<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More on background, foreground and genre</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ntdiscourse.org/2010/03/more-on-background-foreground-and-genre/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ntdiscourse.org/2010/03/more-on-background-foreground-and-genre/</link>
	<description>Removing the mystery from discourse grammar</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 01:31:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: On the need for claiming a third plane of discourse in Greek &#124; NT Discourse</title>
		<link>http://www.ntdiscourse.org/2010/03/more-on-background-foreground-and-genre/comment-page-1/#comment-1479</link>
		<dc:creator>On the need for claiming a third plane of discourse in Greek &#124; NT Discourse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Apr 2010 21:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ntdiscourse.org/?p=1163#comment-1479</guid>
		<description>[...] His claim that each verbal aspect always communicates a certain level of prominence&#8211;regardless of genre&#8211;lacks any support from the linguistic literature he cites. It may be valid, but it will require Porter to either provide other linguistic literature to support his claim, or else argumentation to justify such a drastic departure from the linguistic literature. See posts one, two and three. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] His claim that each verbal aspect always communicates a certain level of prominence&#8211;regardless of genre&#8211;lacks any support from the linguistic literature he cites. It may be valid, but it will require Porter to either provide other linguistic literature to support his claim, or else argumentation to justify such a drastic departure from the linguistic literature. See posts one, two and three. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

