B. Redundance of syntactical elements

Structural and material redundance within the simple sentence (but the same is true with regard to the complex or compound sentences) occurs, first of all, in the increased number of elements used.

Repetition is purely syntactical whenever what is repeated is not a word, but an abstract syntactical position only. This is observed in any sentence comprising two or more homogeneous parts. Compare: The people were running and Men, women, children were running. The second sentence is not only different from the first semantically: the idea of totality of flight is expressed in the second more emphatically.

Repetition may concern not only the syntactical positions (parts of the sentence), but the meanings of recurrent parts as well. If the homogeneous parts are synonyms, we observe “synonymic repetition”:

“Joe was a mild, good-natured, sweet-tempered, easy-going, foolish dear fellow.”

(Dickens)

Finally, repetition proper is recurrence of the same element (word or phrase) within one sentence, the recurrence of words in neighboring sentences or even recurrence of whole sentences. This kind of repetition is the most recognizable of the three; its obvious purpose is visible intensification.

Syntactic tautology. The term implies recurrence of the noun subject in the form of the corresponding personal pronoun. The stylistic function of this construction is communicative emphasis of the “theme”.

Miss Tillie Webster, she slept forty days and nights without waking up (O.Henry)

Syntactic tautology is often met with in nursery rhymes and in folk ballads (or their imitations):

Jack Sprats pig,

He was not very little,

He was not very big…

A phenomenon, grammatically opposite to syntactic tautology, but often confused with it, is the anticipatory use of personal pronouns:

“Oh. It’s a fine life, the life of the gutter” (Shaw)

The stylistic function of anticipatory constructions under discussion is emphasis of the “theme” (the part predicated).

Polysyndeton. The term is opposed to “asyndeton” means excessive use (repetition) of conjunctions – the conjunction and in most cases. Conjunctions may connect separate words, parts of a sentence (phrases), clauses, simple and composite sentences, and even more prolonged segments of text.

Polysyndeton is stylistically heterogeneous. Thus, in poetry and fiction, the repetition of and either underlines the simultaneity of actions, or close connection of properties enumerated.

Advancing and prancing and glancing and dancing,

Recoiling, turmoiling, and toiling, and boiling,

And thumping, and plumping, and bumping, and jumping,

And dashing, and flashing, and splashing, and clashing;

And so never ending, and always descending…

And in this way the water comes down at Lodore. (Robert Southey)

She was smartly dressed … And her cheeks and lips were rouged a little. And her eyes

sparkled. And as usual she gave herself the airs of one very well content with herself.

(Dreiser)

Very often polysyndeton promotes a high-flown tonality of narrative

And only one thing really troubled him sitting there – the melancholy craving in his

heart – because the sun was like enchantment on his face and on the clouds and on the

golden birch leaves, and the wind’s rustle was so gentle, and the yew-tree green so

dark,and sickle of a moon pale in the sky. (Galsworthy)

Syntactic stylistic devices discussed above are connected with the structure of the sentence, the number and position of its constituents. Now we’ll search for stylistic functions in the sentence forms. Regular interchange or repetition may not only concern communicative types of sentences, but their syntactic structure as well. Adjacent sentences are often identical or analogous by their syntactical (or morpho-syntactical) structures. Assimilation or even identity of two or more neighbouring sentences (or verse lines) is called “parallelism” (“parallel constructions”). As a matter of fact, parallelism is a variety of repetition, but not a repetition of lexically identical sentences, only a repetition of syntactical constructions: John kept silent; Mary was thinking. The two sentences are syntactically identical – subject and predicate consisting of two words. It should be stressed that lexically they are different.

Still, much more often it happens that parallel sentences contain the same lexical elements. See, for instance:

Farewell to the forests and wild-hanging woods,

Farewell to the torrents and loud-pouring floods… (Burns)

The cock is crowing,

The stream is flowing… (Wordsworth)

Parallelism contributes to rhythmic and melodic unification of adjacent sentences. But not only that. As everywhere in language, semantics is the predominant factor. It is only with regard to lexical meanings that the constructive function of parallelism can be defined. It serves either to emphasize the repeated element, or to create a contrast, or else underlines the semantic connection between sentences.

Purely syntactical repetitions, with which we have classed parallelism, should be distinguished from lexico-syntactical repetitions. In these, the lexical identity of certain parts of neighbouring sentences is not an obtional occurrence (as is the case with parallelism), but quite obligatory. Among them we can discern the following lexico-syntactical devices: anaphora, epiphora, anadiplosis, chiasmus.

Anaphora. This term implies identity of beginnings, of one or several initial elements in adjacent sentences (verse lines, stanzas, paragraphs). This device, often met with, serves the purpose of strengthening the element that recurs:

My heart’s in the Highlands, my heart isn’t here,

My heart’s in the Highlands, a-chasing the deer… (Burns)

Anaphoric recurrence of words or word combinations helps the reader (hearer) to fix the recurring segment in his memory. It also imparts a certain rhythmical regularity to the prosodic system of the text.

Hence, the most general definition could read thus: anaphora is identity of the initial parts of two or more autonomous syntactical segments, adjacent or at a distance in the text, yet obviously connected semantically.

Epiphora. This stylistic figure is the opposite of anaphora. It is recurrence of one or several elements concluding two (or more) syntactical units (utterances, verse lines, sentences, paragraphs, chapters).

Epiphora, to a still greater extent than anaphora, regularizes the rhythm of the text and makes prose resemble poetry.

“I am exactly the man to be placed in a superior position in such a case as that. I am

above the rest of mankind, in such a case as that. I can act with philosophy in such a

case as that. (Dickens)

Very often one can see a combination of anaphora and epiphora in two or more adjacent utterances, which is sometimes termed “symploca”.

If he wishes to float into fairyland, he reads a book; if he wishes to dash into the thick

of battle, he reads a book; if he wishes to soar into heaven, he reads a book

(Chesterton)

Note the nearly complete parallelism of the three sentences.

Framing. This term is used here to denote the recurrence of the initial segment at the very end of a syntactic unit (sentence, paragraph, stanza).

Money is what he is after, money! (Galore)

Anadiplosis (from the Greek “doubling”): the final element (or elements) of a sentence (paragraph, stanza) recur at the very beginning of the next sentence (paragraph, stanza, etc.). The concluding part of the preceding syntactic unit serves the starting point of the next:

With Bewick on my knee,I was then happy: happy at least in my own way. (Bronte)

Chiasmus. (from the Greek letter x=Chi) means “crossing”. The term denotes what is sometimes characterized as “parallelism reversed”: two syntactical constructions (sentences or phrases) are parallel, but their members (words) change places, their syntactical positions. What is the subject in the first, becomes an object or a predicative in the second; a head-word and its attribute change places and functions likewise.

The segments that change places enter opposite logical relations, which fact produces various stylistic effects (depending on the meanings of words and the forms of chiasmatic members).

I love my Love and my Love loves me! (Coleridge)