2023-03-29 18:09:45 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
66
the distinctive feature; hence it could be considered a figure of phonetics.
Note that metrics [i.e. verse generally] would appear here also, as a
regularization of the feature syllabic quantity.)
metathetic alliteration
INTRODUCTION
repetition of fixed sequences of phonemes.
chekānuprāsa
(repetition
the predicate of sentence one becomes the
subject of sentence two, and so on
the subject of each sentence constitutes the
most characteristic aspect of its predicate,
and the subject of sentence one provides
the predicate for sentence two (the inverse
of the above)
interrupted by
distinctive vari-
(B) Morphemic repetitions
of homonyms
of the word or the sense
āvṛtti
of the syntactical category (subject, verb, etc.) dipaka
(This can also be seen as non-repetition, for one element
remains unrepeated, uniting the several phrases.)
of the word, but in a different sense (accepta-
tion)
the multiple predicates of several sentences
exactly parallel each other in terms of some
larger image (could involve subjects, verbs,
etc.)
ation)
yamaka
punaruktābhāsā
(C) Phrasal repetitions. There is no figure involving the repetition of
phrases only, for it is hard to see how it could be given a poetic twist.
But there are a number of figures which, in addition to the phrasal repeti-
tion, involve a characteristic fixation of certain words within these phrases,
creating a pattern within a pattern.
lāṭānuprāsa
ekāvalī
sāra
yathāsamkhya
It is only in these three figures that we see any interest shown in syntactical
arrangement (see above). Yet even here, the emphasis seems to be on
the enchainment of grammatical forms rather than on the irregularity
the distinctive feature; hence it could be considered a figure of phonetics.
Note that metrics [i.e. verse generally] would appear here also, as a
regularization of the feature syllabic quantity.)
metathetic alliteration
INTRODUCTION
repetition of fixed sequences of phonemes.
chekānuprāsa
(repetition
the predicate of sentence one becomes the
subject of sentence two, and so on
the subject of each sentence constitutes the
most characteristic aspect of its predicate,
and the subject of sentence one provides
the predicate for sentence two (the inverse
of the above)
interrupted by
distinctive vari-
(B) Morphemic repetitions
of homonyms
of the word or the sense
āvṛtti
of the syntactical category (subject, verb, etc.) dipaka
(This can also be seen as non-repetition, for one element
remains unrepeated, uniting the several phrases.)
of the word, but in a different sense (accepta-
tion)
the multiple predicates of several sentences
exactly parallel each other in terms of some
larger image (could involve subjects, verbs,
etc.)
ation)
yamaka
punaruktābhāsā
(C) Phrasal repetitions. There is no figure involving the repetition of
phrases only, for it is hard to see how it could be given a poetic twist.
But there are a number of figures which, in addition to the phrasal repeti-
tion, involve a characteristic fixation of certain words within these phrases,
creating a pattern within a pattern.
lāṭānuprāsa
ekāvalī
sāra
yathāsamkhya
It is only in these three figures that we see any interest shown in syntactical
arrangement (see above). Yet even here, the emphasis seems to be on
the enchainment of grammatical forms rather than on the irregularity