Phonological Parallelism

Norman D Gutter said:

Good thread. Thanks for starting this discussion.

The concept of phonological parallelism is, I think, something the best poets do, whether or not they articulate it by that name. I've been aware of it since pretty much the beginning of my serious poetry writing (though I'm not, by stating that, saying I'm among the best), and have sometimes used it to good effect.

Click to expand...

That's right, I've always been aware of sonic interactions, as I believe most poets are, whatever they choose to call what they note or deploy. But it is interesting to know that there is a theory, or at least a defined practice surrounding it -- because that gives prevalence to experimentation and allows the further exploration of methodologies and ultimately something to discuss. Layering is very important to me in this sense and something which has become second nature, and something to fine tune afterwards.

Norman D Gutter said:

The idea of mono-, di-, and polysyllabic is something I never thought of. It makes sense; I shall have to ponder it more.

Click to expand...

This is the point where the theory kicks in, where the nature of natural ability starts to take to training to realize the phonic quality of words -- what in many formal pieces has led to the initial magic that drives the verse. You see this expansive understanding primarily in classical poetry - and especially in trochaic verse which would otherwise be incredibly difficult to be consistent without it. Think here Poe's The Raven in which the poly- (including di-) and monosyllabic nature of in-line schemes and systems, partialisms and end-resonance work to maintain the meter and pace. Also, Shakespeare when writing the parts of mystical and magical beings commonly used trochaic meter to give an immediate alien and un-human quality to their voices, without attention to this concept that would have been impossible. That's not to say that the only extension for higher parallel phonology theory (as it is academically known) is trochaic verse. There are many other uses and places for it in poetry, in both formal verse and free verse. The latter of which can benefit greatly as the loss of recurrent/established meter can become invisible through such device.

Norman D Gutter said:

I offer as an example of this a cinquain I wrote.

Daybreak
Arise.
Clear the clutter.
Shake off your sleepiness.
Adventure awaits all who claim
today.

Click to expand...

Norman D Gutter said:

One thing this has going for it is the circling around and repeating a sound from an earlier line in a later line. Lines 1 and 4 have the "a", lines 2 and 4 have the "cl" and "r". Line 3 stands alone with the "s" alliteration, though if joined with L1 has the "s" assonance.

I've always been a fan of wrapping back around at the end of the poem to something that came before.

Click to expand...

Your use of parallelisms is exactly what I was talking about when I began to discuss partials and mixing up systems and schemes - it's more common in poetry for alliteration to be echoed as consonance (or vice versa) than it is to have a steady and continuous string of either, yet most beginners and modern poets looking to try their hand at formal verse opt for the latter.

Norman D Gutter said:

But this isn't free verse: it's a cinquain, so it has lineal structure and meter (iambic). It contains no images and little metaphor. So it needs other poetic devices to carry the day. Hopefully the structure, meter, and sonic devices suffice.

Click to expand...

Poetry doesn't require to use exclusively imagery by way way of direct reference, imagery can also be present in the form of phonic resonance. If I write a poem about mail using the right sonics to give a chug-a-chug quality - it's not unthinkable that the poem conjures an image of a postal train...

I didn't start this thread solely for free verse - it's a resource for poets of all 'persuasions' (). Thing is, phonology in depth is a core element in most classical and formal metric verse, but something less common in contemporary verse and free verse, why? There is no rule to say that the irregularity of free verse excludes the use of phonological parallelisms, in fact, the irregularity would/could/should offer plenty of space for enhancement through it and because of it.

kdnxdr said:

Which classification would my poem fit into, if it would fit into any at all?

my fart

it's an innocuous innuendo,
a private joke imposed,
inoberservant inoculation
inoffensive, I suppose,
inordinate and inodorous;
inopportune for your nose

Click to expand...

Sorry I missed you post, Kid. It's not so much about classification as it about recognizing where phonic quality suits or how it works/enhances etc. For example you have a recurring A rhyme as your end-line parallelism served by way of partials and fulls. You then also have a B rhyme that features once in-line and then takes the place of where the reader expects the A rhyme and is pleasantly surprised, the similarity between the 2 rhymes makes the surprise all the more juicy. The polysyllabic alliteration is also a nice treat - but it is limited, hence the interesting spread of partial consonance to close each occurrence, yet despite the mixed consonance of it, you have a recurring start-line rhyme. Heavy layering, but fun.

Debbie V said:

I'm curious about what I've done without realizing.

Click to expand...

Let me break it down for you. The line-breaks are for theoretic expansion as I can't really approach much of the rhyming without a structure (but for the record, I'd like to say you could use them to make this less prose poem and work to the breaks metrically... should you feel the poem over the prose).

As prose it has a quality of wide and deep layering, but it's only approachable in the sense of parallelisms as in-line rhymes suited around sentences in paragraphs.

Debbie V said:

Born into the searing heat | I've broken here to reflect upon the caesura which offers a slight pause and to highlight that this portion offers no parallelism (I also don't like the reuse of 'heat' so many times, but that's a critique issue, not for this discussion -- unless you used another word which held parallelism with 'heat' instead)
of sun, unaware of what’s to come.
You never understood what heat could do(1).

They took your heat out on you.(2) <-- (1)+(2) = end-line-rhyme
Burned it on your arm with cigarettes.
But still you chose to shine(3). <-- line-mirror partialism
They bid you smile, that’s why(4). <-- (3)+(4) = partial end-line rhyme; in-line rhyme

You grew, fed by all that warmth,
until the cigarette stung your lungs. <-- in-line rhyme
You were burning up inside. <-- partial end-line rhyme with (3+4)

What will you do with your fire? <-- partial end-line assonance with (3+4)
Smoke streaming from your soul. <-- in-line assonance stretched from start-line to end-line (known as an 'assonant cage/frame')
Turn your heat on me,
your child, born in July? <-- in-line rhyme, echoes (3+4), partial disyllabic end-line in July with (3+4)

Click to expand...

I missed the partial rhyme of 'could' and 'understood' -- it's a partial monosyllabic rhyme. Mono- because the rhyme is in 'could' as taken from a single syllable that doesn't carry over the 2 syllables from 'understood'. No excuse for my sloppiness there -- just missed it! And because of that missed 'took' too.

Line-mirror rhyme is when the 2 words central to the verse rhyme:

I am a man canned with baked beans

The partialism marked at (3) is you chose. However, it's a very partial partialism