From: Jonathan Robie (jonathan@texcel.no)
Date: Fri Nov 06 1998 - 18:40:44 EST
At 06:23 PM 11/6/98 EST, TonyProst@aol.com wrote:
>Chiasm appears to be a rhetorical device which is alien to our modern
>rhetoric. As an attorney, i.e. a professional rhetorician and sophist, the
>most basic rules of imparting information to be remembered by hearers are the
>rule of primacy and the rule of recency. A modern speaker would probably not
>be able to rely on chiasmic structure to effectively influence an audience. I
>would be interested to find if any religious practitioners use chiasm in
their
>sermons.
See my "Chiasm in English" post for several everyday modern examples of
chiasm. I suspect that most people who use chiasm in modern English do not
use it consciously, but it does seem to erupt on everyday language without
being taught.
I think that people can sense the rhetorical force of chiastic structure
without knowing the name, and without knowing Greek. Try this one, for
example:
"When God gives us a life that defies explanation, we seek answers; yet
answers are not found in explanations, but in the life that is given by God."
Jonathan
jonathan@texcel.no
Texcel Research
http://www.texcel.no
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:06 EDT