Linguistics and opposite conclusions
waldo slusher
waldoslusher at yahoo.com
Sat Oct 26 22:12:35 EDT 2002
Fanning and Porter have been contrasted lately out
here. I have been wondering about a particular issue
for some time now after reading both Verbal Aspect
books. One author/scholar holds that there is no
temporal nature to the finite indicative verbal
system, whereas the other holds just the opposite....
that the Greek finite indicative verbs do by and large
make temporal assertions. To make matters worse, one
scholar holds that the aorist tense is the default
tense, whereas the other holds that the same default
verbs are those in the present tense. (And there has
been even apparent disagreement between two B-Greek
scholars, Iver and Dr. Conrad, as to the relative
emphasis on word order.)
Question then: Is the field of Linguistics,
particularly those aspects of linguistics that can be
applied to Greek, so subjective as to allow for
opposite conclusions as stated above? What needs to
take place to introduce objectivity into the issues
that Porter and Fanning have so noticeably disagreed
upon?
=====
Waldo Slusher
Calgary, AL
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list