Talk:Chiastic structure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Perhaps this article should be merged with Chiasmus? 18:14, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so. They both derive their name from Chi, and are similar in some respects, but they are different. Chiasmus, especially in its classical sense. It is narrower and used only for emphsis as opposed to drawing attention to a specific point. E=MC^2 T@lk

Need example[edit]


This article is pretty worthless. Could it maybe give an example of what chiastic structure looks like? I mean an actual example, not "ABBA" or something cryptic like that.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 22:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC).

An example is:

Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country

The second sentence is an inverse of the first sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Example book[edit]

I removed this unwikiformatted text from the article, added by on 15:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC):

Example: Book of Jonah

A. God’s message to the prophet — Grace for Nineveh (1:1.2) B. God uses forces of the nature to redirect His servant (1:3–13.17) b1. God uses the great wind (1:4)

	b2. God uses the great fish (1:17)

C. The repentance of the sailors (1:14–16)

   	c1. God’s intervention on behalf of the sailors (1:15)

c2. Prayer to the Lord (1:14)

   	c3. Sacrifice and promises — ceremonial elements (1:16)   

D. Jonah’s repentance and God’s recommission ( 2:1 – 3:4) D1. Changing of mind (2:1–9) D2. The God of the second chance(2:10–3:2).

The core of the book: 3:1 “the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the second time”

D1’ Changing of doings (3:3.4) C.’ The repentance of the Nineveh’s people (3:5–10)

   	c3.’ Feast and humbleness — ceremonial elements (3:5–7)
   	c2.’ Prayer to the Lord (3:8.9)

c1.’ God’s intervention on behalf of the Ninevites (3:10)

B’. God uses forces of the nature to redirect His servant (4:5–8)

b2’. God uses the little worm (4:7)

b1’. God uses the hot wind (4:8)

A’. God’s message to the prophet — Grace for Nineveh (4:10.11)ESG.MA iR

"The Literary Structure of the Old Testament: A Commentary on Genesis — Malachi" by David A. Dorsey is a great resource for more information on chiastic structures.

-- JHunterJ 11:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


I would like to see something in here about it's use in music. A piece is cyclical if it uses the same material at the beginning and the end, like in the Mozart Requiem, but chiastic can be used as a musical devise if something is built with a palindrome like structure. This occurs in the Faure Requiem when the structure is presented in the following way:

1. Introit and Kyrie - SATB choir 2. Offetory - baritone and choir 3. Sactus - SATB choir 4. Pie Jesu - Soprano Solo 5. Agnus Dei - SATB choir 6. Libera Me - baritone and choir 7. In Paradisum - SATB choir

--Barber86 (talk) 15:56, 2 December 2010 (UTC)


I have no idea what this article is talking about. I came here wondering what "ring structure" in a narrative meant. This needs to be explained in layman's terms, especially the first paragraph.

Hearthmoon (talk) 02:07, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • I see your point. No promises, but I'll try to take a look later, although I'm not a linguist. Feline Hymnic (talk) 07:57, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
    • @Hearthmoon: I've just edited the opening of the article. I hope the opening is clearer, without losing accuracy. Feline Hymnic (talk) 12:36, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


He could never have a design plan in place for the Qur’an because the revelation of many of its verses depended on events that were out of his control.

Our observation of the element of design in this Surah must lead to the inevitable conclusion that the tradition of its composition over many years is obviously mistaken.

And what could be the purpose of such a design? Only to ease recitation (indeed, recitation is what Qur'an literally means). Then why must we cling to the tradition of it being received by prophetic dictation? Doesn't it instead give every indication of having been an oral text communicating large portions of another unwritten epos, a kind of Arabic Al-Injīl? Nuttyskin (talk) 00:15, 28 May 2018 (UTC)