Talk:Chiasmus

message: Any reason that Chiasmus and Chiastic structure can't be combined into a single page?
*No. Because the use of chiasmus are specific to verses or stanzas where the words are laid out in a specific way like a poem or haiku. Whereas, chiastic structure has a more broader ranger of parallelism occurring throughout a chapter or an entire book, usually subject to interpretation or certain points of view. A merge like this would not be appropriate. Further, this merge was already proposed in 2005 here > Chiastic structure#Merge? and I agree with User: E=MC^2 that it not be merged. Jasonasosa (talk) 23:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: - üser:Altenmann >t 15:40, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

text: Merge chiastic structure into chiasmus: the latter is by definition a structure, so the phrase "chiastic structure" is a case of unnecessary amplitude. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: The section Conceptual Chiasmus is from a single academic source and, I would argue, overwritten. There is an incredible amount of detail on (theoretical) links between slavery and abortion given that this is an article on a figure of rhetoric.
Everything from "Consider the table below.. " treads very heavily into discussions that really aren't the remit of this article and could easily be deleted while still keeping the initial idea of the conceptual chiasmus.
--Mdb23b (talk) 15:22, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conceptual Chiasmus 

message: Someone please export that example to the synchysis article.
---Mark Miner  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.183.99.12 (talk) 16:34, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:   Thyestes 10 is not an example of chiasmus 

message: I like how LDS apologists keep updating this article to include the Book of Mormon - 3 out of all 6 references in the article are books and articles written and self-published by LDS apologists, and the one external link to presumably read more about this topic outside of wikipedia points to a site hosted at byu.edu (LDS school). Not arguing they shouldn't have a voice on wikipedia, but I think the article needs to be a tad more diverse - and the amount of LDS sources I think are planted to make it appear they are an authority on the subject. Also: the quote from the published article suggests that examples are "found throughout the Book of Mormon" is dubious at best. FAIR themselves (Unofficial LDS apologist group) admits there's 6 examples:  Skuld-Chan (talk) 02:21, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mormon Apologists 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Chiasmus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060712042330/http://humanities.byu.edu:80/rhetoric/Figures/C/Chiasmus.htm to http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/Figures/C/Chiasmus.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: If these two "schemes of repetition" are identical, then they should be presented as such, but according to Corbett and Connors they are distinct.
Baldick concedes as much, when he writes that antimetabole is a "subtype" of chiasmus.
John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Address (1961) includes a well-known example of antimetabole: "...ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country." 
Corbett and Connors emphatically regard this as such, not as chiasmus. The famous quote should be removed and replaced with as example of chiasmus. CerroFerro (talk) 19:35, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-edit:  distinguishing between chiasmus and antimetabole