Synchysis

TL;DR: Synchysis is the rearrangement of syntax, decoupling modifiers with their linguistic heads for a provocative effect.

This is a rhetorical technique in which modifiers and nouns are purposefully detached and repositioned to provide multi-layered meanings, to control poetic meter and flow, or to draw attention to a certain idea.

Synchysis

IPA: /ˈsɪn.kə.sɪs/

SPA: [sin-ki-sis]

ABC: syn-chy-sis

variants: “synchisis,” “synchesis”

type: rhetorical device, poetic technique

related terms: “hyperbaton,“ “anastrophe“

Synchysis is also commonly used to bamboozle or stun the reader for some degree of thematic or theatric effect. The unnatural torsion of syntax forces the reader to slow down and think deeper into the meaning of the synchytic phrase, especially if said phrase completely contrasts with surrounding phrases or sentences.

In its simplest form, the relationships between units in synchysis are notated as "A1B1A2B2" in which the letters denote their original, proper syntactical relationship, and the numbers denote grammatical purpose (either a modifier or a head/nucleus). It's important to note that not all instances of synchysis are notated in this exact manner; this example is just the simplest form possible to aid with analysis. You may even remove the numbers in the notation to purely denote syntactical relationships for extra simplicity.

Fig.1

"Quickly, slowly, surrender, die."

  • "Quickly" is A1, a modifier for "surrender"

  • "Slowly" is B1, a modifier for "die"

  • "Surrender" is A2, the head of A1

  • "Die" is B2, the head of B1

The first two words in that example are iambs, lulling the reader into a fleeting sense of security that is then subverted by the initial stress of the dactyl foot of "surrender," all of which is then punctuated by the stressed syllable of "die" (which is also a masculine ending).

If this example were to be written out in proper syntax, the dramatic effect would vanish, and the meaning would change almost entirely. The phrase "Quickly surrender; slowly die." just doesn't slap as good. It reads as if a quip on top of a propaganda poster, teaching soldiers about the pitfalls of surrendering.

Also note that this example I just made up gradually concludes to a sudden stop, starting fast with "quickly," then losing momentum with "slowly," then a dramatic pivot with "surrender," and finally concluding with death. I intentionally placed the group of adverbs first to take advantage of how they pace the semantic meaning of the phrase.

But, of course, just because a phrase can be turned synchytic doesn't mean you should always use it. A consequence of this technique is its potential for misinterpretation. What might seem obvious in the poet's mind does not always translate well with readers.

Since this technique also has a jarring effect, using it too often could unintentionally affect the flow of the poem. Its strength lies in the fact that it contrasts with the general sonic or thematic flow of the poem, especially with other lines or phrases in its proximity.

Synchysis has roots in Greek and Latin poetry, which uses an almost completely different syntax from English. John Milton's poems are prime examples of inclusions of synchysis because he deliberately mirrored the Latin structures. Shakespeare's oeuvre also employs this technique and other similar-sounding techniques quite often. Therefore, using this technique could possibly lend an air of antiquity to your poetry if used too often. Some modern readers would prefer not to read poetry like this since it sounds pretentious.