Verbal Aspect and Discourse Prominence in the Visionary Scenes of Revelation (5:1-14; 7:9-17)
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
One of the interpretive challenges of the book of Revelation is its apparent grammatical irregularities. This paper focuses on the frequent switching between the major Greek tenses (aorist, present, imperfect, and future) in John’s visionary scenes, among other concerns pertaining to the Greek language of Revelation. John’s use of Greek tenses is inconsistent with the conventional understanding of Greek tenses. The most common approach to this grammatical solecism in Revelation is to suggest the Semitic influence. The supposed Semitic influence lies in the assumption that the Greek tenses are based on a temporal system. After the works of Stanley E. Porter and Buist M. Fanning, who argued for verbal aspect theory and discourse prominence, a linguistic approach is emerging as an alternative option to solve the grammatical irregularities in Revelation. This paper examines the various tense forms in Revelation 5:1-14 and 7:9-17 in terms of the verbal aspect theory and discourse prominence. My observation of Rev 5:1:14 and 7:9-17 shows largely consistent results based on verbal aspect theory and discourse prominence, although the various tense forms sometimes reflect John’s dependence on the LXX. First, the aorist tense verb provides background information to what follows as an unmarked form, and it moves the story forward. Second, the present tense is used against the aorist in two ways: 1) as a forward-pointing device (a speech orienter), and 2) to foreground material in a more marked way than the imperfect. Third, the imperfect tense, against the background aorist, is used to provide an emphasis on the event or feature by bringing the event foreground. Fourth, the perfect/pluperfect tense is used to draw attention on the elements of the discourse in order to bring them to the frontground.
Abstract
One of the interpretive challenges of the book of Revelation is its apparent grammatical irregularities. This paper focuses on the frequent switching between the major Greek tenses (aorist, present, imperfect, and future) in John’s visionary scenes, among other concerns pertaining to the Greek language of Revelation. John’s use of Greek tenses is inconsistent with the conventional understanding of Greek tenses. The most common approach to this grammatical solecism in Revelation is to suggest the Semitic influence. The supposed Semitic influence lies in the assumption that the Greek tenses are based on a temporal system. After the works of Stanley E. Porter and Buist M. Fanning, who argued for verbal aspect theory and discourse prominence, a linguistic approach is emerging as an alternative option to solve the grammatical irregularities in Revelation. This paper examines the various tense forms in Revelation 5:1-14 and 7:9-17 in terms of the verbal aspect theory and discourse prominence. My observation of Rev 5:1:14 and 7:9-17 shows largely consistent results based on verbal aspect theory and discourse prominence, although the various tense forms sometimes reflect John’s dependence on the LXX. First, the aorist tense verb provides background information to what follows as an unmarked form, and it moves the story forward. Second, the present tense is used against the aorist in two ways: 1) as a forward-pointing device (a speech orienter), and 2) to foreground material in a more marked way than the imperfect. Third, the imperfect tense, against the background aorist, is used to provide an emphasis on the event or feature by bringing the event foreground. Fourth, the perfect/pluperfect tense is used to draw attention on the elements of the discourse in order to bring them to the frontground.