Verbal Aspekt

Re verbal aspect

No one has mentioned so far the distinction Porter makes between the older
"Aktionsart" idea (as an indicator of the *objective* type of action, as
opposed to "aspect" which is only an indicator of the subjective perception of
the speaker / writer.  This I think is a useful distinction inasmuch as it
prevents one from drawing conclusions about the objective character of  an
action, and focuses strictly on what the author wished to *stress* (if
anything) by his use of aspect.

I've also been interested to hear the reactions of OLsen and others to Porter's
more controversial idea that time is altogether absent from all "tenses" even
in the indicative mood.  Perhaps someone who has worked his/her way through
Porter's "big" book can tell me what semantic value he sees the augment as

**  Dan G. McCartney                   |        I'net: DMCCARTNEY@HSLC.ORG  **
**  Assoc. Prof. of NT                 |          WTS: 215 887 5511         **
**  Westminster Theol Seminary         |       Office: 215 572 3818         **
**  Box 27009, Chestnut Hill           |          Fax: 215 887 5404         **
**  Philadelphia, PA  19090            |         Home: 215 659 7854         **
**                                                                          **