Re: Aspect and Actionsart Distinction (was: aorist tense)

From: Ed Gorham (
Date: Fri Oct 23 1998 - 23:48:04 EDT

Thanks for saying what was on my mind the other day. I simply have not had
a moment to address it until now.
To my mind there is a stark difference between the "postmodern fear of
antithesis" and the co-exitence of two streams of thought that are equally
valid and in fact, need one another. The former puts all truth up for
grabs and is out of the "anything goes" school of thought. The latter is an
attempt to take the some of the latest thinking and see how it can shed
light on or embellish previous theories. If not valid, it should be cast
aside. But if it proves to be valid, then you have to deal with it in some
The alternative is to reject either Aktionsart or aspect out-of-hand. Does
anyone see this as a legitimate option? Porter, McKay, Fanning and others
who have written on aspect have done much to help us with our
understanding. The danger I'm trying to avoid is to take something that is
new(to me, at least) like aspect, and absolutize it to the exclusion of
other approaches. Clearly, that would be the wrong path.
I am open to see what others of you have to say about this.
-Ed Gorham

B-Greek home page:
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: []
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
To subscribe, send a message to

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:05 EDT