368 David J. Armitage designations (1st, 2nd etc.), albeit incorporating the alterations in the categories shown above (11). These designations are likewise retained here. 2. Comparison of semantics of first and third class conditions The relative functions of first and third class conditional structures are of particular interest here, since it is these which occur in Gal 1,8-9. First and third class conditions are distinguished primarily by mood, the former using the indicative and the latter the subjunctive. Porter has proposed that the indicative is the mood of “assertion” whilst the subjunctive (together with the optative and imperative) expresses “projection”. By “assertion”, he refers to the portrayal of an action or state as “the condition of reality” (12). This has no necessary correspondence to reality (since the speaker may be misinformed) nor to the speaker’s beliefs (since they may be lying) (13). “Projection” on the other hand, involves portrayal for examination of “a projected realm which may at some time exist, or may even now exist” (14). Dana and Mantey go as far as to suggest that the subjunctive “assumes unreality” (15). It is perhaps better to think of the subjunctive (and the other moods of “projection”) as assuming that what they portray is, at the time of speaking, not available for specific verification. The statement may eventually prove to have been true or untrue, but the use of the subjunctive leaves this undetermined (16). There are several possible reasons for the non-verifiability of statements using the subjunctive. Contingency associated with futurity is the most obvious, but simple lack of access to information about events in progress might necessitate use of a mood of projection. If a statement is general or hypothetical, this also implies that at the time of speaking specific verification is not possible. Since the subjunctive implies indeterminacy it cannot express assertion. The indicative, however, may include elements of projection in its semantic field. For (11) PORTER, Idioms of the Greek New Testament, Sheffield 1992, 254-267. (12) PORTER, Idioms, 51. (13) PORTER, Idioms, 51. See also A.T. ROBERTSON A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (New York 31919) 915. (14) PORTER, Idioms, 56. (15) DANA – MANTEY, Manual Grammar, 170. (16) ROBERTSON, Grammar, 915, notes that “most untruths are in the indicative mode”. Moods of “projection” do not lend themselves to lying because the situation portrayed is not asserted one way or the other.