Search Results

Ancient Sanskrit had two tenses of particular interest: periphrastic perfect and periphrastic future. At first glance, they are rather similar: both realize a particular value of tense through a combination of a lexical verb (devoid of personal agreement) and an agreeing auxiliary. There are, however, important differences which are revealed in this chapter: the periphrastic future is available for every verb, and can be distinguished from the synthetic future on semantic grounds, while the periphrastic perfect is available only for certain verbs, and these do not make up a semantically homogeneous group. A formal analysis is proposed, within Paradigm Function Morphology, for the two periphrastic tenses. It is demonstrated that a morphological rather than a purely syntactic account is preferable here. The verbs with a periphrastic perfect make up a conjugation class; on the other hand, the periphrastic future is formalized as a morphosyntactic property whose default realization is periphrastic.

Periphrastic constructions in related and well-studied languages such as English, German, and French exhibit significant diversity in their syntactic structure. In English the main verb combines with its complements first, whereas in German the main verb combines with the auxiliary first. French demonstrates that it is possible to have diversity even within one language. Two periphrastic tenses in French — the perfect and the near future — correspond to two distinct phrase structure configurations. This chapter argues that different syntactic configurations show the same level of paradigm integration in the relevant language, and thus the theory of periphrasis should not depend on the particular phrase structure. It presents a formal account for the phrase-structural diversity of periphrases using Paradigm Function Morphology as the inflectional component for an HPSG account.

Each of the orthodox Johannophobia paradigm’s three planks identified at the beginning of the study is now shown to be completely insecure. Orthodox Johannophobia and its correlative, gnostic Johannophilia, have been exposed as little better than scholarly myths, which now must be replaced with expositions more historically responsible. Such expositions should acknowledge the profound influence the Fourth Gospel had on the mainstream Church through most of the second century and that the story of its reception cannot be accurately told without recognizing the common perception of John as a member of a larger authorial corpus.

This final chapter investigates how the kind of political and historical ideas employed among Syriac‐speaking Miaphysites in Mesopotamia were exported elsewhere in the Roman world, focl1sing on the border zones of Rome's conflict with Persia, on Yemen (Himyar) and the lands controlled by the Ghassanid Arab federation (centred in modern‐day northern Jordan). The persecuted missionary church of Miaphysites exported a distinctive paradigm ofhistory, by which new Christian territories such as Himyar could repeat the defining moments of Christian nationhood, the experience of martyrdom and the overthrow of the Jews. Moreover, while this struggle was part of a wider struggle against the Jews, it did not tie Himyar into the political orbit of the Roman lfmpire. It is this evolution of a self‐sufficient political thought in the communities of the late Roman and post‐Roman east that is one of the most important achievements of Miaphysitism in the Syriac‐speaking world.

This chapter evaluates spatial modulation sensitivity under conditions inferred to favour magnocellular (MC) and parvocellular (PC) pathways. Pulsed- and Steady-Pedestal Paradigms revealed characteristic differences in spatial frequency processing. Pulsed-Pedestal D6 spatial contrast sensitivity functions are mediated by the PC-pathway. Steady-Pedestal contrast sensitivity functions are mediated by the MC-pathway at low spatial frequencies, and by the PC-pathway above 4 cycles/deg. These data support the hypothesis of a major role for the PC-pathway in achromatic spatial vision.

In A Theory of Constitutional Rights Robert Alexy provides an account of the structure and domain of constitutional rights. The core claim relating to the structure of rights is that constitutional rights are principles and that proportionality analysis is necessarily at the heart of reasoning about what principles require in real contexts. The core claim relating to the proper domain or scope of rights is that there are good grounds for recognizing a general right to liberty and a general right to equality. A conception of rights that shares these two features defines the ‘Rationalist Human Rights Paradigm’ (RHRP). This chapter focuses on the following question: if rights do have the structure and occupy the domain that Alexy suggests, what is the justification for courts setting aside legislation in the name of adjudicating rights? That question is tied to the classical chestnut of an issue that is the legitimacy of judicial review. But it becomes more focused and specific when tied to the particular theory of rights that Alexy defends. The structure of a theory of rights has direct implications for the understanding of the practice of judicial review. What then are the specific problems and best justifications of a practice of judicial review that embraces the RHRP?

Paradigm shifts in economic governance have occurred at intervals of a century or more; we may be at a point of transition comparable to that of the early 20^th century, a point of conjuncture between short and long term trends. History becomes all the more relevant therefore because there is no living experience of what such a paradigm shift entails. It is part of a process by which crises are resolved when the previous paradigm no longer provides effective or credible solutions. The challenge today, to make cities safer in the 21^st century, calls attention to problems which the macro-economic and sectoral policy frameworks of the 20^th century are ill-equipped to address. Each paradigm shift in the past was associated with a major increase in the scale of urbanization. This analysis introduces the distinction between meta-regulation, which operates at the level of a paradigm, and regulation in the form of specific roles. Meta-regulation helps to keep the entire system going in reference to basic values, defined in terms of society’s deepest hopes and fears.

The Bush Administration, within days of 9/11, began developing what came to be known as “the New Paradigm” for the “war on terror,” under which the president authorized “a new, ad hoc system of detention and interrogation that operated outside any previously known coherent body of law.” This book presents interviews with 62 former detainees held in U.S. custody in Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, as well as 50 U.S. government officials, representatives of nongovernmental organizations, attorneys representing detainees, and former U.S. military and civilian personnel who had been stationed in Guantánamo or Afghanistan in order to answer questions regarding the detention and interrogation. A high degree of consistency is found when comparing the patterns and trends in the interview data with data on detention and interrogation procedures in documents released by the Department of Defense and reports published by the U.S. government, independent organizations, and the media.

The Introduction explains that this study will focus on close readings of selected French and German novels to indicate the evolution and devolution of Franco-American images of each other. Roland Barthes’s theory of modern myth will be used in some chapters, but not in all. For each chapter historical and cultural background is provided.

The chapter deals with a woman’s triumph in a man’s world during the Gilded Age. It chronicles the American take-over of a large section of Paris which becomes an American colony. The main character is a beautiful American woman, more cunning than intelligent, who uses her wits, and willingness to divorce and remarry to make her name in a largely Americanized Paris.

This chapter cites historical examples of life that thrive on the suspension of law’s relation to language, explaining how a life that is marked by the singularity of an exceptional situation pretend to exhibit the sense of belonging to a class. It focuses on Giorgio Agamben’s essay What Is a Paradigm?, which analyzes the role of homo sacer and the musselman in establishing a broader historical-problematic context. The chapter concludes with a clarification to the meaning of “paradigm”, in which Agamben and Michel Foucault suggest that it is a definitive methodological tool in any archaeological investigation that is concerned with the politics of epistemology.

The chapter focuses on the often neglected aspect of the perceptual experience—the impact and effect of the visual process on our attention-action interface. The chapter utilizes studies on eye movement control to explore further the linkage between action and perception. A selection function is ascribed to the visual system, which causes an intended motor action to be directed at a specific object within the visual field. This selective capability links the various visual representations with visual processing and motor programming. Succeeding sections explore the concept of visual attention further and its relationship to eye movements, citing studies using the Moving Window Paradigm, the Sequential Attention Model, and Feature Integration Theory. These studies support the theory that visual attention precedes saccadic eye movement to a specific location of a stimulus in the visual field, and enables the motor system to bind the said location with a motor action.

This chapter follows on closely from the previous one by seeking to conceptualise music consumption and its necessary ‘other’ — production — within a paradigmatic framework that suspends orthodox structuralist models of hegemony polarised by dominant and subordinate socio-economic classes, in favour of dynamic interactionist models which systematically explore concrete, everyday cultural practices. These dynamic interactionist approaches to cultural practices do not all neatly fit into the same ‘spectacle, narcissism, and performance’ framework, but they necessarily contain elements of the Spectacle/Performance Paradigm in their movement away from structural Marxism. After first evaluating the most ground-breaking theories into everyday consumption and production, it applies those theories of greater usefulness for the aims of this research to the relative merits of studies into audiences and — more pressingly — performances.

What have learned? Are we talking about a coherent shift in social policy perspective? What have we learned about the challenges ahead for strengthening welfare systems, and for economic and sustainable growth for all. In this final chapter we will critically consider the perspectives, and ask whether they are simply saying the same thing with different accents (e.g. different disciplinary and country foci) and whether or the extent to which they have different/unique features. Summary tables will be included to summarise approaches and lessons learned.

This chapter addresses the following questions: Why cloud computing? What is so special about cloud computing? How will it affect you, your work, and our society? Just as Microsoft Windows became ubiquitous at home and work, and changed our lives, cloud computing represents a paradigm shift. This is because cloud computing is an enabling technology that bypasses many functions provided by your computer, the software installedon it, your workplace’s IT and finance departments, businesses and government departments. Cloud computing’s paradigm shift is considered from three different viewpoints: (1) how it should affect you socially and personally, (2) how it will affect you in your work, and (3) how it will affect businesses.The personal paradigm shift viewpoint is extended using a novel concept: a cloud of things and services. Such a cloud serves an internet-of-things device and, by the application of service automation, it further provides related services on a personal basis. The combination of a cloud of things and a process-as-a-service deployment model culminates in a Cloud of Things and Services (COTS).

In this dialogue, Tim O’Reilly begins by explaining why change is natural and good and how we have to be open to the future. Later he discusses how the logic that makes things work is related to science and not to a particular set of beliefs; to understanding what is efficient and why within this logic there is a hierarchy that is made up of a set of values. He goes on to explain how the Web 2.0 applications he formulated— for example, the social networks—use network effects by harnessing collective intelligence in such a way that the more people there are who use them, the better they become. After this, he describes how his analysis of the paradigm shift in open code is equivalent to that expressed by Thomas Kuhn in his work “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”. Later on, O’Reilly reflects on the different possible kinds of Internet of the future before moving on to explain why the most innovative people go beyond the limits of “canonical knowledge” in their daily practice, and the way in which their artistic transgressions or discoveries make them part of the new canon.