Ellipsis — Repetition
Repetition-Omission
Ellipsis of Repetition is Bullinger’s third and most extensive principal category (61 pages, pp. 70-130 — almost half of the entire Ellipsis treatment). The missing word is supplied literally from a repeating source: an earlier or later clause provides the exact word. Unlike Absolute (from subject context) or Relative (from related words) Ellipsis, this figure concerns a true word-for-word repetition that the writer suppresses to render the sentence more compact.
For the general workings of Ellipsis see the overview at Ellipsis (parent).
I. Simple Ellipsis of Repetition (pp. 71-109)
The missing word is supplied from a single neighbouring clause — either preceding or succeeding.
1. From a preceding clause (pp. 71-102)
The most common pattern. Subdivided by part of speech:
- (a) Nouns and pronouns (pp. 71-80) — a subject or object from clause 1 is not repeated in clause 2.
- (b) Verbs (pp. 81-92) — a verb from clause 1 also serves clause 2; the second clause acquires its sense only when the reader silently extends the verb. Bullinger’s own illustration in Matt. 14:19 (“He gave the loaves to the disciples, and the disciples to the multitude”) belongs to this type.
- (c) Particles (pp. 93-102) — two sub-types:
- (i) Negatives (p. 93) — a negative particle from clause 1 serves both.
- (ii) Interrogatives (p. 94) — an interrogative particle from clause 1 serves the whole sentence.
2. From a succeeding clause (pp. 103-109)
The less common pattern: the missing word comes from clause 2 and clause 1 anticipates it. Demands more interpretive precision because the reader must first traverse the Ellipsis before the supply becomes available.
II. Complex Ellipsis of Repetition — Semiduplex Oratio (pp. 110-120)
When both clauses are mutually involved: clause 1 supplies a word to clause 2, and clause 2 simultaneously supplies a word to clause 1. Bullinger calls this Semiduplex Oratio — half-double speech.
1. Single words omitted (p. 110)
2. Whole sentences omitted (p. 111)
Appendix: False Ellipsis in the A.V. (pp. 121-130)
Bullinger closes his Ellipsis treatment with an important critical appendix: cases where the A.V. has made italic additions that represent no actual Ellipsis. This is material for text-critical study — the figure is invented by translators where it does not exist, with the result that the literal text is unnecessarily extended and occasionally shifted in meaning.
For modern wiki purposes this appendix is especially relevant when comparing translations: wherever A.V. italic text is followed by a later translation without verification, a Bullinger correction may be worth consulting.
Related Figures
- ellipsis — parent overview
- absolute — sister category A
- relative — sister category B
- zeugma — related figure in which one verb unequally serves two objects (compare Ellipsis of verb from preceding clause)
Source
E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (1898), pp. 70-130 (incl. appendix “False Ellipsis in A.V.”).