38 Adelbert Denaux features). Hence, from a linguistic point of view, style is but one type of systematic linguistic variation29. Style is also modified by the literary genre that is used (e.g. the style of a ‘miracle story’ differs from that of a ‘hymn’), by the audience that is addressed (e.g. writing to enemies or to beloved), and of by the circumstances in which one writes (e.g. peace or persecutions). Style has also to do with beauty and a sense of proportion. Hence, it is also an aesthetic and ethic reality, especially in works of imaginative literature30. Most NT writings, however, do not belong to this category. In the light of what is said, we can point to some definitions of style that give due attention to all aspects involved. G. Kazemier defines style as follows: “Literary style is the proper, not accidental but repetitive way in which a person, or a group of persons, influenced by time, social conditions, life view, belief, age, etc., expresses himself through language”31. J.E. Botha gives a more elaborate definition of style: “Style has to do with the choices available to users of language, and since these choices are determined by specific needs and circumstances, style is a con- textually determined phenomenon. Because of this, style in effect deals with the successful communication of texts in context. Every aspect of language which facilitates this process of communication, therefore, has to do with the style of the text. This, however, does not mean that a general description of all the innumerable linguistic and literary features in a text, will amount to a description of the style of a text. Far from it. Only those features which facilitate the specific communication in these specific circumstances can be considered of stylistic value in this paradigm. The features in a text which facilitates this process should not be limited, and can vary according to the specific needs of a specific text or context”32. H.J. Cadbury, Style, 47: “A full theory of language should carry the onus of accounting 29 for different types of linguistic variation – regional dialects, social dialects, styles, registers, idiolects – and distinguish systematic, structurally significant variation from non-significant or random variation within each of these types”. R. Wellek, “Stylistics, Poetics, and Criticism”, in S. Chatman (ed.), Literary Style: A 30 Symposium (Oxford 1971) 65: “Stylistics can, for our purposes, be divided into two fairly distinct disciplines: the study of style in all language pronouncements, and the study of style in works of imaginative literature”; 66, “The problem is very different as soon as we narrow out attention to a study of literary style, in the sense of style in imaginative literature, with an aesthetic function, particularly in poetry”. G. Kazemier, Stilering, 230. 31 J.E. Botha, “Style in the New Testament. The Need for Serious Reconsideration”, 32 JStNT 43 (1991) 71-87, at 78-79.