Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style and Translation ………………………………….

Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil

Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style

and Translation
Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil
Department of Translation
College of Arts Al -Mustansiriya University

Abstract
Parataxis and hypotaxis are compound words that refer to two stylistic
devices. They involve the arrangement of propositions one after the other in
such a way that goes in line with the role that each proposition plays in speech
or writing.
It is the purpose of this study to shed some light on these two devices by
explaining the way in which they differ from each other, and what tools are used
to achieve them. The study also shows a sort of comparison between parataxis
and hypotaxis in terms of preference of usage in English and Arabic.
Moreover, some problems that may arise in translation are being reviewed.
The paper ends up with some conclusions that may be of use to those interested
in this field.
1. Introduction
The terms ‘’ parataxis” and “ hypotaxis” are compound words. The former is
made up of the prefix ‘’para-‘’ plus the noun “ taxis”, whereas the latter consists
of the prefix ‘’hypo” plus the same noun ‘’taxis’’.
Merriam- Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (2005,11th.ed) gives the following
definitions: ‘’ hypo-‘’, ‘’hyp-‘’: ‘’ A prefix, Greek hypo- meaning: under,
beneath, down, less than the ordinary or norm.’’ (612).
‘’para-‘’, ‘’par-‘’: ‘’ A prefix, Greek para- meaning: beside, alongside of,
beyond, aside from.’’ (897).
‘’-taxis’’: ‘’ arrangement, or ordering.’’(1281).
‘’ parataxis’’: ‘’ The placing of clauses or phrases one after another without
coordinating or subordinating connectives.’’ (900).
‘’ hypotaxis’’: ‘’ Syntactic subordination (as by a conjunction).’’(613).
As for Matthews (2007:286-7), the following definitions are given to
parataxis:
1. The ancient term for coordination, applied especially to that of clauses
or sentences.
2. A syntactic relation between successive units marked only by
intonation:

1122 ‫العدد الثامن والستون‬ 9 ‫جملة كلية الرتبية األساسية‬

Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style and Translation ………………………………….
Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil
e.g. in I am tired, I am hungry, said with the same intonation as I am
tired and I am hungry.
In its second definition, parataxis is so much similar to asyndetic coordination,
in which coordinators are absent but could be supplied.
In the present study, it is to be noted, parataxis is being used to incorporate both
definitions, i.e. , syndetic, as well as asyndetic arrangement and/or ordering of
clauses and sentences alongside each other.
Another related term is (polysendeton); a sentence style which employs many
paratactic conjunctions:
‘’We lived and laughed and loved and left.’’
J. Joyce’s, Finnegans Wake.
In most of his novels and short stories, Hemingway relies heavily on such
basic conjunctions as "and" and "but", not only to link clauses, but even between
phrases. The following two excerpts are taken from his novel In Another
Country:
‘’We were all at the hospital every afternoon, and there were different ways
of walking across the town through the dusk to the hospital. Two of the
ways were alongside canals, but they were long. Always, though, you
crossed a bridge across a canal to enter the hospital. There was a choice of
three bridges. On one of them a woman sold roasted chestnuts. It was
warm, standing in front of her charcoal fire, and the chestnuts were warm
afterward in your pocket. The hospital was very old and very beautiful, and
you entered through a gate and walked across a courtyard and out a gate
on the other side.’’
‘’ In the fall the war was always there, but we did not go to it any more. It
was cold in the fall in Milan and the dark came very early. Then the electric
lights came on, and it was pleasant along the streets looking in the windows.
There was much game hanging outside the shops, and the snow powdered
in the fur of the foxes and the wind blew their tails. The deer hung stiff and
heavy and empty, and small birds blew in the wind and the wind turned
their feathers. It was a cold fall and the wind came down from the
mountains.’’
This style, however, is more evident in Arabic literature than in English:
‫ ولكنه كان زواجآ لم‬،‫"كانت الست سنية عفيفي قد تزوجت في شبابها من صاحب دكان روائح عطرية‬
‫ ثم تركها أرملة منذ عشرة‬،‫ ونهب مالها‬،‫ وأشقى حياتها‬،‫ فأساء الرجل معاملتها‬،‫يصادفه التوفيق‬
".................‫ ولبثت أرملة طوال تلك األعوام‬.‫أعوام‬
N. Mahfuz’s Zuqaq Al-Midaq.
‫ وستكون مغامرة الليلة ابتداء‬.‫" لن انسى الماضي لسبب بسيط هو أنه حاضر – ال ماض – في نفسي‬
‫ وجرى النيل كأمواج من الظالم تنغرس في جنباتها أسهم‬،‫ وستكون مغامرة دسمة‬،‫أفتتح به العمل‬
‫ ثم دنت النجوم من األرض عندما‬،‫ وساد صمت شامل مريح‬.‫الضياء المنعكسة من مصابيح الشاطئ‬
".‫ وقام عن مجلسه فتمطى ثم سار على مقربة من الشاطئ نحو المكان الذي جاء منه‬.‫إقترب الفجر‬
(N. Mahfuz’s Al-lis wa al-kilaab.)

1122 ‫العدد الثامن والستون‬ 10 ‫جملة كلية الرتبية األساسية‬

Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style and Translation ………………………………….
Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil
It might be argued that the two new terms, i.e., coordination and
subordination took the place of the traditional terms of parataxis and hypotaxis.
This might be attributed to the fact that the prefix ‘co- ‘has some of the meaning
of the prefix ‘para- ‘, and similarly, both prefixes ‘ sub- ‘ and ‘hypo- ‘ share
some of their meanings. Yet, the terms are not totally synonymous. Coordination
and subordination are looked upon as purely grammatical concepts, while
parataxis and hypotaxis are not as such since they manifest semantic as well as
stylistic characteristics.
It is worthy to mention that Larson (1984:275), prefers to use the two terms
of ‘’addition’’ and ‘’support’’ to refer to the relation between communication
units in the semantic structure so as to emphasize the fact that these are semantic
relations and not purely grammatical ones.
2. Why parataxis and hypotaxis are problematic?
It is to be argued that both parataxis and hypotaxis are among the most
complicated issues. This arises from the fact that the choice between one rather
than the other is not a haphazard one; rather, there are certain situations where to
use them. In fact, it might be said that there is some philosophy behind using
them.
Part of the difficulty emerges from a semantic point of view. The semantic
focus plays a decisive role in determining whether a clause is to be dependent or
independent, for reliance is made on meaning in this regard.
Such a topic is considered one of the problematic fields for a translator due to
the fact that English and Arabic differ in favouring the kind of junctioning,
either parajunctioning or hypojunctioning. Here, a question is raised: is it a must
to translate faithfully the kind of junctioning into the target language that has
been used in the source language, or is the translator allowed to switch as far as
the target language prefers this? It is to be noted, however, that the translator is
unable to present a genuine piece of work if he has not ascertained what the
target language favours.
It is to be stressed that the definition and concept of sentence is by itself
problematic, for the simple fact that over 200 definitions exist in English.
However, a workable one will be adopted. Emphasis will also be laid
exclusively on the propositional relationship and hierarchy between clauses.
3. Para junction /Hypo junction and Style
If translation is to succeed, the style in which the original text has been
written should be taken account of. To achieve this, the translator has to possess
knowledge of the kinds of sentences that he might face in translation, for style
often depends on both the length of sentences as well as the degree of their
complexity.
English sentences are classified into four types, depending on the number of
clauses they contain: simple, compound, complex and compound- complex.

1122 ‫العدد الثامن والستون‬ 11 ‫جملة كلية الرتبية األساسية‬

Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style and Translation ………………………………….
Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil
As for Arabic, sentences are not classified in the same way. Arab grammarians
divide sentences into verbal and non- verbal (Aziz, 1989:11).
It is worth noting that both parataxis and hypotaxis involve the linking or
enlarging of simple sentences. The question is which of the two processes is
more powerful in written and / or spoken discourse?
In writing, we usually put our main ideas into main clauses and the
subordinate ideas into subordinate clauses. It is argued that by using compound
sentences, consisting of two or more main clauses, equal emphasis is given to
equal thoughts but unity is rather weakened, and coherence as well. Between the
clauses of a compound sentence, which are said to be related just as separate
sentences are related, there would be, then, no logical advance; two ideas, or two
expressions of the same idea, would simply be placed side by side. In most cases
of parataxis, the equality of the clauses is evident both grammatically and
semantically. If the writer’s aim, then, is to achieve such a balance; he might
resort to parataxis per se. Such being the case, equal prominence is given to
every conjoined clause and/or sentence. According to Larson (1984:284), the
relationship of conjoining can occur ‘’not only between propositions but also
between propositional clusters, between semantic paragraphs, between episodes,
and so forth.’’
By using complex sentences, on the other hand, the situation will be
different. The thoughts will be put in order of their importance. The most
significant idea will receive the primary emphasis and thus complex sentences
become more unified and coherent as well as logical than compound sentences.
Hence, hypotaxis appears to be more powerful than parataxis for this reason.
Paradoxically, some are of the opinion that one should not always prefer
hypotaxis to parataxis:
‘’ It must not be supposed that subordination is always better than co-ordination
– that is, it might be preferable to express a string of ideas in one main pattern
rather than in two or three. We might very well wish to put two or more ideas on
a level.’’(Roberts, 1962:216).
It might be believed that balance as well as parallelism in textual structure is
best achieved through the usage of paratactic constructions. In this regard,
Greenbaum, etal (1990:459), have gone so far as to say that ‘’coordination is a
rhetorical pattern that seems to be widely attractive’’.
Although it might be thought that these two types of clause relationships are
used alternatively, it is more normal to find both types in any text of whatever
length. ‘’ It is particularly rare to find a text with subordination but without
coordination’’ (Ibid: 460).
As a matter of fact, neither choice is better than the other, i.e., neither too long
sentences, nor too short ones are preferred. A sentence that goes on too long
may become quite boring and hard to follow. If on the other hand, a text is
composed of short sentences alone, the result will be a monotonous piece of

1122 ‫العدد الثامن والستون‬ 12 ‫جملة كلية الرتبية األساسية‬

Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style and Translation ………………………………….
Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil
work. What a skillful writer should aim at is to include different kinds of
sentences in his writings so as to achieve the best effect on his readers. The
bottom line is that writers need to be able to incorporate a variety of sentence
structures into whatever they are writing. Investigating these two methods of
building a text enables us to see how different writers have used these two styles
to tell very different stories.
Some writers, like Hemingway, prefer to use parataxis to make all of his
sentences carry the same weight, and to make every part of the sentence seem
equally important. Short sentences, or, in fact, sentences linked more by
parataxis rather than hypotaxis are often considered to be typical of his style. To
him, sentence length plays an important stylistic function. According to Hatim
and
Munday (2004:24), Hemingway’s preference for shorter sentences and
avoidance of subordinate clauses is fundamental not only to his style but also to
the view of the world that is being depicted. The translator needs to pay
particular attention to preserving the features of the source text so as not to go
out of the way and might convey the opposite effect to what is intended. A
remarkable degree of sensitivity, therefore, is required of the translator to such
stylistic idiosyncrasy.
Other writers might use a rather sophisticated mix of independent and
dependent clauses in order to convey the complex attitudes of their world. More
often than not, the choice between parataxis and hypotaxis is motivated by
stylistic considerations. It is best to have a text in which parataxis is being used
along with hypotaxis:
‘’ It is the flexible use of both devices that endows a text with variety of
expression on the one hand, and with a well – ordered presentation of
information on the other. The combination also enables one to achieve a high
degree of complexity within a single, unified whole.’’(Greenbaum, etal,
1990:460).
Since language is the primary means of social interaction, it is then,
undoubtedly rich to enable human beings to serve their roles or functions in life.
It is no wonder, then, that language is multi – faceted; being rather simple at
times, and quite complex at other times.
While it might be thought that complex sentences belong merely to the most
formal styles of written English, similar instances of complexity may in fact be
found in spoken utterances in informal conversations as well. Hence, it is not to
be believed that complex sentences are exclusively used in written discourse,
while rather simple sentences are found in spoken discourse.
As far as Arabic is concerned, the situation is rather different. This is
attributed to the fact that Arabic does not exhibit the same classification of
sentences found in English. As a matter of fact, it seems that Arabic is much

1122 ‫العدد الثامن والستون‬ 13 ‫جملة كلية الرتبية األساسية‬

Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style and Translation ………………………………….
Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil
more characterized by parataxis than by hypotaxis. Arabic discourse, in contrast
with English, seems to be more paratactic than hypotactic;
‘’ Arabic authors use a great deal of coordination, and very little of the
subordination which is so highly valued in English persuasive writing. Arabic
modificational syntax is also characterized by the paratactic juxtaposition of
items’’ (Johnstone, 1987:85).
[As a matter of fact, a quick review of the basic paratactic particles in Arabic
(cf. Cantarino, 1975: 11-59) can show that their number exceeds their English
counterparts].
Unlike parataxis, hypotaxis in Arabic is said to be considered a new
phenomenon that appeared either as a result of English impact on Arabic, or as a
sign of the development or complexity of intellect;
‘’ It seems that the early Semitic language contained no long sentences, but
was characterized by the phenomenon of parataxis, which means that the
sentences were short, and were linked with each other through(al-waw)……By
time, Semitic languages began to exhibit long sentences, which seemed a little
complicated than before.’’(Hijazi, 1973:147).
4.Parataxis, hypotaxis and Translation
Since each language has got its own linguistic system, it is quite necessary for
the translator to be aware of such differences that may exist between the source
and target languages so as to present the readers with a sound and accurate
translation that does not sound awkward or odd to the speakers of the target
language.
For a translation to sound natural and precise, the translator has to make
use of all the genuine sources of the target language, and not to render the exact
structure found in the text under translation, for this may result in enforcing the
target language with structures that do not exist in it. A simple instance is the
following sentence:
Because it rained, we cancelled the picnic.
This sentence has been given to a number of students in the department of
translation; most of them translate it into:
‫بسبب المطر الغينا الرحلة‬
It might e argued that the word (‫ )بسبب‬is not genuine in literary Arabic, but has
emerged as a result of English impact on the Arabic language. In fact, there is a
simple particle that can be used in such contexts. It is the particle (‫ )الفاء‬which
replaces the English particle (because). Using this particle yields a genuine
Arabic sentence:
‫امطرت فالغينا الرحلة‬
[It should be mentioned, however, that the second rendition is more genuine
than the first rendition, yet, the latter is not wrong or unacceptable.]
More often than not, the conjunction in an English sentence is absent and a
comma is put instead:

1122 ‫العدد الثامن والستون‬ 14 ‫جملة كلية الرتبية األساسية‬

Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style and Translation ………………………………….
Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil
She stood silent, her head slightly on one side.
In translating such a sentence into Arabic, usually a conjunction is inserted as in:
‫وقفت ورأسها مائل قليال الى احد جانبيها‬
This goes in conformity with the argument that Arabic prefers much usage of
paratactic particles, to a degree that almost every two sentences and/or clauses
are to be linked together via parataxis. To illustrate further, consider the
following example:
‫ وكان إنتهى‬..‫ وذابت نفسه وجدآ وقلقآ وإنفعاآل‬،‫ وإلتهب وجهه إحمرارآ‬،‫" وعاود قلبه الخفقان العنيف‬
‫ ثم نهض‬.‫ وفكره ال يستريح من إضطرابه‬،‫ فراح يمشطه دون أن ينبس بكلمة‬،‫من حلق رأس الشاب‬
.‫ وقبل أن يغادر الدكان إكتشف أنه نسي منديله فرجع مسرعآ إلى البيت‬.‫حسين كرشة وأعطاه نقوده‬
‫ وكأنه يرى فيه هذه الصفات ألول‬،‫ فالح لعينيه مرحآ نشيطآ سعيدآ‬،‫وجعل يتابعه بعينيه من موقفه‬
".‫مرة‬
(N. Mahfuz’s Zuqaq Al-Midaq.)
However, many instances of modern Arabic literature exhibit the usage of
implied junctioning , or asyndeton. The following excerpt is a good evidence of
this case:
‫ الكراسي الخشبية ذات‬،‫ النصبة النحاسية‬،‫ الحجرة المستديرة‬.‫"لم يتغير شئ كأنه تركها باألمس‬
‫ يحتسون الشاي ويعقدون‬،‫ الزبائن القالئل المعروفون الموزعون في االركان‬،‫المقاعد من القش المفتول‬
".‫الصفقات‬
(N. Mahfuz’s Al-lis wa al-kilaab.)
This instance of the absence of paratactic and/or hypotactic relations between all
but the last Arabic constructions makes it possible, at times, to adopt asyndeton,
with the aid of punctuation, in translating similar English instances:
He stood; hand in pocket, pipe in mouth.
.‫وقف(و) يده في جيبه(و) غليونه في فمه‬
It is to be noted, however, that a single English sentence can have a number of
Arabic renditions. To illustrate further, consider the following example:
‘’Being unable to remove the chain, I jumped over and knocked vainly for
admittance.’’
(E. Bronte’s, Wuthering Heights).
Once again, this sentence has been given to students of translation; this is how
they render it into Arabic:
)‫وثبت وطرقت الباب طلبآ للدخول ولكن دون جدوى‬،‫ق عل ّي إنتزاع السلسلة‬ ّ ‫( وعندما ش‬
)........................................،‫( النني وجدت نفسي غير قادر على إنتزاع السلسلة‬
)............................................،‫( لما ّ وجدت نفسي غير قادر على فتح السلسلة‬
).......................................................... ،‫(وبسبب فشلي في فتح السلسلة‬
)...................................................... ،‫( وإذ عدمت حيلة في نزع السلسلة‬
).....................................،‫( حين وجدت نفسي غير قادر على إنتزاع السلسلة‬
It appears that all the above translations are directed towards hypotaxis ignoring
the fact that Arabic – to some extent – tends more towards the usage of
paratactic constructions. As a matter of fact, two, or even more approaches
could

1122 ‫العدد الثامن والستون‬ 15 ‫جملة كلية الرتبية األساسية‬

Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style and Translation ………………………………….
Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil
be followed in translating this sentence. First, it can be rendered into parallel
structures via the usage of a number of coordinating conjunctions:
.‫لم استطع نزع السلسلة فوثبت وطرقت الباب طلبآ للدخول ولكن دون جدوى‬
Some translators, however, may have a tendency towards starting their
sentences with the main clause, rather than the subordinate clause. So in this
case the translation will read as follows:
.‫وثبت وطرقت الباب طلبآ للدخول دون جدوى فقد أعياني نزع السلسلة‬
Other translators, though, may have a rather different approach in which both
constructions, namely, parataxis and hypotaxis are combined in one way or
another. This, again, is a matter of stylistic idiosyncrasy, not only on the part of
writers alone, but also on the part of translators as well.
The issue of the difference in the preference of parataxis and/or hypotaxis in
both languages does not end at this point. Rather, some minute differences might
be detected within the same type of junctioning. Some coordinating
conjunctions in both English and Arabic agree in some way in their semantic
implications. (And), for instance, agrees with (wa) to some extent. It will be of
interest to mention that (wa) is considered the most commonly used conjunctive
particle. Due to its frequency of use, in addition to the manifold meanings it
conveys makes it a bit unreproducable in English unless some elaborations are
made on the Arabic constructions which exhibit the dense usage of (wa). In fact,
(wa) has far greater semantic implications than (and) (cf. Cantarino, 1975:12-
20). In the same way, (or) agrees with (‘aw), and (but) agrees with (lakin).
However, there are certain differences which have to be taken account of. Aziz
(1989:214)
mentions that (and) has a conditional implication which is not a feature of (wa),
and he cites the following example:
Move but one step and I will shoot.
Normally Arabs would not say:
.‫تحرك خطوة واحدة فقط واطلق النار‬
Rather, they opt to use a conditional particle:
.‫إن تحركت خطوة واحدة فقط اطلقت النار‬
This rendition, in fact, shows an instance of a somewhat unique case of
changing English parataxis into Arabic hypotaxis. It gives good evidence that
the translator should always be aware of such differences so as to end up with a
good piece of work that is both acceptable and natural in the target language.
In modern Arabic, it is to be noted, greater flexibility and freedom in usage,
as well as purely stylistic considerations make it possible to witness the usage of
‘’expanded compounds’’, in which there is an expanded sentence or a compound
that has been further expanded via adding new elements, either through
parataxis or hypotaxis or both. Cantarino (1975:385) argues that’’ using such
expanded constructions can now be considered characteristic of present- day

1122 ‫العدد الثامن والستون‬ 16 ‫جملة كلية الرتبية األساسية‬

Parataxis, Hypotaxis, Style and Translation ………………………………….
Assi. Lec. Ghusoon Subhi Khalil
literary Arabic. The excessive use of them by some authors contributes to the
creation of rather long and complicated styles.’’
Conclusions
Parataxis and hypotaxis are two highly important processes of creating
semantic as well as stylistic relations between parts of a text in such a way that
unity is arrived at. Within parataxis, the notion is of the grouping together of
parallel structures where all paratactic elements are on a par with each other. As
for hypotaxis, it is the relation where one element becomes part or embedded or
a constituent of another element. Hence, the elements are on different levels.
Languages differ in their frequent usage of parataxis and hypotaxis. It might
be true to some extent to say that Arabic often tends to use paratactic
constructions much greatly than the hypotactic ones, where written English
would use both devices, but tends to use hypotaxis more frequently. Spoken
English, on the other hand, tends to employ parataxis. As such, translating these
constructions would not be an easy matter. Good sensitivity is required on the
part of the translator not only of the language preference, but also of the stylistic
identity of the original writer. The translator is asked, then, to try to make a
balance between target language preferences - so as not to enforce it with forms
or structures alien to its usage – and faithfulness to the original style intended by
the writer.
References
Aziz, Yowell. (1989). A Contrastive Grammar of English and Arabic. Mosul:
University of Mosul.
Cantarino, Vicente. (1975). Syntax of Modern Arabic Prose. The Compound
Sentence. Vol.3. Bloomington/ London: Indiana University Press.
Greenbaum,S., R. Quirk, G. Leech& J. Svartvik. (1990). A Student’s Grammar
of the English Language. Hong Kong: Longman Group UK Limited.
Hatim, Basil & Munday, Jeremy. (2004). Translation. An advanced resource
book. London and New York: Routledge.
Hijazi, Mahmood, F. (1973). ‘ilm al-lugha al- ‘arabiya (Science of the Arabic
Language). Kuwait: Wakalat al- Matbu’aat.
Johnstone, Barbara. (1987). ‘’ Parataxis in Arabic: Modification as a model for
Persuation’’. Studies in Language. Vol.II No. 1. (pp.85-98).
Larson, Mildred, L. (1984). Meaning – based Translation: A Guide to Cross –
Language Equivalence. New York/ London: University Press of America.
Merriam – Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. (11th ed.)(2005). Massachusetts:
Merriam – Webster, Incorporated.
Matthews, P.H. (2007). Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Roberts, Paul. (1962). English Sentences. New York: Harcourt, Brace and
World, Inc.

1122 ‫العدد الثامن والستون‬ 17 ‫جملة كلية الرتبية األساسية‬