Kara Ireland
Dr. Diop
ENGL 3020
October 11, 2018
Syntagms and Paradigms
The Cork and the Whale, Two Frogs in Cream, and Invictus all share similar themes regarding being downtrodden and faced with specific plights that require some form of action to take place. All three poems present different tactics to tackle the issues presented. While adversity is shared amongst them all, what separates them further are the syntagms and paradigms each poem exhibits. A syntagm characterizes the constitution of signs in all semiotic systems and provides the contextual frameworks for the signs. A paradigm can be considered a distinctive sign within the syntagm.
The Cork and the Whale is a poem that faces adversity by overcoming an obstacle through redemption. The syntagm of choice is redemption. Redemption is reinforced by deliberate language choices like “in spite of.” Choosing the relationship between a cork and a whale is another paradigmatic choice because the whale takes the role of the oppressor and the cork takes the role of resilience. Another apparent syntagm is buoyancy, which is seconded by paradigms like the cork itself and related language like “[floating].” Buoyancy is a synonym for optimism, as one believes they might be able to bounce back to being afloat rather than tussling the waves.
Falling is a shared paradigm between each of the poems. It is used in a different nature in succession, but it yields a common theme: adversity. In The Cork and the Whale, the cork “fell in the path of a whale,” meaning it unintentionally got itself into a tough situation. In Two Frogs In Cream, the frogs “fell into a can of cream,” meaning they literally fell, but landed in a predicament nonetheless. Invictus mentions the “fell clutch of circumstance,” denoting an unfortunate situation. The paradigm “fell” appears in all three of the poems and provokes similar connotations, the ultimate syntagm of adversity.
Two Frogs In Cream and Invictus make varying uses of the paradigm “fate.” Two Frogs In Cream draws on fate as a sign of concession. By believing that it was the first frog’s fate, he relented his own accountability in the matter. Alternatively, Invictus uses fate to invalidate this stance, noting that “[he] is the master of [his] fate.” Invictus chalks up how the character fares in the face of adversity to the state of his own accountability; his attitude will determine his outcome and little is predetermined because “it matters not how strait the gate, how charged with punishments the scroll.”
Two Frogs In Cream and The Cork and the Whale suggest that how one fares in the face of adversity is related to the character traits one has. Being “made of” preferable traits allows the characters to overcome adversity. If the character is “made of the stuff,” which Two Frogs In Cream specifies as “sterner stuff,” he will be better equipped. If the syntagm here is bravery, then such paradigms would include being made of “[sternness],” resilience, rigor, and “[buoyancy]” as both poems permit. Invictus also offers a character trait of being “unconquerable,” which fits within that syntagm as well.
The frequency of faring in the face of adversity is a syntagm that is addressed in each poem. Invictus states that “the menace of the years finds and shall find me unafraid,” referencing present and future dispositions. This paradigmatic phrase notes the importance of staying level headed throughout the difficulties, which the other two poems hinge on. Substituting “never, never” from The Cork and the Whale shifts the reading of the line from Invictus, now aligning with the first frog’s disposition in Two Frogs In Cream as he is now never found unafraid. Two Frogs In Cream reinforces frequency with “not once he stopped to mutter,” praising the focus of the second frog in his endeavors to escape, rather than harping on the dire situation. Thus, having a level headed disposition. Replacing the original paradigm with “not once” now seconds the alternative meaning as it reads: not once finds me unafraid.”
Invictus mentioned having “not winced nor cried aloud” and insinuates that that containment of emotion has aided the battle against adversity. The syntagm of stoicism is emboldened by the paradigm of not crying aloud. The first frog in Two Frogs In Cream maintains that with “weeping still, he drowned.” It can be inferred from this paradigm that because he was weeping, with an emphasis on weeping still, he drowned.
Within each poem, there are several syntagms of varying themes. In dissecting the syntagms and the associated paradigms, it created an available means to compare and contrast ideas between them all. Although adversity is a common link, there was much more in common through further scrutiny.