Search

This monograph on biblical linguistics is a highly specialized, pragmatic investigation of the controversial question of'foregrounding'-the deviation from some norm or convention-in Old Testament narratives. The author presents and examines the two main sources of pragmatic foregrounding: events or states deviating from well-established schemata, structures of reader expectation that can be manipulated by the narrator to highlight specific'chunks'of discourse; and evaluative devices, which are used by the narrator to indicate to the reader the point of the story and direct its interpretation. Cotrozzi critiques the particular evaluative device known as the'historic present', a narrative strategy that employs the present tense to describe past event. He tests two main theories that support this device by using a cross-linguistic model of the historical present drawing upon a variety of languages. Cotrozzi ultimately refutes these theories with a thorough examination and detailed refutation. He concludes with a study of a particular Hebraic verb as a particular marker of represented perception, a technique whereby the character's perceptions are expressed directly from its point of view.

This study of the language of Acts is based on M. A. K. Halliday's functional grammar, which offers a theory based on linguistic choices and the effects they have on readers or hearers. Interacting with selected interpretations from, among others, C.K. Barrett, Ben C. Witherington, Jerome Neyrey, Jacob Jervell and John Lentz, Martín-Asensio argues that transitivity ('who does what to whom') emerges as a key factor in the foregrounding scheme of Acts, and this analysis offers a linguistically based perspective on Luke's overall concern to underline the supremacy of the divine will on the stage of human affairs.

This study breaks new ground in describing how various linguistic and pragmatic mechanisms affect both the form of the narrative clause and the arrangement of the grammatical elements. The various possible forms that a narrative clause can take are classified in terms of their'topic-comment'and'focus-presupposition', and it is argued that the way in which these are articulated dictates the word order in the clause. The outcome of the study demonstrates that the traditional binary distinction between foreground and background, based purely on verb forms, is inadequate. A new model is offered showing how foregrounding is achieved by exploiting cognitive structures or by using specific evaluative devices.