|
27 August 2005: Karl Kempton has been complaining about all my neologies. He has a point. I crowd them in pretty fiercely at times, and some are unnecessary, and more are clumsy. Almost no one uses any of them but me. I am an analytical systemizer, though, so I am compelled to reduce my fields of study down to their essential elements and name those essentials, name them as dramatically distinguishable as possible. I have no other way.
I think ultimately, I'll be proven right. I ask Karl and others who have disliked my taxonomania to consider what is so wonderful about the following established poetics terminology: "alliteration," "metaphor," "simile" (which at least connects to "similar"), "assonance," "euphony," "consonance," even "rhyme"--to mention just a few of the many jargonical terms one needs to know, and eventually takes for granted, if one wants to discuss poetics intelligently? I claim that most of my terms are at least as self-identifying, easy to pronounce and useful. Moreover, most of them are terms-in-progress.
|