Community hub
Recent from talks
Contribute something
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Parataxis
View on Wikipedia | This article needs additional citations for verification. (March 2011) |
Parataxis (from Greek: παράταξις, "act of placing side by side"; from παρα, para "beside" + τάξις, táxis "arrangement") is a literary technique in writing or speaking that favors short, simple sentences without conjunctions, or sentences coordinated without the use of subordinating conjunctions.[1][2] It contrasts with syntaxis and hypotaxis.
It is also used to describe a technique in poetry in which two images or fragments, usually starkly dissimilar images or fragments, are juxtaposed without a clear connection.[3] Readers are then left to make their own connections implied by the paratactic syntax. Ezra Pound, in his adaptation of Chinese and Japanese poetry, made the stark juxtaposition of images an important part of English-language poetry.[4]
Etymology
[edit]Edward Parmelee Morris wrote in 1901 that the term was introduced into linguistics by Friedrich Thiersch in his Greek Grammar (1831). The term has remained unchanged, but the concept of parataxis has expanded.[5]
History
[edit]The term "parataxis" is a modern invention, but the paratactic style itself goes back to the classical age. Parataxis distinguished itself as a rhetorical style during the fourth and fifth century B.C.E. because of the development of periodic methods used by orators. Ancient peoples believed these rhetorical styles originated in fifth century Sicily, where Corax and Tisias wrote books about new public speaking styles. It is believed these new methods were brought to Athens in 427 B.C. by Gorgias. After Gorgias' visit to Athens, numerous handbooks were written about new styles of rhetoric. These handbooks have not survived the years, but it is known that they classified rhetorical styles, so it is assumed that the distinction between periodic syntax and more traditional techniques were made.[6]
In the Rhetoric, Aristotle makes the earliest formal distinction between periodic syntax and older methods. He distinguishes between "lexis eiromene" and "lexis katestrammene". "Eiromene" means "to fasten together in rows" or "to string". Aristotle relates the term to the connection of clauses in a statement. Statements along these lines are referred to as unlimited, because the people listening to the speaker do not know how the sentence will end based on its beginning. Aristotle's section in his book regarding these styles of statements is seen today as the description of parataxis and is used to distinguish between Greek prose and periodic and paratactic techniques. Aristotle mentions that this style of writing had been used frequently at other times, but was hardly in use during his own time.[6]
Description
[edit]Parataxis can most simply be described as and compared to the way children speak. They speak their ideas as they come to them, one after the other, without logically connecting the ideas together.[7] Parataxis may use commas, semi-colons, and periods to force juxtaposition, but it can also replace these punctuation marks with "and" to seamlessly string the speech or written piece together and present the words as each being equally important. Works utilizing parataxis as a style may emit a staccato rhythm. This can result in phrases with words that don't seem to go together at all.[8] An example of this is Julius Caesar's phrase "Veni, vidi, vici" or, "I came, I saw, I conquered".
Parataxis can also be a pile of fast-moving ideas with a lack of or insistent rhythm. An example of this form of parataxis comes from the Bible. It says, "And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light."[8]
Meaning
[edit]Parataxis may be considered from three points of view:
- the outer expression of internal psychological features of experience,
- the linguistic means to express the paratactic relation,
- and the resulting sentence structure.
The underlying idea is that, in a connected discourse, complete independence among the consecutive sentences is very rare. This observation is captured in the expression "train of thought".[5] Consider the following:
- The sun was shining brightly. We went for a walk.
- The sun was shining brightly; we went for a walk.
- The sun was shining brightly, and we went for a walk.
- The sun was shining brightly, so we went for a walk.
In the first example, the two sentences are independent expressions, while in the last example they are dependent. However, the connection of thought in the first examples is just as plausible as in the last ones, where it is explicitly expressed via the syntax of subordination.
In spoken language, this continuance from sentence to sentence is supported by intonation and timing (rhythm, pause). While details may differ among different languages and cultures, generally similar musicality and shortness of pauses indicate the continuation, while the change of tone and longer pause generally indicate the transition to another connected group of ideas.
In storytelling, storytellers utilize paratactic or syntactic styles. Parataxis is common among oral storytellers. When telling a story orally, there are many inconsistencies because of the lack of a written-down, word-for-word, multiply-checked draft. However, audiences do not set out to compare the stories word for word and are only interested in the main points of the story.[7]
Parataxis versus hypotaxis
[edit]Parataxis roughly translates to "arranging side by side", while hypotaxis translates to "arranging under". Parataxis omits subordinating conjunctions while hypotaxis utilizes terms such as "when", "although", and "after". Parataxis juxtaposes ideas and thoughts, while hypotaxis subordinates ideas to one another and shows both juxtaposition, transition and connection. Thus, hypotaxis can show relationships of cause and effect, chronology, and comparison.[8]
Recent studies show that the Zamucoan languages are characterized by a rare syntactic configuration which is called para-hypotaxis, where coordination and subordination are used simultaneously to connect clauses (Bertinetto & Ciucci 2012).[9]
Examples
[edit]Literature
[edit]An example is Mr. Jingle's speech in Chapter 2 of The Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens.
"Come along, then," said he of the green coat, lugging Mr. Pickwick after him by main force, and talking the whole way. "Here, No. 924, take your fare, and take yourself off—respectable gentleman—know him well—none of your nonsense—this way, sir—where's your friends?—all a mistake, I see—never mind—accidents will happen—best regulated families—never say die—down upon your luck—Pull him UP—Put that in his pipe—like the flavour—damned rascals." And with a lengthened string of similar broken sentences, delivered with extraordinary volubility, the stranger led the way to the traveller's waiting-room, whither he was closely followed by Mr. Pickwick and his disciples.
Samuel Beckett's opening to his monologue "Not I" is another example.
Mouth: .... out ... into this world ... this world ... tiny little thing ... before its time ... in a godfor– ... what? .. girl? .. yes ... tiny little girl ... into this ... out into this ... before her time ... godforsaken hole called ... called ... no matter ... parents unknown ... unheard of ... he having vanished ... thin air ... no sooner buttoned up his breeches ... she similarly ... eight months later ... almost to the tick ... so no love ... spared that ... no love such as normally vented on the ... speechless infant ... in the home ... no ... nor indeed for that matter any of any kind ... no love of any kind ... at any subsequent stage ...
Greek
[edit]In What Is Called Thinking?, Martin Heidegger addresses the paratactic nature of Classical Greek texts. Through analyzing a fragment from Parmenides (typically translated "One should both say and think that Being is") Heidegger argues that modern syntactic translations of paratactic Greek texts often leave the meaning obscured. He suggests multiple translations of the fragment that may more closely resemble the paratactic Greek original. These include "needful : the saying also thinking too : being : to be," and "Useful is the letting lie before us, the taking-to-heart, too: beings in Being." Heidegger points to a modern linguistic bias that places paratactic language beneath syntactic language; paratactic language is often viewed as "child-like" or "primitive". He argues that a paratactic sentence a child might say, such as "dog, woof-woof, bad" is not inherently less meaningful than its syntactic equivalent, like "dogs bark and can be dangerous."[10]
Cultural theory
[edit]The term parataxis has also been appropriated by some[who?] cultural theorists to describe certain works of art or "cultural texts" in which a series of scenes or elements are presented side by side in no particular order or hierarchy. Examples might range from the collages of the dadaists and Robert Rauschenberg to many contemporary music videos. The traditional polyptych constitutes another example.
Notes
[edit]- ^ Fish, Stanley (2011), How to Write a Sentence, p. 62, ISBN 978-0-06-184054-8
- ^ Butler, Christopher (2003), Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-Functional Theories. Part 2: From clause to discourse and beyond, Studies in Language, vol. 64, John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 260–261, doi:10.1075/slcs.64, ISBN 9781588113580
- ^ "Parataxis Examples and Definition", Literary Devices, 5 May 2016, retrieved 16 April 2020
- ^ "The Cantos", Academy of American Poets, retrieved 16 April 2020
- ^ a b Morris, Edward Parmelee (1901), "Parataxis", On Principles and Methods in Latin Syntax, C. Scribner's Sons, pp. 113–149.
- ^ a b Towle, John Dennis (1978), Parataxis and organization in the Histories (PhD), University of Washington, OCLC 919787204
- ^ a b Thury, Eva M. (2017), Introduction to mythology: Contemporary approaches to classical and world myths, ISBN 9780190262983, OCLC 946109909
- ^ a b c Hale, Constance (7 August 2013), "There's Parataxis, and Then There's Hypotaxis", The Chronicle of Higher Education Blogs: Lingua Franca, archived from the original on 18 March 2015
- ^ Bertinetto, Pier Marco (2009). Ayoreo (Zamuco). A grammatical sketch. Quaderni del laboratorio di Linguistica 8 n.s. (Online version: <http://linguistica.sns.it/QLL/QLL09.htm>).
- ^ Heidegger, Martin (1968). What is called thinking?. Translated by Gray, J. Glenn. New York: HarperPerennial. pp. 182–184. ISBN 0-06-090528-X. OCLC 273314.
Parataxis
View on GrokipediaFundamentals
Definition
Parataxis is a syntactic and stylistic device in which clauses or phrases are placed side by side and coordinated, with or without coordinating conjunctions, but without subordinating conjunctions, relying on juxtaposition or coordination to establish their connection.[8] This structure treats the elements as equal in status, avoiding hierarchical subordination and allowing the reader or listener to infer relationships through context or proximity.[9] In contrast to hypotaxis, which employs explicit subordination to denote logical dependencies, parataxis emphasizes a non-subordinate arrangement that prioritizes immediacy and directness.[8] Core characteristics of parataxis include the equality of its clauses, which creates abrupt transitions between ideas, and an emphasis on rhythm and immediacy rather than a clear logical hierarchy.[9] This form often appears in basic syntactic constructions, such as simple sentences joined by commas, periods, or semicolons, as exemplified by the Latin phrase Veni, vidi, vici ("I came. I saw. I conquered."), where each clause stands independently to convey sequential action through parallelism.[9] The resulting rhythm can evoke a sense of piling ideas or fast-moving narrative, enhancing the stylistic impact in oral or written expression.[10] Semantically, parataxis generates implications such as ambiguity in clause relations, urgency through implied immediacy, or parallelism in meaning, all derived from inference rather than explicit linkages.[9] For instance, the absence of connectors can leave causal or temporal ties open to interpretation, fostering multiple possible readings while underscoring equal thematic weight among elements.[9] This approach heightens the device's effectiveness in conveying direct, unmediated experience.[9]Etymology
The term "parataxis" derives from the Ancient Greek word παράταξις (parátaxis), literally denoting the "act of placing side by side" or "arrangement," formed from the prefix παρά- (pará-, "beside" or "alongside") and the noun τάξις (táxis, "arrangement" or "order").[11][12] In its original classical context, parataxis referred to a military formation or general juxtaposition, but it later evolved to describe syntactic structures in linguistic analysis.[13] The modern linguistic sense of "parataxis" was first introduced in 1826 by the German philologist Friedrich Wilhelm Thiersch in his work on historical Greek grammar, where he contrasted it with "syntaxis" to denote coordinate rather than subordinate clause arrangements.[13] This usage marked a shift toward formal grammatical terminology, building on ancient rhetorical discussions of clause connections, such as those in Aristotle's Rhetoric, which analyzed non-subordinated styles without employing the precise term.[14] The term entered English linguistics in the mid-19th century, with the earliest known usage around 1842, often through translations and commentaries on classical texts that highlighted non-subordinate syntactic patterns.[15] In these contexts, parataxis specifically described the juxtaposition of clauses or phrases of equal status, without implying hierarchy. It is distinguished from "asyndeton," which refers to the deliberate omission of conjunctions in such sequences; parataxis may incorporate minimal coordinating conjunctions like "and" or "but," whereas asyndeton excludes them entirely.[16][2]Historical Development
Ancient Origins
Parataxis emerged prominently in ancient Greek literature through the Homeric epics of the 8th century BCE, particularly the Iliad, where it served as a structural device to replicate the rhythms of oral storytelling. In these works, paratactic constructions juxtapose independent clauses with coordinators like δέ (de), creating an additive, linear progression that mirrors the improvisational flow of spoken narrative. This style, characterized by repetitive and equal-weight clauses, facilitated memorization and audience engagement in performance contexts, as seen in passages like the opening of the Iliad (1.1–5), where sequential events build cumulatively without subordination.[17] By the 5th century BCE, parataxis influenced historical narrative in Herodotus' Histories, where it drove progression through juxtaposed events and diverse logoi (accounts) rather than hierarchical embedding. Herodotus employed paratactic chains of narrative units—ranging from political reports to ethnographic digressions—to preserve the multiplicity and potential unreliability of sources, compelling readers to navigate the text actively along an implied "path of inquiry." This approach, evident in sequences like the Lydian logos (1.6–94), emphasized juxtaposition over integration, reflecting a commitment to displaying the raw complexity of historical inquiry.[18] In the 4th century BCE, Aristotle analyzed parataxis in his Rhetoric (Book 3, chapter 12) as a stylistic choice suited to oratory, contrasting asyndetic (unconnected) parataxis with syndetic forms for achieving clarity and emphasis. He viewed the loose, paratactic style—reminiscent of earlier poetic traditions—as effective for building momentum in spoken discourse, though less refined than periodic structures, thereby establishing it as a deliberate tool for persuasive impact in public address.[14] Overall, parataxis in these ancient texts reflected broader Indo-European oral traditions, which favored linear, additive syntax over subordination to suit performative and mnemonic needs in pre-literate societies.[19]Evolution in Literature
In the medieval period, parataxis underwent a significant shift in Old English poetry, particularly in works like Beowulf (composed between the 8th and 11th centuries), where it facilitated rhythmic structures and caesura-based juxtapositions that echoed the oral traditions of Germanic storytelling. This technique allowed for a cumulative, additive style that emphasized heroic action and fate through independent clauses, mirroring the formulaic density of spoken verse performed in communal settings.[20] During the Renaissance, parataxis experienced a revival in English drama, notably in William Shakespeare's plays of the 16th and 17th centuries, which harnessed it to heighten dramatic intensity and immediacy. In soliloquies and dialogues, Shakespeare frequently employed short, piled clauses to convey urgency and psychological depth, as seen in the rapid succession of statements that propel character revelations and conflicts forward without subordinating elaboration. Building on foundational influences from ancient Greek models, this adaptation infused parataxis with a theatrical vitality suited to the stage.[21] The 19th-century Romantic movement further adapted parataxis to prioritize emotional authenticity and accessibility, evident in William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge's Lyrical Ballads (1798), which used it to mimic the simplicity and natural rhythms of everyday speech among common people. By juxtaposing plain clauses, the poets evoked a sense of organic flow and rustic immediacy, countering the ornate hypotaxis of neoclassical verse and aligning with their manifesto for poetry rooted in "the language really used by men."[22] In modernist literature, Ernest Hemingway refined parataxis through his "iceberg theory," prominently featured in The Sun Also Rises (1926), where terse, independent sentences omitted explicit connections to imply submerged emotional and thematic depths. This approach created a stark, objective surface that invited readers to infer unspoken tensions, such as the characters' disillusionment, through what was left unsaid. Extending into the 20th century, parataxis influenced stream-of-consciousness techniques in James Joyce's Ulysses (1922), where it blended with syntactic fragmentation to replicate the disjointed flow of psychological interiority, layering perceptions in a paratactic rush that captured the multiplicity of urban experience.[23]Structural and Semantic Analysis
Linguistic Characteristics
Parataxis is characterized by a grammatical structure that coordinates clauses or phrases of equal status without subordination, relying primarily on juxtaposition and punctuation such as commas, semicolons, or dashes to establish linkages rather than explicit subordinating conjunctions.[9] This approach contrasts with hierarchical embedding, favoring linear arrangements where each unit maintains syntactic independence, as seen in constructions like "Veni, vidi, vici," where temporal and logical relations are inferred from sequence alone.[24] While coordinating conjunctions like "and" or "or" may occasionally appear, the core mechanic emphasizes minimal connective apparatus to preserve clause autonomy.[25] Stylistically, parataxis generates a brisk pace by presenting ideas in rapid succession, promoting equality among elements and compelling readers to infer connections, which heightens vividness and immediacy in both prose and poetry.[25] This technique fosters a sense of spontaneity and directness, enhancing rhetorical emphasis through compression and parallelism, as in tricolon structures that build cumulative impact without explanatory elaboration.[26] In oral or written contexts, it underscores thematic equivalence, allowing for emphatic delivery that prioritizes experiential flow over analytical detail.[27] Phonetically and rhythmically, parataxis supports parallelism and anaphora, creating balanced cadences that improve oral readability and stress key repetitions for auditory emphasis.[25] The absence of subordinators enables smoother prosodic contours, often aligning with natural speech intonation patterns that facilitate memorability and performative power in recited forms.[24] Key variations include polysyndeton, an extension of parataxis that incorporates repeated coordinating conjunctions for intensified linkage and rhythmic buildup, such as in sequences emphasizing multiplicity.[9] In contrast, asyndeton represents pure omission of conjunctions, amplifying parataxis through stark juxtaposition to heighten drama or speed, distinguishing it as a subset focused on connective absence rather than minimal coordination.[24] Cognitively, parataxis demands holistic interpretation by eschewing hierarchical parsing, thereby reducing processing load in real-time comprehension and encouraging contextual inference over explicit guidance.[27] This structure aligns with spoken language dynamics, where linear clause presentation aids incremental integration of meaning without the demands of nested dependencies.[9]Comparison with Hypotaxis
Hypotaxis refers to the grammatical arrangement in which clauses or phrases are subordinated to one another, typically using conjunctions such as "because," "although," or "while" to establish hierarchical relationships and dependencies between elements.[28] In contrast to parataxis, which juxtaposes independent clauses of equal status without subordination, hypotaxis creates layered structures where subordinate clauses provide additional detail or qualification to a dominant main clause.[28] This structural distinction is fundamental in systemic-functional linguistics, where parataxis is denoted by numerical sequencing (e.g., 1 ^ 2 for equal linkage) and hypotaxis by alpha-beta notation (e.g., α ^ β for dominant-dependent relations).[28] Structurally, parataxis maintains equality among clauses, often relying on juxtaposition or simple coordinating conjunctions like "and" or "but," fostering a linear, non-hierarchical progression that mirrors spoken discourse.[29] Hypotaxis, however, imposes inequality through embedding, allowing for complex nesting that embeds subordinate ideas within the main clause, which is prevalent in formal written English where it accounts for over 70% of clause complexes in analytical texts.[28] These differences influence syntactic flexibility: paratactic constructions permit looser connections inferred from context, while hypotactic ones enforce explicit relational logic via grammatical markers.[30] Stylistically, parataxis enables brevity and rhythmic impact, producing a telegraphic or stream-like effect suitable for emphatic or narrative drive, whereas hypotaxis supports elaboration, creating balanced, orderly prose that unfolds logically through dependency.[31] In written genres like essays, hypotaxis enhances cohesion by guiding the reader through intricate arguments, demanding more interpretive effort but yielding precise flow; parataxis, by comparison, offers simplicity and immediacy, often evoking oral traditions' directness.[28] This contrast shapes authorial choices: parataxis for concise punch, hypotaxis for nuanced development. Interpretively, parataxis introduces ambiguity by leaving clause relations implicit, inviting readers to infer connections and potentially yielding multiple readings based on context or cultural knowledge.[30] Hypotaxis, conversely, directs interpretation through explicit subordination, providing clarity and reducing polysemy by hierarchically organizing meaning.[28] Such effects align with broader cognitive demands: paratactic ambiguity fosters holistic, associative understanding, while hypotactic guidance promotes analytical precision. Historically, parataxis predominated in early oral traditions and ancient texts due to its simplicity in performance and memory, preceding hypotaxis as languages evolved toward complex subordination.[29] A shift toward hypotactic dominance occurred with the rise of written analytical prose, particularly in 18th-century English literature, where it embodied virtues of balance, order, and rational elaboration in philosophical and narrative works.[31] This interplay reflects broader cultural transitions from communal, additive storytelling to individualistic, logical exposition, though empirical corpus analyses show genre-specific variations rather than a uniform diachronic progression.[32]Examples and Applications
In Literature
Parataxis has profoundly influenced literary narratives, particularly in the King James Version of the Bible (1611), where it structures the creation account in Genesis through additive clauses connected by "and," emphasizing sequential divine acts without subordination. For instance, Genesis 1:3 states, "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light," juxtaposing command and fulfillment to create a rhythmic, inexorable progression that mirrors the orderly emergence of the cosmos. This paratactic style fosters a sense of immediacy and universality, allowing readers to experience the narrative as a direct, unmediated sequence of events that builds cumulative power without interpretive hierarchy.[33] In 20th-century American prose, Cormac McCarthy employs parataxis in Blood Meridian (1985) to depict the stark, relentless violence of the frontier, using short, juxtaposed sentences that evoke a chaotic, indifferent landscape. A representative passage reads: "They rode on and the sun in the east flushed pale streaks of light and then a deeper run of color like blood seeping up in sudden reaches flaring planewise." This structure heightens tension by presenting actions and descriptions in flat succession, denying causal links and thereby underscoring the meaningless brutality of human endeavors amid vast, uncaring nature. McCarthy's technique thus amplifies the novel's thematic nihilism, where events unfold in brutal equality, much like the biblical additive style but inverted to convey horror rather than harmony.[34] Parataxis also features prominently in 19th-century poetry, as seen in Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass (1855), where catalog-like lists of images and experiences promote democratic inclusivity through side-by-side placement without conjunctions. In "I Hear America Singing," Whitman writes, "I hear America singing, the varied carols I hear, / Those of mechanics, each one singing his as it should be blithe and strong," piling occupations and voices in paratactic array to affirm equality among diverse lives. This form builds a sense of expansive universality, inviting readers to connect disparate elements into a collective whole, reflecting Whitman's vision of an interconnected, egalitarian America. The technique's additive rhythm evokes the pulse of a nation, prioritizing breadth over depth to celebrate multiplicity.[35] Beyond Western traditions, parataxis appears in Japanese haiku, where spatial juxtaposition of images creates evocative silences, as in Matsuo Bashō's famous 1686 poem: "Old pond— / a frog jumps in, / sound of water." This structure relies on paratactic placement to suggest deeper interconnections between stillness and sudden motion, embodying Zen principles of momentary enlightenment without explicit linkage.[36]In Rhetoric and Cultural Theory
In ancient Greek oratory, parataxis served as a rhetorical device to create persuasive rhythm and emphasis through the juxtaposition of independent clauses, as seen in Demosthenes' De Corona, where it structures arguments as building blocks for larger persuasive forms.[37] This technique allowed speakers to build momentum and urgency without subordinating ideas, aligning with the democratic assembly's need for direct, collective engagement. In modern rhetoric, parataxis appears in Martin Luther King Jr.'s 1963 "I Have a Dream" speech, particularly in the repetitive sequence "Let freedom ring from..." across multiple locations, which employs asyndetic parataxis to evoke rhythmic unity and shared aspiration without connective conjunctions.[38][39] In cultural theory, Walter Benjamin's 1936 essay "The Storyteller" critiques the decline of traditional storytelling, highlighting parataxis in folk tales as a marker of communal, non-hierarchical narrative that fosters collective experience over individualized interpretation. Benjamin argues that such paratactic forms, prevalent in oral traditions, allow stories to remain open and experiential, resisting the explanatory closure of modern novels and reflecting pre-capitalist social bonds.[40] Postmodern applications extend parataxis to visual media, as in Jean-Luc Godard's 1960 film Breathless, where jump cuts function as visual parataxis, juxtaposing shots without smooth transitions to fragment narrative continuity and underscore ideological disjunctions in consumer society.[41] This editing style disrupts classical Hollywood hypotaxis, mirroring the film's critique of alienated modernity through additive, non-subordinated images. In linguistic anthropology, parataxis characterizes storytelling in non-Indo-European languages like North Fork Mono (Nium), where additive clause structures reflect collectivist worldviews, contrasting Western hypotactic individualism by emphasizing relational harmony over linear causation.[42] North Fork Mono narratives often employ paratactic sequencing to evoke multivalent, community-oriented meanings, preserving cultural epistemology in oral transmission. Contemporary relevance of parataxis is evident in digital media, such as threads on X (formerly Twitter) since their emergence around 2006, where users construct additive, non-subordinated posts to facilitate concise, participatory discourse amid character limits and algorithmic flows.[43]References
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/parataxis