20 David I. Yoon tense-form of the participle and is to be considered foreground material73. He continues in the next verse (v. 23) with another imperfective periphrastic construction (ἀκούοντες ἦσαν): they were hearing about Paul’s former way of persecuting contrasted with his present way of preaching. Not only is there another imperfective periphrastic construction here, Paul uses two present tense-forms (imperative aspect) in relaying what they are saying about him: ὁ διώκων (“persecutes”) and εὐαγγελίζεται (“preaches”). To clarify, according to verbal aspect theory, the aspectual choice here is Paul’s, his desire to convey an imperfective aspect for what they have heard about him. This results in Paul highlighting this part of the discourse. The last verb in this verse, ἐπόρθει (imperfective aspect, imperfect tense-form), continues to refer to what they have heard about him, that he used to destroy the faith that he now preached. In the final verse (v. 24) in this section, Paul uses an imperfect tense-form (imperfective aspect), ἐδόξαζον, to describe the response of those in Syria and Cilicia to Paul’s conversion: they gave glory to God. So in this section, Paul uses the perfective aspect to continue describing his travels. He particularly emphasizes the brief statement that he is telling the truth in all this (v. 20) through the imperfective aspect. And he also uses the imperfective aspect to communicate what others have heard/said about his post-conversion and consequent ministry. This includes the statement that they gave glory to God because of Paul and his conversion. 2) Mood. There are no non-indicative moods in this section. 3) Voice. The first occurrence of a non-active voice-form is in v. 20, a clause that is already prominent due to the imperfective aspect it is characterized by (see above). Paul asserts that everything he has said thus far is true and appeals to God that he does not lie (ψεύδομαι). However, since no separate active or passive voice-form exists for ψεύδομαι, whether or not it has a prominent function in this text must be reconsidered. In other words, prominence cannot be based on the voice-form of ψεύδομαι since no other voice-forms exist for it, although it should still be considered prominent because of other reason, e.g., its aspectual feature (see above). The next non-active voice-form occurs in v. 22, when Paul discusses his travels to Syria and Cilicia, being ἀγνοούμενος (“unknown”) to those who were there. By use of the passive voice-form, Paul keeps the focus of the subject on himself. The point is that he was unknown, not that others did not know him; since he is discussing his relatively low profile during these days, it makes sense to describe himself as unknown. 73 One could also argue the periphrastic construction is prominent as well, but since it was not included in my criteria for prominence above as with markers of attention (see above), I have relegated it to this footnote.