Hacker News

Formulaic Delimiters in the Iliad and the Odyssey

28 points by glth ago | 13 comments

kibwen |next [-]

> What I find interesting with these transition delimiters is their frequent pairing with an adjective that characterizes the speaker [...] That would explain why he continuously and repeatedly uses them across both poems.

You don't need to speculate, this is known as an "epithet", and is well-studied: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epithet#Literature

quuxplusone |root |parent [-]

And specifically concerning meter, this was Milman Parry's big discovery.

https://archive.org/details/MilmanParryTheMakingOfHomericVer...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milman_Parry

SuperNinKenDo |next |previous [-]

Currently reading through Robert Fagles' translation of the Odyssey - a superb page turner, though my father would say lacking compared to some of the older, less approachable translations - and it has a great breakdown in the opening notes of the various academic zeitgeists for understanding the composition of the poems, in particular these constructions - I belive written by Bernard Knox.

Would reproduce it here, but it's long, and obviously still under copyright. However if this post piques anybody's interest, you should be able to find a copy.... wherever copies may be found... and I highly recommend checking it out, if just for the relevant intro, if not for the translation - which I personally do rate.

I believe this post adds an interesting angle to the discussion that isn't particularly explored in the introduction to Fagles, but the Fagles introduction adds a lot of Academic-Historical context to how these literary techniques have interacted with Academic trends at various times to inform people's understanding of the pieces.

Together with the OP, the two make for great reading.

aebtebeten |next |previous [-]

Rhetoric (Ῥητορική?) in general offers many "signposting" oral structures so that one may (in a 1-D temporally streamed medium) reliably communicate some of the nested arboreal complexities which writing (somewhat 2D, and amenable to re-reading) tends to communicate more clearly.

nubg |root |parent [-]

How is writing 2d, just because you can't fit a given text on a piece of paper and need to text wrap? That doesn't make it 2d.

likelyMostYes |root |parent |next [-]

> reliably communicate some of the nested arboreal complexities

Text/Subtext, text/'direct' and implied meaning, maybe?

I don't think 2D refers to conventional dimensions but to a dimensional structure implicit to text as an object made of objects, nested and nesting all the way up and down.

https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/weirdalyankovic/thebrainsong...

bdr |root |parent |next |previous [-]

I think they mean that, with writing, it’s easier to parse complex syntax trees. Think fractal dimension and finite vs stack memory.

thechao |root |parent |previous [-]

Weird. I was just having a similar discussion with my colleagues regarding coding style. Anyways, I absolutely view text (code more than prose; but poesy definitely has this!) to be 2D. There is both per-line and interline structure that good formatting surfaces; it simplifies long range reasoning about invariants.

I mean... the whole field of typographic ad copy is about 2D writing?

itchingsphynx |next |previous [-]

Yes, fascinating.

“Syntax is a set of principles governing the combination of discrete structural elements (words, notes) into sequences. Combinatorial principles operate at multiple levels, such as in the formation of words, phrases and sentences in language, and of chords, chord progressions and keys in music.” Patel.2003-LanguageMusicSyntax

“Syntactic knowledge allows the mind to accomplish a remarkable transformation: a linear sequence of elements is perceived in terms of hierarchical relations that convey organised patterns of meaning.”

“Syllables hierarchically arrange phonemes into words.”

msarrel |next |previous [-]

Great stuff! Definitely helpful for working with texts and LLMs.

578_Observer |next |previous [-]

It is ironic and beautiful.

We engineers tend to believe that concepts like "modularity," "reusability," and "DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself)" are modern inventions of software engineering.

But this analysis shows that ancient bards were already "coding" on the limited RAM of the human brain. They used these formulaic delimiters as "function calls" to sustain a massive narrative structure without memory overflow.

Perhaps humans haven't changed at all. We have always sought "Structure" to give shape to the chaotic "Soul." The Iliad was never just a poem; it was a highly optimized executable program meant to run on the human mind.

Twixes |root |parent [-]

Thank you, ChatGPT