In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

This chapter aims to cast new light upon one aspect of Hosea’s literary art, and its persuasive impact, by enlisting the investigative techniques of structuralist rhetorical criticism as inspired by the Russian formalists.1 The literary critic has a different perspective from those who employ more traditional methods of analyzing a text, for he attempts to see how the writer is communicating as much as what he is communicating. Yet this vantage point is not isolated. In fact, the results of literary criticism can often clarify aspects that are in the domain of traditional study. Hence, the disciplines are not contradictory; modern literary criticism does not deny the validity of traditional exegesis nor diminish its excellence. On the contrary, the literary approach complements the traditional one by arming the latter with new, penetrating insight. Thus, a new reading of Hosea :– along literary lines not only affirms what is apparent through conventional methodology concerning the chapter’s beginning, it also suggests a new division of these opening verses. This new reading involves an analysis of a framework used in rhetoric that may be considered part of the deep structure of the passage and that affects the reader’s perception of the progression in Hosea’s argument. The initial rhetorical structure is latent in the two opening stichs. To expose the pattern, however, it is helpful to identify the various parties in Hosea’s audience.  9 Hosea 5:1-3 Between Compositional Rhetoric and Rhetorical Composition All things within’t Are digested, fitted, and composed As it shews Wit had married Order. — , The Staple of News om ‘w z’t hkhnym whqoybw byt yqr’l wbyt hmlk h’zynw ky lkm hmops Hear this, O priests, And attend, O house of Israel, And give ear, O house of the King; For to you pertains the judgment. ( :a) The first party (priests) and the third party (king) present no difficulty. But the expression “house of Israel” refers only to the elders of the people.2 While several commentators agree with Wolff, others prefer a more general referent .3 Y. M. Ward, for instance, suggests that the phrase includes “the whole people” of Israel, and his reading seems plausible, as it best fits the context.4 The prophet’s rebuke, which is evident throughout the chapter, is not limited solely to the leaders; it is also addressed to those who emulate their wicked example. The leaders and their followers share the same abominations. Ward’s reading of “house of Israel” appears convincing from the rhetorical standpoint as well. The parallelism between the first three hemistichs is obvious in terms of both content and meter. In each hemistich, the prophet singles out a particular social group as the object of his condemnation, and each address contains three metrical beats: om ‘w z’t hkhnym // whgoybw byt yqr’l // wbyt hmlk h’zynw If byt yqr’l is not as limited in the number of people it includes as are the other two social groups (hkhnym [priests]) and hmlk [king]), the expression provides some variation in what might otherwise be a simple list and, consequently , prevents the unaesthetic effect of mechanical rigidity, giving the parallelism a refreshing sense of flexibility. The cumulative nature of the parallel hemistichs, each of which seems to echo the preceding one, compounds groups in Hosea’s audience to the point of congestion. From a theoretical standpoint, the parallel components seem endless because there is no evident progression (e.g., from the largest group to the smallest) that promises some resolution to the apparently random sequence. More and more parallel components could in fact join the horizontal continuum without drawing it closer to a vertical conclusion.5  :  The fourth hemistich, “for to you pertains the judgment” (ky lkm hmops), plays an important role, for it disrupts that paratactic continuum and provides a conclusion for the parallel hemistichs that precede it. Because it differs from the previous three hemistichs, it serves to disengage the perpetuum mobile. Moreover, the concluding hemistich syntactically completes that sequence by providing a causal ending. In a diagram of this process, the author establishes a pattern with the first three hemistichs (PH), which are a cumulative series of parallel units, and then introduces the fourth hemistich (EH) in order to extricate himself from this continuum: The absence of an internal component that moves the cumulative series of parallels toward a natural conclusion finds compensation in the external components , which close the cumulative...

Share