Answer:
The basis of this argument is that verbs are conjugated only in the present and past tense. If we want to refer to the future, we have to use the auxiliary verb will, or the be going to phrase followed by the verb in present or past, or the present tense. Since in English, there is no change in the conjugation of the verbs for the future, some linguistics claim that there are two tenses (past and present) while others claim that there are three because we form the future tense with the addition of the auxiliary or use present simple or continuous.
Explanation:
Linguistics such as Quicker Al claims that there are two tenses, present, and past since they are expressed by inflections in their verbs, while future does not have inflections. There is no future tense, but there is future time. Time is related to our perception of reality, making the future subjective. On the other side, tense expresses when an action happens, taking into account the moment that the person is speaking. Linguistics such as Hatav or Klein claims three tenses' existence, past, present, and future. They state that we can refer to the future with the addition of the auxiliary verb will, or the phrase be going to, or the use of present simple, or continuous even though there is no specific inflection in the verb, as it happens in other languages like Portuguese or Spanish. They identify the future with the definition of tense.
The answer is a first I hope this helps
Answer:
The synthesize regarding John brown with respect to two articles are explained below.
Explanation:
After John Brown was hanged on multiple charges surrounding the abolition of slavery in 1859, there were different aspects on him, and there became a debate: on the one hand , people were in support of him and preferred him to be dead. But at the other side , people treated him as a hero.
Although the former claimed to be a murderer and traitor whose purpose was to take down a servile civil war, the other saw an example of true patriotism in him, someone who compromises himself for the liberation and survival of a hated people, that is, his brothers.
In my opinion, those lines are: "<span>Too weak, for all her heart's endeavour, To set its struggling passion free From pride, and vainer ties dissever." At this moment, Porphyria confesses her love for the speaker. But he is on the verge of doubting it because he thinks that she is too weak to give herself entirely to him, and because she is obviously unwilling to cut those "vainer ties". He doesn't really explain what these ties are and why they are vain. Maybe he has low self-confidence and therefore thinks that he is not worthy of her. Anyway, the following lines ("But passion...") function as a counterpoint because she actually gave up a jolly party and came in the stormy night to the cottage just to be with him - which probably means that she really cares about him. But it doesn't neutralize his initial doubt.</span>
