Proverbial poetry: its settings and syntax
Yüklə 6,58 Mb.
|
|
____________________ 1Examples may also be seen from other proverbial expressions from other cultures. Consider Benjamin Franklin's sayings: "Laziness travels so slowly that poverty soon overtakes him" or "Diligence is the mother of gook luck" (Bartlett J. Whiting, Early American Proverbs
Press, 1977], pp. 255, 109). son]). The sonant-semantic playing on the words קַיִץ and
semantic-syntactic-phonetic unity. The semantic repetition of the preposition ב [during] and the noun בֵּן [son] adds a duo of semantically equivalent units. Similarly the sound repetitions of the letters, ב, קצ, בן, and the long hireq and sibilant following the mem initial final participle in מֵבִישׁ and מַשְׂכִיל all add to the feeling of equivalence. These elements of symmetrical sameness lure the reader's attention to the two points which turn the proverb into a contrastive antithesis: (1) אֹגֵר / נִרְדָּם [gathers/sleeps]; and (2) מַשְׂכִּיל/ מֵבִישׁ [wise/shameful]. The point is the classification of activity/inactivity as a product of character (wise/ shameful), thereby exhorting to the former. Notice that the initial and final elements of the colon are what provide the contrast, while the inner units provide repetitional sameness. Not only do the syntactic, semantic, and phonetic levels combine symmetries to highlight the contrast, but even morphological parallels exist, as both lines begin with intransitive clause subjects and both feature antithetical participles and end the lines with long hireq participles which contrast qualities. This is no mere coincidence. For example, it is normal, when describing the quality of an item, to use nominal vocabulary such as כְּסִיל [foolish 10:1b], [righteous 10:6a], or רְשָׁעִים [wicked 10:6b, cf. 10:7, 8, 11 et al.]. The sage here matches the two noun phrases by binding contrastive participles, rather than the normal nominals, to characterize the actions of the repeated [son]. While the overall syntax is repetitive, variation is found as the writer opts for Qal and Hiphil participles in the first colon but switches to Hiphil and Niphal participles in the second. It is of further interest that the second Hiphil participle מֵבִישׁ [shameful], the long hireq matching the long hireq in the corresponding line yielding the impression of sound equivalence. Thus, this proverb highlights elements of sameness from the syntactic, semantic, and phonetic hierarchies. Another less complex isomorphic proverb is Proverbs 14:18. While there are bi-colonic matches in the syntactic elements employed VSO/SVO, the sub-lineal syntactical equivalences go much deeper. 
Both subjects ( פְתָאִים/ עֲרוּמִים) are nominals which experience rather than perform the action of the verb. Normally, transitive verbs take an agent rather than an experiencer as a subject (cf. 10:8a, 12, 14a, 27a, 31a, 32). There is also a front flip chiasm--initiating the proverb with the positive verb נָחֲלוּ [inherit], then introducing the subject second--ironically raising curiosity as to what it is that the פְּתָאִים [simple], who normally would not be considered as likely candidates for inheritance, should inherit. The final object אִוֶּלֶת [folly] answers. The second subject, who will experience the action of the verb, is fronted--contrasting with the פְּתָאִים [simple] of the first. The transitive verb follows, moving from inheritance to crowning (appropriate to the royal court). Both verbal elements of inheriting and crowning suggest a wealthy conclusion; however, the writer crowns the עֲרוּמִים [prudent] with a crown of דָעַת [knowledge]--the very quality which separates him from the simple. Both objects are simple nouns which act as patients. Thus the surface structure and deep structure are syntactically isomorphic. The elements of sameness do not stop with the semantic contrasts between the two sets of nominals and synonymy of the two verbs. Morphologically the nominals are equivalent--both subjects being masculine plurals and both objects being feminine singular. The variation in the ordering of the verb elements is complemented by the morphological variation--the first verb being a Qal perfect, while the second is a Hiphil imperfect. Perhaps it is coincidental, but the final letters on each of the corresponding syntactic units are exactly the same phonetically, thus adding to the feeling of equivalence binding this proverb together. One may respond that such isomorphic behavior is just a function of the juxtaposing of two SVO sentences. Several factors cause one to reject such a riposte. First, to have single nominal subjects and objects in both lines is rare, since a two-membered noun phrase subject is the norm in Proverbs 10-15 (vid. 10:1a, 8, 21a, 24; 11:3 et al.) and double-membered objects are not lacking (10:3, 6b), although the single nominal object does indeed predominate. Thus, there seems to be a syntactic tailoring of this proverb so that the syntactic units match precisely. Secondly, there are numerous cases of SVO matches which do not exhibit a perfectly isomorphic character (11:16; 12:6, 13:6). It must be admitted, however, that there is a greater propensity toward isomorphism among matching lines than among non-matching lines (11:3, 15:2, 14); but that rather proves than disproves the case that syntax provides the fundamental units of equivalence which are expertly and artistically woven into the proverbial poetic tapestry. The sage may often vary his surface syntax, even in the midst of a matching bi-colon (10:12; 11:16; 13:6); or he may desire to match the surface syntax while creating deep structure differences (11:13; 15:18); or he may vary both (12:6, 21; 15:20), yet maintain the overall SVO match. Thus, the complete, artistic balance and symmetry of a totally isomorphic bi-colon should not be taken insensitively.1 While the above total isomorphisms have necessarily been taken from matching lines, in order to stress the importance of the sub-lineal syntactic units themselves, the syntactic equivalence in non-matching lines should be elicited. Proverbs 10:11 is obviously not a match (PscS/SVO), yet the two subject tagmemes are both similarly constructed noun phrases with common deep
the designation syntactic and/or morphological "repetition" in favor of the terms "equivalence" and "symmetry" (contrast Berlin, "Grammatical Aspects of Biblical Parallelism," p. 21) due to the fact that "repetition" often carries connotations of boredom and unartistic dullness. structures manifesting an item body part ( פִיi [mouth]) followed by a standard quality statement of that item ( [righteous]; רְשָעִים [wicked]). The morphological variation from the singular righteous to the plural wicked should not be overlooked. While the subject is clearly a syntactic-semantic match, the rest of the bi-colonic units do not match. The equivalent subject tagmemes in 10:11 reveal that sub-lineal syntactic units were used by the sage as he constructed his saying, even though the bi-colon itself does not match (cf. also 10:17). Cases of horizontal isomorphisms (10:26; 11:2; 11:30) and correspondence of tagmemes in embedded and independent units (10:1, 6, 25; 11:6; 14:6) reveal the creative use of syntactically equivalent units below the line level. In Proverbs 10:26, for example, the symmetrical pattern of a prepositional phrase, initiated with a and followed by an item which has the ability to adversely effect the body part listed in the second prepositional phrase initiated by an ל. This shows that units of syntactic equivalence are being used even horizontally within a single line. The bi-colon concludes as the metaphor is realized by a initial line with a ל initiated preposition in second place. Indeed the relationships are complex, but the dual repetition of the acrid and tearful reactions of the body clearly illustrates the grimacings of the one sending a sluggard. This is quite at home in realizing the Sitz im
and Variations The same point, that sub-lineal syntactic units are used as elements of bi-colonic equivalence furthering the parallelistic features which also occur within the semantic and phonetic hierarchies, may be corroborated from a brief discussion of homomorphic correspondences. Homomorphisms differ from isomorphisms in that while isomorphisms demand a totally equivalent tagmeme, specifying a surface as well as a deep structure equivalence, homomorphisms allow for variations in a multitude of directions. The surface grammar may remain exactly equivalent while the deep structure evinces significant variation or the surface grammar may vary, yet the deep structures still equivalent. Several examples will be worked in order to demonstrate this phenomena starting with bi-cola which are composed totally of isomorphisms and homomorphisms. More bi-colonically dissimilar examples will be used in support of the contention that the monitoring of sub-lineal syntactic units is important and that the six box tagmeme, as suggested in this study, provides an adequate tool for such monitoring. Proverbs 10:15 provides an interesting total iso/homomorphic verse. It is composed of matching nominal
all isomorphic. The subjects, for example, are both noun phrases, providing the item being discussed. The two subject complements are also both noun phrases classifying the subjects. Both initial noun phrases are horizontally referenced later in the line by a pronominal suffix (10:15a 3ms, 15b 3mp). This pronominal back-referencing is interesting in that, in the first line, it is referenced from the subject, while in the second it is from the subject complement (as indicated by the dotted lines). The homomorphism appears in the noun phrase fillers. In the first colon הוֹן עָשִׁיר (wealth of the rich) provides a normal, two-member noun phrase--the first being the item of discussion (הוֹן [wealth]) and the second specifying the possessor of the item (עָשִׁיר [rich]). This is mapped onto the second line subject noun phrase with certain variations. The subject noun phrase of the second colon likewise has a common deep structure with the first colon subject, in that it is composed of an item ( רֵישׁ [poor]) followed by a specification of the possesor of that poverty. The surface manifestation of the specified possessor, however, is a pronominal suffix rather than a matching noun. So there is a surface variation between the nominal possessor in the first colon and the pronominally suffixed possessor in the second. Thus there are an elements of similarity and points of variation. It is interesting that the variational pronominal suffix closes the second line with a pronominal suffix which is how the first line closes. Consequently, there is a cross-over beyond the mappings provided for by the tagmemes. That is, each line begins with a double nominal noun phrase and finishes with a noun and attached pronominal suffix. This structure is not chiastic, although the syntax is. This provides an example of what may be labelled complex chiasm--by which is meant that there is an obvious chiasm of syntactic elements (SPsc/PscS), but there is a non-chiastic ordering of double nominal elements and closing noun with pronominal suffix. A final point of interest in the second colon subject tagmeme is the semantic unit to which the pronominal suffix refers back--that is, דַּלִים [poor]. It is interesting because it is that semantic element to which the pronominal suffix is syntactically matched in the first line ( עָשִׁיר [rich]). Thus, there is a syntactic and semantic interweaving. The subject complements (קִרְיַת
also provide another homomorphism, which varies both on the surface and deep structure levels. Both begin with a noun which is then modified in the first case by an explication of the quality of the item, while the second tells of the character of the one who possesses the item. The semantic correspondence between קִרְיַת (town) in the first and מְחִתַּת (destruction) in the second is obvious. The qualifier in the first colon completes the colon with the noun plus pronominal suffix עֻזּוֹ [his fortified] which provides the non-chiastic correspondence with the end of the second line. Hence, there is a complicated but beautifully varied balance through the experiencing of both chiastic and non-chiastic syntactic features. One should not miss noticing the splitting of semantically corresponding elements of the initial noun phrase ( הוֹן עָשִׁיר [wealth of the rich]) in the second line, with דַּלִים (poor) being found in the subject complement and רֵישׁ (poverty) occurring in the matching syntactic subject. The metaphorical symbol of strength and security עוֻזּוֹ (fortified city) then is collapsed into the single catastrophic noun מְחִתַּת (ruin), thereby obtaining the Finally, one should not ignore the morphological variation manifested both in the pronominal suffixes and in the number of the nouns referring to the persons under discussion. The rich are singular while the poor are put in the plural. From this discussion of two homomorphisms, it should be apparent that homomorphisms provide great interest as they evince both elements of equivalence and variation. Proverbs 11:1 will not be discussed in detail, other than to say that it provides a simple example of homomorphic variation within a total isomorphic match. The noun phrase elements of the two subject complements form a homomorphism. תּוֹעֲוַת יְהוָה (abomination of YHWH; 11:1a) corresponds to רְצוֹנוֹ (his delight). Clearly this manifests a Chomskian pronominalization transformational procedure which is used to collapse the second line units from four to three ( structure variation monitored in the slot and filler boxes of the tagmeme and a deep structure equivalence as seen in the case box. Other interesting examples of total iso/homomorphisms which will not be discussed are Proverbs 11:9 and 13 (11:13 also contains phonetic features). Proverbs 11:18 provides an example of a bi-colon which is not totally iso/homomorphic, yet demonstrates a sub-lineal homomorphism. It is immediately noticed that 
there is a heavy, double nominal noun phrase in the objects of both lines. This is quite rare, since it is usually the subject which contains the double membered noun phrase in SVO cola. In order to reduce the elements to the favored equivalent four (134/224), the subject in the first line is a singular nominal רָשָׁע [wicked] which acts as the agent. More commonly רָשָׁע [wicked] is used to qualify an item; but here it stands alone. The noun phrase object in the first colon פּעֻלַת־שָׁקֶר (false wages) is a standard item followed by a qualifier (שָׁקֶר [false]). This noun phrase tells the product of the wicked's efforts: false wages. The second line contains a doubled noun phrase subject which is an embedded transitive clause. The normal semantic antithesis is gained from the contrast between רָשָׁע / צְדָקָה (wicked/righteousness). The surface syntactic construction of the subject is different, although both participate as the agents in the deep structure. With a doubled membered noun phrase as the subject and an important noun phrase object, the heaviness of the second colon is lightened to match the syntactic units of the first line by the gapping of the verb. The use of זֹרֵעַ (sows) with the abstract צְדָקָה (righteousness) metaphorically presents fruitfulness as a result of proper character rather than of economic scheming. The rationale behind the double membered noun phrase objects may be accounted for not only by the isomorphism which draws them together as syntactically equivalent units, but also by the phonetic-syntactic- semantic crossover. The obvious semantic contrast is between פְּעֻלַּת (wages) and שֶׂכֶר (reward), and שָׁקֶר (false) and אֶמֶת (true). The syntax follows this same ordering by its strong, isomorphic equivalence. This is all quite normal until one notices the phonetic play going on between שָׁקֶר (false) and שֶׁכֶר (reward). This adds an element of delight and further binding of the objects together. The play requires an unusual, two-unit noun phrase object in both lines in order for the play to work. The phonetic parallel crosses semantic and syntactic equivalences to bind the doubled units together. This example demonstrates, once again, that if one is going to appreciate the sages' poetic artistry, he must be sensitized to parallelistic features from all three hierarchies (syntax, semantics, and phonetics). To fixate
emaciate the richness of poetic craftsmanship and settle into banal prosaicness. One further example will demonstrate the ability of the tagmeme to deictically monitor both surface and deep structure relationships. Proverbs 10:8 provides an example of a non-matching line type IV bi-colon (SVO/SV). While the overall, colonic syntactic structures are different, the sub-lineal units do manifest a clear design in the direction of syntactic equivalence and symmetry. 
The noun phrase subjects, for example, are an isomorphism where the qualities precede, rather than follow (which is much more frequent), the items they qualify. The subject noun phrases are contrasted by the qualities of each, while the items referenced are rather normal corresponding body part pairs ( לֵב [heart], שְׂפָתַיִם [lips]). The morphological variation (singular to dual) is a result of the noun items chosen. Thus, semantically and syntactically the subject noun phrases are bound together. There is, however, a deep structure difference between the two subjects as a result of the verb form used the first ( יִקַח [accept]) being an active Qal, while the second (יִלָּבֵט [ruin]) is a passive Niphal. As a result of these verbal shifts, the isomorphic noun phrases perform two very different deep structure roles in the bi-colon. The subject of the first line, חֲכַם־לֵב [the wise in heart], becomes the actor doing the action described in the verb and object (accepting commands). In the second colon the subject ( אֶוִיל שְׁפָתַים [a chattering fool]) is not described as doing the action of the verb, but as the recipient/ experiencer of the action described by the passive verb ( יִלָּבֵט [comes to ruin]). There is, then, a surface correspondence between the two subjects, which draws them together for a deep structure contrast (Agent/Experiencer). Finally, the tendency to move from a four- unit initial line down to a three unit second line is accomplished by a collapsing technique which uses the passive verb and, consequentially, allows the object noun to be dropped. So, the two verbs also manifest a surface correspondence; but in the third box it is seen that there is a deep structure movement from the active to the passive and from Yüklə 6,58 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|
