23 Narrative Structure and Verbal Aspect Choice in Luke the diegetic mode, with its attendant principles for aspect choice of fore- grounding and backgrounding. The only seeming exceptions to this general rule of perfective forms describing the sequence of “backbone” narrative events are the cases of imperfectives in vv. 1-2 and in v. 15. The first exception was dealt with in detail above as the model for aspectual cadence. The second can be simi- larly explained. V. 14 has an aorist verb of motion, π στρεψεν, which serves as the initial marker of an aspectual cadence. This verb, along with the prepositional phrase ε ς τ ν Γαλιλα αν, signals a change of setting of the narrative for the following pericope that is in keeping with the cadential/boundary-marking verbal aspect use of vv. 14-15. Then in v. 15, two imperfectives portray the action of Jesus internally, in the mimetic mode. These imperfective verbs, due to their markedness in comparison with the more usual perfectives, heighten the discourse in order to draw attention to the change of pericope and to give structure to the surround- ing narrative. In v. 16, the perfective driven discourse returns with λθεν and the transition is complete. This two-part cadence, just as the one before of vv. 1-2, acts as a dual marker, ending one section and beginning another. The backward referring features of it, which serve as a sort of summary, can be seen in v. 14a’s echoes of the preceding cadence of vv. 1-2: Jesus “turns” ( π στρεψεν – the identical verb and form) to a new place “in the spirit” or “in the power of the spirit” ( ν τ πνε ματι / ν...το πνε ματος). The forward looking features of the cadence are v. 14a’s pointing to a new set- ting (ε ς τ ν Γαλιλα αν) and v. 15’s imperfective verbs, which introduce plot themes of the following section: “teaching” ( δ δασκεν) and “being praised” (δοξαζ μενος), or, as it will unfold in the next pericope, notably not “being praised”. The imperfective aspect of these actions presents them as unfolding before the audience’s eyes in such a way that they indi- cate a continuance of the actions past the precise moment in the narrative and into the next pericope. Through this “vivid”, subtly future-referring mode of discourse, Luke invites his audience to imagine from within the realization of the events before he records them as fully having happened. Thus again, Luke uses a two-part cadential formula of a historical aorist (of motion) and “vivid” imperfective(s) to create a fluid boundary of the discourse that reaches both forward and backward61. 61 The special narratological nature of this cadence (14-15) has been noted by J. A. Fitzmeyer, who describes it as a kind of “summary” – a compositional feature of which Luke is fond (The Gospel According to Luke (I–IX) (AB 28; Garden City 1981) I, 522). He cites also as another example 4,31-32, which will be dealt with below, also as a cadential formula.