Prominence and Markedness in New Testament Discourse 21 Another non-active mood-form occurs in the next verse (v. 23), εὐαγγελίζεται. This is part of a statement that others have made about Paul, that he used to persecute the faith, but is now “preaching” it. There have been a number of times already that the word εὐαγγελίζω has been emphasized, and Paul uses a mood-form here to bring it to foreground as well—it has also been noted above that the present tense-form causes it to be foreground material. C. Gal 2,1–10 1) Verbal aspect. Paul’s discourse continues in 2,1 with another temporal marker (ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν), this time fourteen years having passed. The subject matter returns to his travels, this time back to Jerusalem (he has not been there for fourteen years) with Barnabas and Titus. Both verbs in this verse, ἀνέβην and συνπαραλαβών, are in the aorist tense-form (perfective aspect) and are background material. In v. 2, Paul explains his reason for going to Jerusalem, still using an aorist tense-form (ἀνέβην): because of a revelation (it is not explicitly stated who that revelation was to, but it was probably a revelation Paul received). He states that he went there and explained (ἀνεθέμην; aorist tense-form) to them the gospel. Then, Paul’s discourse regarding the gospel contains more foreground material, as he states that he preaches (κηρύσσω; present tense-form/imperfective aspect) to the Gentiles. He states that he told them privately (κατ’ ἰδίαν) to reputable people (τοῖς δοκοῦσιν), remaining with the present tense-form (imperfective aspect) for the participle. What is interesting is the final clause of this sentence, where Paul states that he did this to ensure he was not running in vain; he repeats the same word twice but in different tense-forms (τρέχω ἢ ἔδραμον; present and aorist tense-forms, respectively). This makes “running” to be both background and foreground material. And the shift to the perfective aspect (aorist tense-form) coheres with the next verse. Those who advocate a temporal feature to the Greek verbal system may interpret this as Paul referring to “running” now in the present and also in the past. Those who take an Aktionsart view may interpret this to as Paul referring to running continually and also singularly. However, this phrase is made better sense with an aspectual view, taking this to mean that Paul conveys here a viewpoint shift with the two words. The first word communicates his “running” imperfectively, with the viewpoint as internal and immediate, while the second word provides an alternative viewpoint to a perfective aspect, the “running” as a complete action without regard to its progress or time. In other words, with the use of both imperfective and perfective aspects, Paul wants to communicate that his “running,” both his immediate running and the totality of his