 |
Figures of Speech Involving Omission and Suppression |
|
|
In this category there are four major types of figures: Ellipsis, Zeugma, Aposiopesis, and the Rhetorical Question. With the first three figures usually the translators have supplied or added the words to make the sentences grammatically correct. These additions are indicated by the feature that they are in italics, they are not in the original text. They should be looked at closely to insure they have not inserted any personal prejudice or preference to doctrinal issues, and that they are indeed correct.
ELLIPISIS [El-lip’-sis]
Example: 1 Cor. 15:5 – And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve (Apostles)
Mark 7:3 - For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.
4 - And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.
(Notice in these two verses how the translators have added the italicized words to make the sentences complete grammatically? Try reading it without the supplied words and you will see the Ellipsis.)
- Zuck . . . An Ellipsis is an omission of a word or words that must be supplied to complete the sentence grammatically.
- Mickelsen . . . Ellipsis refers to an idea not fully expressed grammatically so that the interpreter must either supply words or expand and alter the construction to make it complete.
- Bullinger . . . The figure is so called because some gap is left in the sentence, which means that a word or words are left out or omitted. These words, which are necessary fot the grammar, are not necessary for the sense.
ZEGUMA [Zeug’-ma]
Example: Luke 1:64 – And his mouth was opened immediately, and his tongue loose and he spake and praised God.
(The translators supplied the verb loose, else it would read “his mouth was opened … and his tongue.”)
1 Tim. 4:3 - Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
(Here the Translators furnished the second verb with the conjunction “and commanding.” Else it would read “Forbidden to marry to abstain from meats..”)
1 Cor. 3:2 - I have fed you with milk, and not with meat:
(The true sense is that I have given you milk to drink and not fed you with meat.)
- Zuck . . . A Zeugma is the joining of two nouns to one verb when logically only one of the nouns goes with the verb
- Mickelsen . . . A Zeugma is two words unequally yoked by one verb. In certain contexts words are placed together which properly do not belong together. Zeugma demands the supplying of some form of the verb to clarify the meaning.
- Bullinger . . . In this figure one verb is yoked on to two subjects while grammatically it strictly refers only to one of the: the two subjects properly require two different verbs. This figure, therefore, differs from the Ellipsis, where one of the two verbs is omitted which belongs to only one clause.
APOSIOSPESIS [Apo-si-o-pee’-sis]
Example: Eph.3:1 – For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles (Breaks off here),
(2) - If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God, (Breaks off here) which given me to you-ward.
Mark 11:32 - But if we shall say, Of men; (Breaks off here) they feared the people: for all men counted John, that he was a prophet indeed.
(Their reasoning is broken off at the end of, “Of men” indicating that they could not pronounce the conclusion of such a perilous answer.)
(The true sense is that I have given you milk to drink and not fed you with meat.)
- Zuck . . . This is a sudden break in the sentence as if the speaker were not able to finish the sentence. The writer is strongly moved emotionally, or a break is better imagined than described.
- Mickelsen . . . Literally it is the breaking off what is being said, with sudden silence. In Aposiopesis a part of the sentence is consciously suppressed either because the writer is strongly moved emotionally or because he wants to achieve a rhetorical effect.
- Bullinger . . . It is the sudden breaking off of what is being said (or written), so that the mind may be the more impressed by what is too wonderful, or solemn, or awful for words: or what a thing may be, as we sometimes say. “better imagined than described.”
RHETORICAL QUESTION
Example: Gen. 18:14 – Is anything too hard for the Lord?
Rom 8:31 . . . . If God be for us, who can be against us?
32 - He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
33 - Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.
34 - Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
35 - Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
(In Rom 8:31-35 there are 5 Rhetorical questions)
- Zuck . . . A question is asked Rhetorically if it does not require a verbal response and is given to force the reader to answer in his mind and to consider the implications of the answer.
- Mickelsen . . . Rhetorical Questions are far more than a teaching technique. Sometimes they are answered. At other times the answer is obvious and no explicit statement is necessary. But the question becomes a means of focusing the thought upon a central idea.
|
|
Next: Figures of Speech Involving Overstatement or Understatement
|
This page last updated April 21, 2005
|
|
