|
18 August 2005: Equaphemes, to continue my discussion of techniphemes, are the components of equaphors, which is what I call standard figures of speech, but also a few other devices such as visiophors (which are part graphic, part verbal) and juxtaphors (implicit metaphors) which others might not call figures of speech. Repenemes are simply repeated elements in poetry, including alliterative syllables, rhyming syllables, parallel locutions, and the like.
My only new, or perhaps just newly-named, kind of poetic element, is the enhancipheme. I haven't worked out the particulars of this device yet. It would include locutions that are particularly rich in connotations and/or freshness Any enhancipheme can also be some other technipheme, incidentally. In fact, any technipheme can fit into two or more classes of techniphemes.
I have now named the techniphemes I claim all poetry has some of to a greater extent than prose does. I believe that any fair-minded person would agree that all poetry has always had equaphors, repenemes, enhanciphemes and poetic flow-breaks. Differences of opinion on the subject occur only concerning which particular specimens of each of these devices poetry has, and if requires any particular kind. I believe it requires poetic flow-breaks. It seems to me that, with the exception of prose poems (and let's leave them outside the discussion to keep the discussion from getting too complicated), nothing considered poetry (non-metaphorically) has ever lacked flow-breaks. Would everyone agree?
|
|
|
|