123. Figures of Speech in Scripture and Poetry

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Figures of Speech and Their Importance #

• Figures of speech are devices used by poets and theologians to convey meaning through indirect naming
• Understanding these figures is crucial for avoiding misinterpretation of Scripture and literature
• Heretics have historically misunderstood scriptural figures of speech, leading to serious theological errors

Metonymy (Μετωνυμία) #

• Definition: Transfer of a name from one thing to another, typically from cause to effect or from container to contained
• Two forms: (1) Cause to effect or vice versa; (2) Container to contained

Examples of Metonymy #

• “Let all flesh bless the Lord”: Does not mean the flesh itself, but those in the flesh (those on earth)
• “This is a wicked place”: The place itself is not wicked, but the people in the place are
• “I had a bad time”: Time itself is not bad, but the events contained in that time were bad
• “The White House announced today”: The building did not speak; the President in the White House did
• “The White House was bombed”: Refers to the President’s house, not the speaker’s own house
• Cause to effect: “Loving hate” or “hating love” in Roman literature—love causes hate when two people compete for the same object; hatred of an enemy follows from love of one’s country
• Scornful pride: The metonymy of tongue (explicit example mentioned but not fully developed)

Why Metonymy Appears in Poetry #

• Poets use these figures spontaneously and naturally
• The figures are named by rhetoricians but not by philosophers
• Thomas mentions metonymy in his scriptural commentaries when identifying the figure at work

Synecdoche (Συνεκδοχή) #

• Definition: Transfer of the name of the universal whole to the part, or vice versa (the “more known” kind of whole-part relationship)
• Examples: Calling an athlete “the toe” (the part doing the distinctive action); calling someone “a brain” or “a bicep” (emphasizing one part)

Shakespeare’s Use of Figures #

Sonnet 1: “From fairest creatures we desire increase” #

• “Beauties rose might never die”: Uses metonymy in “beauty” (applying the common word to human beauty) and appears to use another figure in “beauty’s rose”
• Complex figuration: “Beauty” is a metonymy for human beauty (from general to particular); “rose” appears to be a metonymy in reverse (from particular to general)
• Effect: Creates a striking, memorable line that emphasizes the fragility of beauty and the necessity of reproduction
• Beauty is the perfection of youth (Aristotelian principle: pleasure perfects operation as beauty perfects youth)

Scripture and Figurative Language #

John 1:14 - “The Word was made flesh” #

• Synecdoche of the part for the whole: Uses “flesh” (the bodily part) instead of “man” or “human nature”
• Purpose of the figure: Emphasizes the assumption of even the lowest, most fragile part of human nature
• Heretical misunderstandings:
  1. Some thought the Word literally became flesh (turned into flesh)
  2. Others thought the Word replaced the human soul (the Word as the soul)
• Correct interpretation: The Word assumed complete human nature, including body and soul, but Scripture emphasizes the bodily aspect through synecdoche

“To dust you shall return” (and variations) #

• Uses “flesh” to emphasize the mortal, fragile aspect of human nature
• Thomas uses this phraseology in Scripture
• The emphasis on “flesh” rather than “soul” highlights human mortality

The Lack of Philosophical Treatment #

• Gap in philosophical literature: There is no comprehensive treatise on metonymy in the philosophical tradition
• Source in rhetoric: These figure names come from rhetoric and poetry rather than philosophy
• Poor naming: As a result, the names are not as well-developed or precise as they might be in a philosophical context
• Where to learn them: Students should encounter these figures first when reading poetry, though Thomas’s scriptural commentaries and rhetorical discussions provide some doctrine

Key Arguments #

Why Understanding Figures Prevents Heresy #

• When heretics do not recognize a figure of speech in Scripture, they interpret figurative language literally
• Misreading “the Word was made flesh” as literal physical transformation or as the Word replacing the human soul represents serious theological error
• Proper recognition of synecdoche shows that the Word assumed complete human nature while emphasizing its bodily aspect

Why Poets Use Figures Spontaneously #

• Shakespeare demonstrates that great poets use complex figures of speech without explicit awareness of their rhetorical names
• The figures serve poetic purposes: memorability, emotional impact, economy of language
• Understanding the figures after encountering them in poetry enriches interpretation

Important Definitions #

Antonomasia (Ἀντονομασία) #

• A figure of speech where a proper name or title is applied generally, or a common name is applied as a proper name
• Example: “Christ” (meaning “the Anointed One”) functions as a name
• In Scripture: “The Bible,” “the White House” (where these terms stand for particular things rather than general categories)
• Mentioned as related to understanding how names work in figurative language

Synecdoche vs. Metonymy #

• Synecdoche: Part-whole relationship (the more known kind of whole-part)
• Metonymy: Cause-effect or container-contained (various relationships beyond mere part-whole)
• The distinction matters for precise interpretation

Examples & Illustrations #

Athletic Examples #

• The kicker: In football, when a kicker performs the distinctive action of kicking a field goal or extra point, the team calls him “the toe”
• Emphasis through part-naming: When you say “the toe kicked the ball,” you emphasize the distinctive part of the person that performs the action

Domestic Example #

• The cat and the meowing: An old cat’s persistent meowing illustrates natural desires and instinctive behavior, though not directly related to figures of speech

Practical Examples from Daily Life #

• “Don’t force it”: When something doesn’t fit properly (e.g., putting a square peg in a round hole), we say “it doesn’t want to go”
• Scoop stuck in jar: An anecdote about a scoop stuck in a jar for months that “didn’t want to go” illustrates how we speak of material objects as having will or resistance

Questions Addressed #

How Do We Distinguish Metonymy from Simple Metaphor? #

• The lecture does not explicitly address this distinction, though it discusses the difference between synecdoche and metonymy

Why Are These Figures Important for Theology? #

• Recognizing figures of speech in Scripture prevents heretical misinterpretation
• Understanding the rhetorical intention helps us grasp the theological meaning correctly
• Without recognizing synecdoche in “the Word was made flesh,” readers might arrive at false conclusions about the incarnation

Why Do Philosophers Neglect This Doctrine? #

• Philosophers have traditionally focused on logic and metaphysics rather than rhetoric
• The figures are named and discussed by rhetoricians but not subjected to philosophical systematization
• As a result, the doctrine remains somewhat informal and unsystematized in philosophical tradition

Notable Quotes #

“Things in motion sooner catch the eye than what not stirs” (Shakespeare, Troilus and Cressida)

• Explains why we notice movement and change more readily than stasis

“Beauties rose might never die” (Shakespeare, Sonnet 1)

• Example of complex figurative language that requires careful interpretation

“This is a metonym” (Thomas Aquinas, in scriptural commentaries)

• Berquist notes that Thomas occasionally identifies figures of speech in his commentaries, providing some philosophical doctrine about them

Connections to Broader Lecture Context #

Relation to Logic and Language #

• Understanding figures of speech relates to the proper interpretation of statements in logic
• The distinction between what is literally stated and what is figuratively meant affects how we evaluate truth claims

Relation to Memory and Retention #

• The lecture transitions from discussion of figures of speech to discussion of memory as a power of the soul
• The connection suggests that vivid, figurative language aids memory and retention

Relation to Thomistic Philosophy #

• Thomas’s approach to Scripture involves recognizing and interpreting figures of speech
• This demonstrates that Thomistic theology integrates rhetorical and poetic understanding with philosophical analysis