Anaphora Misnamed as Chiasmus in a Mock Set-Text Couplet
Literature section, 20-mark passage question. Candidates are given a short mock set-text couplet: 'Non aurum, non arma peto, non moenia regni; sed pacem et socios et sine fraude dies.' A candidate writes: 'The repeated non is chiasmus: it surrounds aurum and arma and then moenia regni, creating a symmetrical pattern.' The teacher says the candidate has spotted a real stylistic feature but misnamed it and missed its rhetorical effect. The class has studied anaphora, asyndeton, polysyndeton, chiasmus, and tricolon. The candidate must reanalyse the couplet, distinguish the devices accurately, and explain how the list supports the speaker's characterization. The teacher also asks what would need to change for the passage to be a genuine chiasmus.
1. Correct the candidate's identification. What device is the repeated 'non', and what other devices are present in the first line?
Read the worked answer
The repeated 'non' at the start of three successive units is anaphora, not chiasmus. Chiasmus is an ABBA arrangement of corresponding elements; a simple example would be 'pacem bello, bello pacem'. Here the structure is A, A, A: 'non aurum, non arma, non moenia regni'. The list is a tricolon, and because the items are not linked by conjunctions it is also asyndeton. 'moenia regni' is a genitive phrase, not a balancing element that reverses the order. The candidate has confused repetition at the beginning with reversal of order. The first line builds intensity but does not form a ring.
2. Analyse the second line. Which devices appear, and what is the rhetorical effect of the shift from 'non' to 'sed'?
Read the worked answer
The second line is introduced by 'sed', which turns the rejection into a positive choice. It contains polysyndeton: 'pacem et socios et ... dies' repeats 'et' where asyndeton would be possible. The list is another tricolon, but the items are abstract and social rather than material and military: peace, companions, and days without deceit. The shift from 'non' to 'sed' is a rhetorical correction: the speaker defines himself by what he refuses and then by what he values. The repeated 'et' slows the line and gives each item weight. 'sine fraude dies' is a privative expression; it defines peace positively as freedom from fraud rather than through a metaphor.
3. What would need to change for the couplet to be a genuine chiasmus? Give a short rewritten example using the same vocabulary.
Read the worked answer
It would need an ABBA arrangement of corresponding ideas, not just repetition. For example: 'pacem, non aurum; non arma, socios' places the desired peace (A) and companions (A) outside, and the rejected gold (B) and arms (B) inside. That is chiasmus. The original 'non aurum, non arma, non moenia' is A-A-A anaphora; changing it to a mirror would alter the rhetorical thrust from insistence to balanced antithesis. The original's effect is cumulative rejection, not symmetrical ring composition.