Is Verbal Aspect a Prominence Indicator? 11 The main verb employed at this climactic juncture, however, is the aorist συνέκλεισαν (v. 6). Given the discourse preponderance upon this event, it is unlikely that “no attention is being drawn to it”, as Porter’s proposal suggests. Furthermore, the so called “frontground” tense is used by Luke to report the backgrounded introductory details (5,1-2). It would seem that Luke felt that the perfect tense was a legitimate choice for do- cumenting the initial situation. Healing a Leper (5,12-16) The cleansing of the leper is widely recognised as a healing story34, so the high point of the pericope would seem to be v. 13. Luke confirms this by drawing additional attention to the miracle by noting its instan- taneous nature (εὐθέως). However, the tense that Luke uses to report the departure of the leprosy is aorist (ἀπῆλθεν). Once again it is highly unlikely that Luke is drawing no attention to the climactic resolution of this socially ostracizing complicating action. Healing a paralytic (5,17-26) This account is particularly interesting in the light of Porter’s propo- sal since all three verbal aspects are scattered throughout the discourse. Verse 17, for example, sets the scene for the paralytic’s healing, yet this introductory material is reported with perfective (ἐγένετο), imperfective (ἦν διδάσκων) and stative (ἦσαν ἐληλυθότες) aspects. Nolland has ob- served that “Luke uses periphrastic tenses (ἦν διδάσκων [‘was teaching’], ἦσαν καθήμενοι [‘were seated’], ἦσαν ἐληλυθότες [‘had come’]) to set the background for the action of the story”35. This certainly seems to be the case here, yet these constructions express imperfective and stative aspects, Porter’s foreground and frontground aspects. As with many of these stories there seems to be a mixture of forms. In this instance both pronouncement (5,20.23-24) and miracle (5,25) can be discerned36. But, in view of the fronted παραχρῆμα (v. 25) and the repetition that each of Jesus’ instructions came to pass; it seems natural to consider the miracle itself as the climactic point of the story. The key actions, however, are reported with the aorist tense forms ἀναστάς ... ἄρας ... ἀπῆλθεν (v. 25). Porter’s proposal would suggest that, in relation to ἀναστάς ... ἄρας ... ἀπῆλθεν, Luke is highlighting κατέκειτο and δοξάζων. But in view of the Bultmann, History, 212; I.H. Marshall, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids 1979) 206; 34 Fitzmyer, Luke, 1:572; Bock, Luke, 1:470. J. Nolland, Luke 1-9:20; 9:21-18:34; 18:35-24:53 (Dallas 1989-93) 1:233. 35 See Bock, Luke, 1:470. 36