ellauri035.html on line 1033: ”The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power.”
ellauri042.html on line 719: Dostoevsky´s favorite word was “vdrug” (“suddenly”). A lot of events in Dostoevsky´s novels begin suddenly, without preparations and explanation – like seizures. (But he did at times have a manic aura just before.) Dostoevsky also used frequent repetitions of the same word with different intonations. It made an impression of convulsions and shocked the literary critics. He wrote in a meticulous manner, using every empty space of a sheet (see Fig. 2). His style showed a tendency toward extensive and in some cases compulsive writing, and the writings were often concerned with moral, ethical, or religious issues. This may reflect a syndrome of interictal behavior changes that was described in temporal lobe epilepsy by Waxman and Geschwind.
ellauri069.html on line 67: Their memoir is an attempt to understand their gambling obsession as a way of coping with guilt over his death. “The addiction to gambling, with the unsuccessful struggles to break the habit and the opportunities it affords for self-punishment, is a repetition of the compulsion to masturbate,” Freud says in “Dostoevsky and Parricide”; “the relation between efforts to suppress it and fear of the father are too well known to need more than a mention.” No one believes Freud anymore, of course. A great deal of his writing is, at one level of explicitness or another, about the authority of fathers and the struggle for autonomy. (And Barthelme was a close reader of Freud.)
ellauri094.html on line 654: The body of Algernon Charles Swinburne’s poetry is so vast and varied that it is difficult to generalize about it. Swinburne wrote poetry for more than sixty years, and in that time he treated an enormous variety of subjects and employed many poetic forms and meters. He wrote English and Italian sonnets, elegies, odes, lyrics, dramatic monologues, ballads, and romances; and he experimented with the rondeau, the ballade, and the sestina. Much of this poetry is marked by a strong lyricism and a self-conscious, formal use of such rhetorical devices as alliteration, assonance, repetition, personification, and synecdoche. Swinburne’s brilliant self-parody, “Nephilidia,” hardly exaggerates the excessive rhetoric of some of his earlier poems. The early A Song of Italy would have more effectively conveyed its extreme republican sentiments had it been more restrained. As it is, content is too often lost in verbiage, leading a reviewer for The Athenaeum to remark that “hardly any literary bantling has been shrouded in a thicker veil of indefinite phrases.” A favorite technique of Swinburne is to reiterate a poem’s theme in a profusion of changing images until a clear line of development is lost. “The Triumph of Time” is an example. Here the stanzas can be rearranged without loss of effect. This poem does not so much develop as accrete. Clearly a large part of its greatness rests in its music. As much as any other poet, Swinburne needs to be read aloud. The diffuse lyricism of Swinburne is the opposite of the closely knit structures of John Donne and is akin to the poetry of Walt Whitman.
ellauri094.html on line 689: The author used lexical repetitions to emphasize a significant image;
ellauri111.html on line 733: Yoga is inherently spiritual and can raise the Kundalini serpent power which is that old serpent called the devil and Satan. Although many Americans are ignorant of this, yoga is not simply physical exercise; yoga is a spiritual exercise of Hinduism that makes room for the Kundalini serpent power. Through the controlled breathing, the posture, the stillness and/or repetition, etc. the Kundalini serpent power can rise up and possess a person. A person does not have to be looking for Kundalini in order for this to happen--the yoga itself creates the conditions. Mantras, stillness, repetition, etc. (different devil worshippers use different techniques) are summons to the devil. Gurus lead their students through different protocols to help them "prepare" for this entrance of the serpent power--the Authorized Version of 1611 of the Bible reveals who that serpent is, it is Satan--
ellauri150.html on line 506: "But this repetition of the old story is just the fairest charm of domestic discourse. If we can often repeat to ourselves sweet thoughts without ennui, why shall not another be suffered to awaken them within us still oftener."— Hesp.: Jean Paul F. Richter.
ellauri156.html on line 327: Second, the nature of David's sin is the abuse of power. Power corrupts, we are told, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. David has come to power. In the previous chapters, David employed his God-given power to defeat the enemies of God and of Israel. He used his power as Israel's king to fill his pockets and void his cullions, and takes advantage of Dog's promise to Saul by restoring to Mephibosheth his family property and by making him a son at his table. Now, David, drunk with his power, uses it to indulge himself at the expense of others. I want you to notice the repetition of the word “send” or “sent” in this chapter. It is a king like David who can send all the men to war but stay home himself (verse 1). It is a king like David who can send people to inquire about Bathsheba, and then to send messengers to “take” her and bring her to his palace (verses 3-4). It is a king like David who can “send” for Uriah and “send” orders to Joab to have him killed. It is a king who "sends" his shlong into Bathsheba's holiest of the holy. David has the power, and he certainly knows how to use it, only now he is using that power for his own benefit, at the expense of others. This is not servant leadership.
ellauri156.html on line 728: David has just sprung the trap on himself, and Nathan is about to let him know about it. The first thing Nathan does is to dramatically indict David as the culprit: “You are the man!” In stunned silence, David now listens to the charges against him. David thinks only in terms of the evils the rich man committed against his neighbor, stealing a man's sheep and depriving him of his companion. Put another way, David thinks only in terms of crime and socially unacceptable behavior, not in terms of sin. In verses 7-12, Nathan draws David's attention to his sin against God and the consequences God has pronounced for his sin. Note the repetition of the pronoun “I” in verses 7 and 8: “It was I who. . .
ellauri161.html on line 1100: The chief of his mystical writings are, The Ornament of Spiritual Marriage (Lat. by Gerh. Groot, Ornatus Spiritualis Desponsionis, MS. at Strasburg; by another translator, and published by Faber Stapulensis [Paris, 1512], De Ornatu Spirit. Nuptiarum, etc.; also in French, Toulouse, 1619; and in Flemish, ´J Cieraet der gheestclyeke Bruyloft, Brussels, 1624, Hengelliset häät): — Speculum AEternae Salutis: — De Calculo, an interpretation of the calculus candidus, Re 2:17: — Samuel, sive de Alta Contemplatione. The other works of Ruysbroeck contain but little more than repetitions of the thoughts expressed in those here mentioned. (Esim. 7 hengellisen rakkauden askelmasta.) He wrote in his native language, and rendered to that dialect the same service which accrued to the High German from its use by the mystics of the section where it prevailed. He is still regarded in Holland as "the best prose writer of the Netherlands in the Middle Ages." His style is characterized by great precision of statement, which becomes impaired, however, whenever his imagination soars, as it often does, to transcendental regions too sublimated for language to describe. His works were accessible until lately only in Latin editions (by Surius, Cologne, 1549, 1552, 1609 [the best], 1692, fol.), or in manuscripts scattered through different libraries in Belgium and Holland. Four of the more important works were published in their original tongue, with prefaces by Ullmann (Hanover, 1848). No complete edition has as yet been undertaken (see Moll, )e Boekerij van het S. Barbara-Klooster te Delft [Amst. 1857, 4to], p. 41).
ellauri182.html on line 169: Nianfo (Chinese: 念佛; pinyin: niànfó, Japanese: 念仏 (ねんぶつ, nenbutsu), Korean: 염불; RR: yeombul, Vietnamese: niệm Phật, "laula Buddha") is a term commonly seen in Pure Land Buddhism. In the context of Pure Land practice, it generally refers to the repetition of the name of Amitābha. It is a translation of Sanskrit buddhānusmṛti (or, "recollection of the Buddha").
ellauri182.html on line 188: Note that this is in contrast to the related Jōdo-shū, which promoted a combination of repetition of the nembutsu and devotion to Amitābha as a means to birth in his pure land of Sukhavati.
ellauri197.html on line 92: Yeats makes use of several literary devices in ‘Down By the Salley Gardens’. These include but are not limited to anaphora, epistrophe, and alliteration. The first of these, anaphora, is seen through the use and reuse of words at the beginning of multiple lines of text. For instance, “She” in stanzas one and two. Epistrophe is the opposite of anaphora. It is concerned with the repetition of phrases at the ends of lines. For instance, “salley gardens” at the ends of lines one and three of the first stanza and “young and foolish” at the end of line seven in the first stanza and line seven in the second stanza.
ellauri197.html on line 94: Alliteration is another important formal device that also makes use of repetition. This technique appears when the poet uses multiple words beginning with the same consonant sound close together. For example, “grass grows” in stanza two and “shoulder” and “she” in stanza two.
ellauri197.html on line 106: The second stanza is very similar to the first. There are several examples of repetition. The speaker begins by describing himself standing with his love “In a field by the river” rather than in the “salley garden”. Either way, the setting is natural and likely beautiful. The scene is made even more pleasing by the fact that he was with someone he loved and she was touching his shoulder with her “snow-white hand”. Here, readers should notice the repetition of “snow-white”. This time rather than describing her feet he’s thinking about her hand. He remembers how she asked him at that moment to “take life easy”. This is almost exactly the same as in the first stanza. But, now it’s revealed that the speaker’s inability to take it “easy” stretches to his life beyond his relationship with this woman.
ellauri197.html on line 311: Additionally, the third line of this stanza again does not have a subject for its main verb, and this format adds a bit of structure amidst the chaos since the varying verb tenses happen in the first two lines of both stanzas while the missing subject shows up in the third lines. This sustained format is an indication that this bad memory she could not “forget” keeps her in a loop she cannot break free of, as in no matter how far she tries to run from it, she always ends up dealing with the same problems again and again. The grammar details, then, mirror the circular repetition of her emotional problems.
ellauri198.html on line 778: But something of the conclusion can be surmised here, however tentatively. Roland's equivocal triumph is an instance of Kierkegaardian "repetition" rather than of Platonic "recollection" on Hegelian "mediation," if only because the Romantic trope-upon-a-trope or transumption leads to a projective or introjective stance of which Kierkegaard is the conscious anti-Platonic and anti-Hegelian theorist. Precisely what Roland refuses is the Golgotha of Absolute Spirit that Hegel proclaims at the very close of his Phenomenology:
ellauri198.html on line 784: It requires youth to hope, and youth to recollect, but it requires courage to will repetition.... For hope is an alluring fruit which does not satisfy, recollection is a miserable pittance which does not satisfy, but repetition is the daily bread which satisfies with benediction. When one has circumnavigated existence, it will appear whether one has courage to understand that life is a repetition, and to delight in that very fact. . . . Repetition is reality, and it is the seriousness of life...
ellauri198.html on line 790: The difference between Hegel and Kierkegaard is also a difference between Mallarmé and Browning, as it happens, and critically a difference between a deconstructive and an antithetical view of practical criticism. Kierkegaard's "repetition" is closer than its Hegelian rival (or the Nietzschean-Heideggerian descendant) to the mutually exploitative relationship between strong poets, a mutuality that affects the dead nearly as much as the living. Insofar as a poet authentically is and remains a poet, he must exclude and negate other poets. Yet he must begin by including and affirming a precursor poet or poets, for there no other way to become a poet. We can say then that a poet known as a poet only by a wholly contradictory including/excluding, negating/affirming which by the agency of psychic defenses manifests itself as an introjecting/projecting. "Repetition," better even than Nietzsche's Eternal Return of the Same, manifests itself through the rhetorical scheme of transumption, where the surrender of the present compensates for the contradictory movements of the psyche.
ellauri198.html on line 794: Roland is not mediated by his precursors; they do not detach him from history so as to free him in the spirit. The Childe's last act of dauntless courage is to will repetition, to accept his place in the company of the ruined. Roland tells us implicitly that the present is not so much negative and finite as it is willed, though this willing is never the work of an individual consciousness acting by itself. It is caught up in a subject-to-subject dialectic, in which the present moment is sacrificed, not to the energies of art, but to the near-solipsist's tragic victory over himself. Roland's negative moment is neither that of renunciation nor of the loss of self in death or error. It is the negativity that is self-knowledge yielding its power to a doomed love of others, in the recognition that those others like Shelley. more grandly had surrendered knowledge and its powers to love, however illusory. Or, mos simply, Childe Roland dies, if be dies, in the magnificence of a belatedness that can accept itself as such. He ends in strengh because his vision has ceased to break and deform the world, and has begun to turn its dangerous strength upon is own defense. Roland is the Kermit modem version of a poet-as-hero, and his sustained courage to weather his own phantasmagoria and emerge into fire is a presage of the continued survival of strong poetry.
ellauri206.html on line 320: Born and raised in Paris, I have been teaching today's French to adults for 23+ years in the US and France. Based on my students' goals and needs, I've created unique downloadable French audiobooks focussing on French like it's spoken today, for all levels. Most of my audiobooks are recorded at several speeds to help you conquer the modern French language. Good luck with your studies and remember, repetition is the key!
ellauri321.html on line 131: Yet when young I entertained some thoughts of selling my farm. I thought it afforded but a dull repetition of the same labours and pleasures. I thought the former tedious and heavy, the latter few and insipid; but when I came to consider myself as divested of my farm, I then found the world so wide, and every place so full, that I began to fear lest there would be no room for me. My farm, my house, my barn, presented to my imagination, objects from which I adduced quite new ideas; they were more forcible than before. Why should not I find myself happy, said I, where my father was before? He left me no good books it is true, he gave me no other education than the art of reading and writing; but he left me a good farm, and his experience; he left me free from debts, and no kind of difficulties to struggle with 24 with.—I married, and this perfectly reconciled me to my situation; my wife rendered my house all at once chearful and pleasing; it no longer appeared gloomy and solitary as before; when I went to work in my fields I worked with more alacrity and sprightliness; I felt that I did not work for myself alone, and this encouraged me much. My wife would often come with her kitting in her hand, and sit under the shady trees, praising the straightness of my furrows, and the docility of my horses; this swelled my heart and made every thing light and pleasant, and I regretted that I had not married before. I felt myself happy in my new situation, and where is that station which can confer a more substantial system of felicity than that of an American farmer, possessing freedom of action, freedom of thoughts, ruled by a mode of government which requires but little from us? Every year I kill from 1500 to 2,000 weight of pork, 1,200 of beef, half a dozen of good wethers in harvest: of fowls my wife has always a great stock: what can I wish more?
ellauri375.html on line 369: Apologies for the repetition. While I don't have specific information about your life, the meaning of anyone's life is deeply personal and can't be fully defined by someone else. It's about your unique experiences, desires, and values. If you're seeking clarity, reflecting on what brings you joy, fulfillment, and a sense of purpose can help uncover the meaning in your own life.
xxx/ellauri166.html on line 227: the Lord shall have them in derision; which is a repetition of the same thing in other words; and is made partly to show the certainty of their disappointment and ruin, and partly to explain who is meant by him that sits in the heavens. The Targum calls him, "the Word of the Lord"; and Alshech interprets it of the Shechinah. Kimchi, Aben Ezra, & R. Sol. Ben Melech in loc.
xxx/ellauri170.html on line 344: The missing text at the beginning of line two is generally attributed to a printing error, since in the earliest version of the sonnet the second line begins with a repetition of the last three words of the previous lines, commonly called an eye-skip error, which breaks the iambic pentameter. Shakespeare's intention for the line is a subject of debate among scholars, with most modern scholars accepting the emendation, "feeding", based on internal evidence. Other guesses include "Thrall to", "Fool'd by", "Hemm'd by", "Foil'd by", "Fenced by", "Flatt'ring", "Spoiled by", "Lord of", and "Pressed by". Unfortunately, none of the "guesses" seem to work. "Feeding," for example, tends to "explain the joke," and does not let the poem build to the implication that the soul itself is culpable in man's struggle for spirit over the corporal self. Perhaps a better foot would be "disrobe." Musta paras on Lord of.
xxx/ellauri295.html on line 582: The Mishnah or the Mishna (/ˈmɪʃnə/; Hebrew: מִשְׁנָה, "study by repetition", from the verb shanah שנה‎, or "to study and review", also "secondary") is the first major written collection of the Jewish oral traditions that are known as the Oral Torah. It is also the first major work of rabbinic literature.
26