Runge on Porter on Tense

Post Reply
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 2519
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Runge on Porter on Tense

Post by Stephen Carlson » August 16th, 2013, 5:14 pm

Steve Runge has posted a critique of Stan Porter's method as it relates to tense here: http://www.ntdiscourse.org/2013/08/port ... stitution/
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Louis L Sorenson
Posts: 704
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 9:21 pm
Location: Burnsville, MN, USA
Contact:

Re: Runge on Porter on Tense

Post by Louis L Sorenson » August 16th, 2013, 11:01 pm

And here is a link to the paper http://www.ntdiscourse.org/wp-content/u ... nFinal.pdf. But Runge really wants you to read his blog first, so the reader can get a perspective on the greater disagreement.

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 2519
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Runge on Porter on Tense

Post by Stephen Carlson » August 17th, 2013, 12:14 pm

In a follow-up post, Steve lays out the following areas of consensus:
Well folks, I am here to tell you that this is not really the case. Regardless of the hype, there is actually quite a bit more consensus on these issues than you might think. If you like Porter’s taxonomy then we have something in common; I like it too. Here is what I mean:
  1. Greek tense-forms convey perfective, imperfective, or a third kind of tense/aspect.
  2. The aspects are present in every mood, whereas tense (“spatial proximity/remoteness” for you timeless folks) is only found in the indicative mood.
  3. The aorist conveys perfective aspect, the present and imperfect convey imperfective aspect, and the perfect and pluperfect convey a third thing. Porter calls it stative aspect, which I can live with.
I'm basically fine with this, but I'd call the aspect of the perfect, well, perfect.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

MAubrey
Posts: 799
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 8:52 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: Runge on Porter on Tense

Post by MAubrey » August 17th, 2013, 3:13 pm

Stephen Carlson wrote:I'm basically fine with this, but I'd call the aspect of the perfect, well, perfect.
+1
Mike Aubrey, Linguist
Koine-Greek.com

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests