Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2001 :: March ::
Re: Rhetoric Question
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.0594  Tuesday, 13 March 2001

[1]     From:   Gideon Burton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 12 Mar 2001 14:41:54 -0700
        Subj:   RE: SHK 12.0574 Rhetoric Question

[2]     From:   Richard Gyde <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 13 Mar 2001 16:42:31 +1300
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0574 Rhetoric Question

[3]     From:   Marti Markus <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 13 Mar 2001 08:29:22 +0100
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0574 Rhetoric Question

[4]     From:   Matt Kozusko <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 13 Mar 2001 03:17:00 -0600
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0574 Rhetoric Question


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Gideon Burton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 12 Mar 2001 14:41:54 -0700
Subject: 12.0574 Rhetoric Question
Comment:        RE: SHK 12.0574 Rhetoric Question

     You can spend all your time making money;
     You can spend all your love making time.

The rhetoric in this example from the Eagles song can be explained as
the play of two kinds of repetition: the initial anaphora, as noted, and
an internal use of epanalepsis (sometimes called "resumptio" or "the
echo sound" or "the slow return":  repetition of the same word after
intervening matter).  In this case, "time" (the object of the main
clause in the first sentence) is echoed when it becomes the object of
the adverbial phrase in the second sentence.  This has a curious effect
because the repeated sentence opening (anaphora) seems to call for
complete parallelism, which does occur (these are grammatically
identical sentences), but which also does not occur (since there is an
inversion semantically--time is associated with a different verb).  The
transposition of the word "time" is suggestive of (though not an example
of) the very common Shakespearean scheme, "antimetabole," yet the subtle
semantic change in the meanings of "spending time" and "making time"
suggests another figure of repetition in which the second instance of a
repeated word has a differing semantic value, "antanaclasis."
Shakespeare used all of these forms of repetition, though I do not know
of an instance in which he used them in this exact combination.  All of
these terms are found, usually with Shakespearean examples, at Silva
Rhetoricae: The Forest of Rhetoric
(http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/silva.htm), which also features a
page on the many varieties of rhetorical repetition
(http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/Figures/Groupings/of%20repetition.htm)

Gideon Burton
Brigham Young University

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Richard Gyde <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 13 Mar 2001 16:42:31 +1300
Subject: 12.0574 Rhetoric Question
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.0574 Rhetoric Question

Skip Nicholson asked [10 Mar 2001] :

> I have a question about a figure Shakespeare might have used, although I
> can't find an example.
>
> Our students ask if there a term for the rhetorical device in these two
> lines from a song by the Eagles?
>
>      You can spend all your time making money;
>      You can spend all your love making time.
>
> We know that the lines are called anaphoristic because they share the
> same opening phrase, but does the echoing of the word 'time' put them in
> any other category? And does anyone know of a place Shakespeare might
> have used the same turn?

Would this example from Richard III suffice?:

Derby: Unless for that, my liege, I cannot guess.
Richard: Unless for that he comes to be your liege...  [4.4.474-5]

Is the term for this rhetorical device 'stichomythia' ?

Richard Gyde

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Marti Markus <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 13 Mar 2001 08:29:22 +0100
Subject: 12.0574 Rhetoric Question
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.0574 Rhetoric Question

>      You can spend all your time making money;
>      You can spend all your love making time.

It is a chiasmus which is based on the fact that "love" and "money" are
interchangeable. The erotic qualities of money in huge quantities are
undisputed, and love is often bought dearly.

Markus Marti

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Matt Kozusko <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 13 Mar 2001 03:17:00 -0600
Subject: 12.0574 Rhetoric Question
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.0574 Rhetoric Question

Skip Nicholson wrote:

> Our students ask if there a term for the rhetorical device in these two
> lines from a song by the Eagles?
>
>      You can spend all your time making money;
>      You can spend all your love making time.

Perhaps you have already considered this, but the use of "time" here
loosely qualifies as a chiasmus.  Strictly speaking, "money" should
recur in the second line (or "love" should take its place in the first
line), but the syntactical relocation of "time" is at least halfway
there.

Shakespeare is fond of chiasmus, and the device (in this partial form)
is abundant, at least in the sonnets.  "Sonnet 130" comes to mind:

"If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head"

Where you have "HAIRS verb WIRES" versus "WIRES verb HEAD" ("head"
serving as a metonymy for "hairs").  "Sonnet 129" also features a loose
chiasmus:

"Mad in pursuit, and in possession so"

In which "mad" and its parallel "so" switch places in the two phrases.

Matt Kozusko
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.