Chiasmus Criteria in Review

Authors

Neal Rappleye

Keywords

BYU Studies, Chiasmus

Abstract

As in all academic fields, the discipline of chiastic studies has had to grapple with persistent questions related to method. Understanding how these questions have been dealt with in the past is critical in knowing how to proceed in the future. In that spirit, I offer a historical review of the criteria or standards scholars have used to judge the merits of chiastic proposals. Of course, space ensures this will be far from comprehensive, and I make no pretensions of being able to resolve the issues that have plagued the study of chiasmus for the last seventy-five years. In reviewing past efforts, however, I hope I can adequately identify the problems that persist and provide a fair assessment of where things presently stand. Finally, I will suggest some areas that might need further research going forward.

Recommended Citation

Rappleye, Neal (2020) "Chiasmus Criteria in Review," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 59: Iss. 5, Article 15.
Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol59/iss5/15