Comments on: Project for 2009 http://www.ntdiscourse.org/2009/01/project-for-2009/ Removing the mystery from discourse grammar Mon, 02 Aug 2010 02:41:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Steve Runge http://www.ntdiscourse.org/2009/01/project-for-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-162 Steve Runge Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:38:09 +0000 http://www.ntdiscourse.org/?p=362#comment-162 Rod, this just means I will engage you on Mark and aspect, but will not touch the Mac issue. I do not hold it against people, and in fact I may be converted some day. All things are possible in Christ, right? I reference your work in my next post set for the weekend. Rod, this just means I will engage you on Mark and aspect, but will not touch the Mac issue. I do not hold it against people, and in fact I may be converted some day. All things are possible in Christ, right? I reference your work in my next post set for the weekend.

]]> By: Rod Decker http://www.ntdiscourse.org/2009/01/project-for-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-161 Rod Decker Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:33:40 +0000 http://www.ntdiscourse.org/?p=362#comment-161 Hmmm. I'm a Mac user who has published on verbal aspect (in Mark, no less!). So where does that leave me? :) Interested in your project at least. (Does it ameliorate my situation if I have an old Pentium box that dual boots Win95 and Ubuntu?) BTW, the JETS article was good on review of lit., but not as good in analyzing the text; sort of pettered out before the article was finished. RD Hmmm. I’m a Mac user who has published on verbal aspect (in Mark, no less!). So where does that leave me? :) Interested in your project at least. (Does it ameliorate my situation if I have an old Pentium box that dual boots Win95 and Ubuntu?)

BTW, the JETS article was good on review of lit., but not as good in analyzing the text; sort of pettered out before the article was finished.

RD

]]> By: Con Campbell http://www.ntdiscourse.org/2009/01/project-for-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-160 Con Campbell Thu, 01 Jan 2009 16:45:46 +0000 http://www.ntdiscourse.org/?p=362#comment-160 Sounds good Steve! I completely concur with your sensitivity to the issue of idiolect in relation to this matter. I look forward to your results. Con Sounds good Steve! I completely concur with your sensitivity to the issue of idiolect in relation to this matter. I look forward to your results.

Con

]]>