132 Francis G. H. Pang Aspect can be loosely defined as a viewpoint feature10, expressing a speaker’s subjective portrayal of an action. In order to engage in meaningful discussion about verbal aspect, one must distinguish between semantics and pragmatics. Semantics refers to the meaning expressed by the form alone as part of a language system, that is, meaning apart from context. Pragmatics refers to the meaning in a specific context, which has to do with “linguistic performance and implicature, which will vary depending on lexical, stylistic, grammatical and deictic interactions”11. Aspect is encoded in and expressed by the tense-form alone and thus is a matter of semantics. To borrow Porter’s wordings, aspect can be formally defined as: [A] synthetic semantic category (realized in the forms of verbs) used of meaningful oppositions in a network of tense systems to grammaticalize the author’s reasoned subjective choice of conception of a process12. Before this semantic category became the key focus in the discussion of the Greek verbal system, temporal reference and Aktionsart used to dominate the discussion13. For the past century, the prevailing view 10 Evans, “Future Directions,” 200; cf. Porter, Verbal Aspect, 88, 107 and Fanning, Verbal Aspect, 84-85. 11 Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 24. In contrast, Evans suggests that it is possible to gram- maticalize Aktionsart. He claims that stativity is an Aktionsart instead of an aspect. Mix- ing it with the lexical and grammatical stativity, he concludes that the Perfect should be treated as a special case of imperfective aspect instead of a third aspect (stative). Similarly, Olsen argues that certain kind of Aktionsart can be marked to certain class of verbs by adding prefix. See the discussion on the aspect of the Future below. Evans, Verbal Syntax, 20-32 and Olsen, Lexical and Grammatical Aspect, 208. 12 Porter, Verbal Aspect, 88, 107. Fanning’s definition is of similar essence, for him ver- bal aspect is a “category in the grammar of the verb which reflects the focus or viewpoint of the speaker in regard to the action or condition which the verb describes. It shows the perspective from which the occurrence is regarded or the portrayal of the occurrence apart from the actual or perceived nature of the situation itself”. Fanning, Verbal Aspect, 84-5. 13 For a concise summary of the traditional explanation of the function of the tense-form, see Decker, Temporal Deixis, 5-11. Detailed history can be found in Porter, Verbal Aspect, 17-65. Briefly put, the tense-forms are described almost exclusively in terms of temporal reference in late nineteenth-century Koine Grammars (like for example Winer, Buttmann). It is G. Curtius who introduces Zeitart, and later called Aktionsart, to the discussion of the meaning of the Greek verb and later adopted by other grammarians (Brugmann, Burton, Moulton and Robertson for example, although they did not use the exact terminology to refer to Aktionsart). Although some grammarians’ description of various Aktionsarten seems to resemble what one would categorize as aspect in the twentieth century, much of the discussion is dominated by Aktionsart language. For example, Robertson’s classification of three Aktionsarten: punctiliar, durative and perfected state is very similar to the perfective, imperfective and stative aspects referred in the discussion of verbal aspect today. See A.T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (NY 31919) 830-910 and Porter, Idioms, 20-61.