Criteria for identifying chiasm of design in New Testament literature : objective means of distinguishing chiasm of design from accidental and false chiasm
Chiastic studies, a step-child of literary analysis and cousin to several other critical methodologies, have become enormously popular since the publication of N.W. Lund's Chiasmus in the New Testament in 1942. However, modern studies of the figure of chiasm (a.k.a. chiasmus, concentric or inve...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Published: |
University of Bristol
2009
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.505768 |
| id |
ndltd-bl.uk-oai-ethos.bl.uk-505768 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
oai_dc |
| spelling |
ndltd-bl.uk-oai-ethos.bl.uk-5057682016-06-21T03:18:32ZCriteria for identifying chiasm of design in New Testament literature : objective means of distinguishing chiasm of design from accidental and false chiasmSmith, Craig Arnold2009Chiastic studies, a step-child of literary analysis and cousin to several other critical methodologies, have become enormously popular since the publication of N.W. Lund's Chiasmus in the New Testament in 1942. However, modern studies of the figure of chiasm (a.k.a. chiasmus, concentric or inverted parallelism, ring composition rhetorical helix, et al) actually began in the I8th century. A survey of the history of chiastic studies from their beginning into the contemporary period indicates that chiastic analysis, while popular, rests precariously upon an insufficient theoretical foundation.229.92University of Bristolhttp://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.505768Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| collection |
NDLTD |
| sources |
NDLTD |
| topic |
229.92 |
| spellingShingle |
229.92 Smith, Craig Arnold Criteria for identifying chiasm of design in New Testament literature : objective means of distinguishing chiasm of design from accidental and false chiasm |
| description |
Chiastic studies, a step-child of literary analysis and cousin to several other critical methodologies, have become enormously popular since the publication of N.W. Lund's Chiasmus in the New Testament in 1942. However, modern studies of the figure of chiasm (a.k.a. chiasmus, concentric or inverted parallelism, ring composition rhetorical helix, et al) actually began in the I8th century. A survey of the history of chiastic studies from their beginning into the contemporary period indicates that chiastic analysis, while popular, rests precariously upon an insufficient theoretical foundation. |
| author |
Smith, Craig Arnold |
| author_facet |
Smith, Craig Arnold |
| author_sort |
Smith, Craig Arnold |
| title |
Criteria for identifying chiasm of design in New Testament literature : objective means of distinguishing chiasm of design from accidental and false chiasm |
| title_short |
Criteria for identifying chiasm of design in New Testament literature : objective means of distinguishing chiasm of design from accidental and false chiasm |
| title_full |
Criteria for identifying chiasm of design in New Testament literature : objective means of distinguishing chiasm of design from accidental and false chiasm |
| title_fullStr |
Criteria for identifying chiasm of design in New Testament literature : objective means of distinguishing chiasm of design from accidental and false chiasm |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Criteria for identifying chiasm of design in New Testament literature : objective means of distinguishing chiasm of design from accidental and false chiasm |
| title_sort |
criteria for identifying chiasm of design in new testament literature : objective means of distinguishing chiasm of design from accidental and false chiasm |
| publisher |
University of Bristol |
| publishDate |
2009 |
| url |
http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.505768 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT smithcraigarnold criteriaforidentifyingchiasmofdesigninnewtestamentliteratureobjectivemeansofdistinguishingchiasmofdesignfromaccidentalandfalsechiasm |
| _version_ |
1718311994943078400 |