Strategies applied by interpreters of the paradox in Proverbs 26:4-5 : research article
This study explores strategies for interpreting paradox, and paradoxical proverbs in particular. According to Neal R. Norrick only three basic strategies regularly recur in the interpretation of paradox, two of which appear valid for paradoxical proverbs generally. He calls these strategies: separat...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2008
|
| In: |
Journal for semitics
Year: 2008, Volume: 17, Issue: 2, Pages: 591-617 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | This study explores strategies for interpreting paradox, and paradoxical proverbs in particular. According to Neal R. Norrick only three basic strategies regularly recur in the interpretation of paradox, two of which appear valid for paradoxical proverbs generally. He calls these strategies: separating frames of reference, averaging opposites, and modifying one term of the paradox. With reference to Proverbs 26:4-5, this study confirms but also extends Norrick's findings. Interpreters of this proverb pair have applied more than the above three strategies for resolving paradox, which could be explained by the fact that, in this case, more than one proverb constitutes the paradox, and it is used in a literary context. This study also shows that a complex network of factors is involved in the interpretation of paradoxes that are constituted by antithetical proverbs. |
|---|---|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal for semitics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | HDL: 10520/EJC101092 |