Francis G.H. Pang, «Aspect, Aktionsart, and Abduction: Future Tense in the New Testament», Vol. 23 (2010) 129-159
This study examines the treatment of the Future tense among the major contributions in the discussion of verbal aspect in the Greek of the New Testament. It provides a brief comparative summary of the major works in the past fifty years, focusing on the distinction between aspect and Aktionsart on the one hand, and the kind of logical reasoning used by each proposal on the other. It shows that the neutrality of the method is best expressed in an abductive approach and points out the need of clarifying the nature and the role of Aktionsart in aspect studies.
140 Francis G. H. Pang
Aspect
Tense Imperfective Perfective Unmarked
Past Imperfect Pluperfect
Present Perfect
Future Future
Unmarked Present Aorist
2.5 Constantine R. Campbell (2007)
The latest contribution to the discussion of Greek verbal aspect is the
recent work of Constantine Campbell. His definition of aspect, much like
the others, focuses on the opposition between the internal and external
portrayal of an action58. Aspect and Aktionsart is carefully distinct in
Campbell’s work. Following Bache, several distinctions are made: whereas
aspect is regarded as primarily (not entirely) subjective, Aktionsart is
regarded as primarily (not entirely) objective; whereas aspect is a semantic
category, Aktionsart a pragmatic category; whereas aspect concerns the
perspective of the speaker on an action, Aktionsart concerns how the
nature of an action can be objectively determined59. Campbell also adopts
the principle of cancelability to distinguish semantic values (aspect) from
pragmatic implicature (Aktionsart)60.
Like Porter and Fanning, Campbell regards Greek grammatical aspect
as equipollent aspectual opposition rather than privative opposition. He
did not describe his aspectual system at the outset, claiming that it is
rather difficult to choose whether there are two aspects (Fanning, Olsen)
or three (Porter and Decker). He contends that the key to the decision is
to figure out the aspect of the Perfect and Pluperfect forms. He argues that
an inductive/bottom-up approach is preferable, from which the aspect
of the Perfect “may be recognized from the patterns evident within text
rather than imposed upon it deductively”61.
Campbell points out that those who reject a temporal understanding
of the verb may prefer the concept of remoteness to distinguish the
two imperfective tense-forms (Present and Imperfect)62. Remoteness
58
Formally, he starts his work with the following: “Verbal aspect refers to the manner
in which verbs are used to view an action or state. An author/speaker will portray an event
either from the inside, as though it is seen as unfolding, or from the outside, as though it is
seen as a whole”. Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 1.
59
Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 10-11.
60
Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 26-7.
61
Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 29-30.
62
He cites Decker as an example. Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 15.