Stanley E. Porter and Matthew Brook O’Donnell 24 as the ratios of the other sub-corpora. The preference for –perfective forms in these letters might be explained by the exhortative function of a letter. Further research might examine the distribution of various aspectual forms according to the letter form 82. The FINITENESS system (system 7) exhibits a weak equiprobable distribution for the entire New Testament (0.66/0.34). The Johannine Writings, at 0.81/0.19, a skewed distribution, is the only examined sub-corpus in this system to vary great- ly from this ratio. These writings have noticeably fewer –finite forms (participles and infinitives) than +finite forms. Again, more detailed analysis is required to explain this variance, but it might be a function of Johnannine style. In system 10, PARTICIPATION, the probability for the whole of the New Testament is equiprobable that ±included would be selected (0.65/0.35) but in the Synoptic Gospels and Acts, it is slightly more probable that –included rather than +included would be selected (0.72/0.28), a slightly skewed distribution. This is probably best explained by the narrative nature of this material and its subse- quent dependence upon third person forms. In contrast, the Pauline Letters exhibit a clear equiprobable distribution for this system (0.48/0.52). Again, this may be explained by the genre of the mate- rial—letters have a relatively higher use of first and second person forms than do narratives. Similar comments can be made regarding the use of the first and second person as indicated by system 11, DIRECTION. In the whole New Testament, the system is equiprobable (0.55/0.45), but in the Synoptic Gospels and Acts the ratio is closer to the divide between skewed and equiprobable at 0.65/0.35, although still within the equiprobable distribution. In system 13, an ATTITUDE sub-system (NON- ASSERTION), the system is of equiprobable distribution in the whole of the New Testament (a relatively equal number of imperative and sub- junctive/optative forms) but ambiguous for the Johannine writings (0.70/0.30). These are the only possible departures within various sub- corpora of the New Testament from the probabilities for the whole of the New Testament. In fact, in only two (systems 7 and 10) is there a clear changing of category of distribution (we discount system 5, CAU- SALITY1, since the system and all of its sub-corpora, except for the Johannine Writings, are very close in their distributions, even if they fall on either side of the dividing line between skewed and equiprobable). In the light of the probabilities of the systems involved, the departures noted above seem understandable, and do not jeopardize the results in any way. 82 Preliminary attempts along these lines have been made by Reed, Discourse Analysis of Philippians; and S.E. Porter and M.B. O’Donnell, «Semantics and Patterns of Argumentation in the Book of Romans: Definitions, Proposals, Data and Experiments,» in S.E. Porter (ed.), Diglossia and Other Topics in New Testament Linguistics ( JSNTSup, 193; SNTG, 6; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000, pp. 154-204).