Hans Ausloos - Valérie Kabergs, «Paronomasia or Wordplay? A Babel-Like Confusion. Towards a Definition of Hebrew Wordplay», Vol. 93 (2012) 1-20
Against the general background of a terminological confusion that is present in contributions about Hebrew wordplay, the definition of the socalled paronomasia in relation to the term wordplay is especially debated. This article aims to clarify the concept of wordplay in the Hebrew Bible. After a survey of the current opinions in defining the terms «paronomasia» and «wordplay» (I), we propose our own definition of «Hebrew wordplay» (II). Thereafter, this description will simultaneously delimit the field of Hebrew wordplay as it excludes a few linguistic figures, although they are possibly classified as wordplay in other studies (III).
12 VALÉRIE KABERGS – HANS AUSLOOS
ing ― defined by the use of a word in a specific literary context ―
on the other. This definition is primarily based on two elements 30.
First, Casanowicz makes a distinction between “sound-paronoma-
sia†(alliteration, assonance and other kinds of rhyme) and “sense-
paronomasia†31. In calling wordplay a sense-paronomasia, Casanowicz
means that wordplay is not merely constituted by a play in the sound
pattern of words ― this sound aspect is already present in his use of the
term “paronomasia†as an umbrella term for all types of sound figures
― but equally includes a play on the meaning (“senseâ€) of combined
words. The difference between alliteration, assonance, and other forms
of rhyme, on the one hand, and wordplay, on the other, therefore illu-
minates the lack of meaning-play in Casanowicz’s “sound-paronoma-
siaâ€, while the interaction between both sound and meaning is
undeniably present in wordplay.
In order to illustrate the difference between Casanowicz’s con-
ception of “sound-paronomasia†and “sense-paronomasiaâ€, one
could refer to Isaiah 29,6 and 61,3. Isaiah 29,6 is a good example of
“sound-paronomasia†32. The word combination #(rw M(r (“thun-
der and earthquakeâ€) alliterates in two consonants (r and (). How-
ever, there is no play on contrasted or antithetic meanings. This is
different from Isaiah 61,3, in which one finds the words r)p
(“crownâ€) and rp) (“ashâ€) closely related 33. The sound similarity
of this “sense-paronomasia†is constituted by means of the inter-
change of p and ). Moreover, both words play on contrasted mean-
ings within the literary context of Isaiah 61,3. The ash is associated
with the past, a period of grief. The crown, however, is related to sal-
vation in the present time, in which YHWH sends his spirit to Isaiah
in order to proclaim the message of hope to the poor.
Secondly, the characterization of wordplay as an interplay be-
tween both sound and meaning makes clear why this definition is
30
Moreover, the definition of wordplay as a “play†with the constitutive
aspects of a “wordâ€, i.e. sound and meaning, is quite logical.
31
C A S A N O W I C Z , Paronomasia in the Old Testament, 12-13. Cf. W.
BÜHL MANN – K. SCHERER, Stilfiguren der Bibel. Ein kleines Nachschla-
gewerk (BibB 10; Fribourg 1973) 21.
32
CASANOWICZ, Paronomasia in the Old Testament, 32.
33
J.L. KOOLE, Isaiah. Part III. Vol. 3. Isaiah Chapters 56–66 (HCOT; Leu-
ven 1998) 276-277.