on a timeline - more precisely, locating the event to be spanning the time between the points E and S/R.
(Here, S and R coincide - however, this holds only true for the present perfect where the speech time is the same as the reference time (as in They have taken over); in past perfect (as in They had taken over), the reference time is before the speech time, and the event would extend only until R, not up to S).
In contrast, perfective is considered an instance of aspect, indicating that the event is being viewed as a "bounded whole" (from an outside perspective), rather than as an ongoing event from an inside perfective (which would be called imperfective):
In the perfective sentence, the event is reported from an outside perspective as a bounded event, while in the imperfective sentence, the event is being viewed from an inside perspective as something ongoing.
Velupillai makes a sharp distinction between perfect and perfective here, arguing that the former is an instance of tense (because it locates an event on a timeline) while the latter is an instance of aspect (because it describes the view taken on the event). However, she also notes that perfect is often being labelled as an aspect category.
The problem is that English (or French) does not actually express aspect independently: The distinction between perfect and non-perfect, and perfecitve vs. non-perfective becomes apparent only in combination with tenses, such as past perfect, past perfect progressive, simple past, present progressive, etc. This makes it hard to actually draw the line between what is an aspect and what a tense, especially given that in school, different "tenses" (which might now be arguably pure tenses or mixtures of tense and aspect) are beingt taught in the shape of the complex conglomerates mentioned above.
Note that, for example, Wikipedia introduces the term imperfect as "a verb form [...] which combines past tense and imperfective aspect". I think it's pretty much the same issue with the name "past perfect": It combines a notion of tense with a notion of aspect.
Especially in as far as the difference between perfective (what we considered a tense above) and imperfective (what we considered an aspect above) in English is concerned, the difference is not immediately obvious: In a situation like
I would argue that it is both tense and aspect that make the difference in meaning:
In (3)-a, the use of "past perfect" indicates that John's living in Chicago is a still ongoing state of affairs, there while in (3)-b, the use of "simple past" (non-perfect) suggests that the situation described does no longer hold true in the present, which is a tensual concept (supporting the view that perfect is a tense category).
However, at the same time, viewing (3)-b as something that describes a terminated event comes with a strongly perfective notion, as opposed to (3)-a, where the event is not really regarded as a bounded whole, which is an aspectual category. (Note how things are twisted: The sentence that doesn't use past prefect tenes is the more perefective one!)
This would lead to the conclusion that the use of perfect does have an aspectual component, and that it is not simply a matter of tense.
What this all boils down to is that it might not be wrong to categorize perfect as an instance of tense, by assuming a difference between perfective and imperfective where the latter as a form of aspect and perfect is a device that locates events on a timeline (in the sense that some event is still of relevance to the speech or reference time), in the style that Velupillai treats these two terms.
However, what the above discussion also shows is that this distinction is not as straightforward when interpreting how different "tenses" are being used in English (or French or whatever other language), and that complex combinations of tense, aspect and possibly mood are being subsumed under the term "tense" because it reflects how aspect is being used in that language - namely in combination with tense categories, and not as an isolated grammatical function.
And because it is simply easier to explain to students. Telling them they are going to learn a new tense is easier to grasp than starting to introduce terminology that even linguists disagree about. Up to now, I haven't seen a word of command that puts an end to the discussion of perfect vs. non-perfect, perfect vs. perfective, tense vs. aspect once and for all, because such complex abstractions are vague by nature and languages don't always behave exactly in the categories you want them to.
"Perfect" can be considered a tense if one distinguishes it from "perfective" and considers perfect as soemthing that locates events on a timeline.
Perfect is in reality often, if not usually considered an aspect.
The reason is that the way perfect is being used in English, French etc. is a complex combination of tensual and aspectual concepts, putting into play the notion of perfective vs. imperfective also.
Calling it all tense is simply easier if it's only for the purpose of teaching students and not in the context of detailled linguistic analysis.
For me this is perfect fit for tilt lens. Moving the focus plane to be parallel to the guitar you will be able to get focus of entire guitar (in displayed position). Even if you use relatively open aperture.
You mention that it is probably not likely to be used, but those programs have batch mode, so they can be used on a large scale. Stacking 5 photos will take less time than the one spent framing and aligning the pice, so if you have a good workflow and a team of people, it can be done in almost "real time".
I am not asking or wish to discuss the principle question whether an unauthenticated key exchange is something one should do and that it is prone to man-in-the-middle attacks. The question above is mostly based on theoretical curiosity.
I recently investigated the security of a mail server and had a closer look on what cipher suites the mail server supported. I noted that the server supported authenticated key exchange both with and without PFS and both over elliptic curves and traditional finite groups, i.e. the full range DH__..., ECDH__..., DHE__... and ECDHE__.... Then I noticed that the server allowed anonymous key exchange both over elliptic curves and traditional finite groups, but only without PFS, i.e. there was ADH_... and AECDH_... ("a" like anonymous), but nothing of the sort like ADHE_... or AECDHE_... (with an "e" like ephemeral).
c80f0f1006