Eric R. Naizer, «Discourse Prominence in Matthew 20,1-16: Stanley Porter's Verbal Aspect Theory applied» filologia-neotestamentaria, Vol. 22 (2009) 41-54 page 53

Vol 22 (2009)

Eric R. Naizer, «Discourse Prominence in Matthew 20,1-16: Stanley Porter's Verbal Aspect Theory applied», Vol. 22 (2009) 41-54

While traditionally grammarians have understood the Greek verbal system as grammaticalizing time and/or Aktionsart, there is growing acknowledgment that the Greek verbal system is fundamentally aspectual. There is also increasing recognition that verbal aspect can function to provide the author with the subjective choice to define discourse prominence within any given context. Much of the scholarship done on the subject of verbal aspect with regard to discourse prominence has been done at a theoretical level leaving the majority of the New Testament open for the application of the theory. It is the purpose of this study to apply the results of verbal aspect theory articulated by Stanley E. Porter to the pericope found in Matthew 20,1-16 in order to test the viability of aspect functioning to indicate prominence.

TAGS

Greek verbal system

Page 53/54
«
‹
53
54
›

Discourse Prominence in Matthew 20,1-16 53 The importance of this interchange is further supported by the author’s use of the perfect participle and perfect indicative in v. 6 which adds even more contour to this episode. The author’s use of the imperfective and stative aspects marks the prominence of this exchange in the parable. In contrast to the aorist and present tenses, the perfect tense (sta- tive aspect) functions to bring certain elements to the frontground of the narrative in order to signify the importance of the given features in the passage. The stative aspect serves to focus the reader’s attention on the processes which are central to the narrative. In Matthew 20,1-16 the author’s use of verbal tenses conforms to Porter’s thesis concerning verbal aspect and discourse prominence. The use of stative aspect most notably emphasizes the central role of the last group of laborers hired by the landowner (v. 6). 3.4. The Future Tense In the parable there are three instances in which the future tense is used (δώσω in v. 4, λήμψονται in v. 10 and ἔσονται in v. 16). Porter’s verbal aspect theory describes the future tense as used to express ex- pectation. He further understands the future as not fully aspectual and therefore aspectually vague34. Because Porter defines the future tense as aspectually vague, it does apply to this study in which verbal aspect is used to identify discourse prominence. 4. Conclusion The intention of this study has been an exercise in applying the verbal aspect model articulated by Porter with special emphasis on the verbal aspect’s function to display discourse prominence. Approaching the text from Porter’s perspective, aspect is not to indicate time, but is instead to portray the author’s perspective on a particular process. Understanding Porter’s verbal aspect theory functioning to indicate discourse promi- nence provides a paradigm that ostensibly conforms to the structure and flow of the narrative in Matthew 20,1-16. In the parable, the author uses the aorist tense to background various features in the parable, to view the action as a whole, as well as move the narrative forward. The imper- fective aspect is used against the backdrop of the default aorist tense to highlight elements in the parable that the author wishes to dwell on and 34 Porter, Verbal Aspect, 438.