This is a very good point, and the primary reason I chose to work on the
aspectual value of the future tense in my just completed thesis. For what
it's worth (and I don't want to be seen as pushing my own barrow), my
conclusion, based on a comparison with the usage of the aorist, is that the
future shares the same aspectual value as the aorist. As far as I could
tell from my research, no-one has done any substantial work on the aspect
of the future. The very fact that Fanning only gave it a few pages before
dismissing it as "non-aspectual" prompted me to delve deeper. I think
Clayton's point is a good one.
Regards,
M.
-----
Rev. Mark B. O'Brien Grad. Student, Dallas Theological Seminary
3909 Swiss Ave #1092 Adj. Prof., Dallas Christian College
Dallas, TX 75204
markus@upnaway.com
obrienmb@iName.com
obrienmb@hotmail.com