The powers activated through expression are most evident when they are manipulated for rhetorical or æsthetic effects or when they “fail” in an application (cf. Tsur 1992a:10-12). The conventions associated with a genre or poetic system are intrinsically bound to the powers activated through expression. These conventions instil the various structures of
expectation212 in relation to which the powers are manipulated in the generation of meanings (and quality). Powers activated through expression are dependent on the recognition of the intended referent, which is in turn dependent on the internalization of those conventions. Once the referent becomes active, the manner and degree of deviation from the referent will be interpreted to determine whether it is æsthetic in value and intent (cf. Frog 2009b:277; Kjartansson 2009:256), or just a mistake. This is particularly evident in magical applications, where imperfect reproduction may prevent or alter effects on the immediate or invisible worlds.
9.4.1. The Maintenance of a Poetic System
Word power (or the avoidance of its lack) underlies conservatism in the reproduction of a
poetic system. The persistence of a poetic system attests to a continuity in its value and significance within a cultural milieu. Conventions in contemporary composition may not be identical to conventions maintained in the reproduction of poetry of earlier periods (Tarkka 2005:127n; an example is found in §19.3.2.2.1n). Persistence should be understood as “resistance to change” owing to social cultural activity that results in a continuity of identity.
212 Ross (1975) proposed the term „structures of expectation‟ for culturally dependent non-syntactic
understanding of linguistic patterning used in both the process of encoding experiences and other information in language and in decoding narrative information communicated by others. In other words, „structures of expectation‟ provide frameworks for generating inferences which provide the connecting tissue between statements in order to construct a coherent whole from the composite of communicated elements, including the hierarchies of semiotic significance among those elements which constitute a communication. These may occur at the level of relationships between a main and subordinate clause, a relationship between sentences, relationships between parts in a large narrative schema, or between whole narratives (cf. the juxtaposition of narratives in skaldic verse). It should be emphasized that structures of expectation are related to propositional information inferred through other propositional information: structures of expectation are not concerned with the packages of values, implications and associations associated with, e.g. narrative power. Structures of expectation can be considered a set of rules for encoding and decoding complex or stratified constellations of semiotic expressions. They stand in complementary relation to powers activated through expression: the powers activated through expression relate to the conventional “force” behind the structures of expectation – the degree to which it is anticipated to be fulfilled, from possible to inevitable – and the powers present a means of describing the values, meanings, implications and associations which can become conventionally attached to these conventional patterns and also to variations on those patterns.
9.4.1.1. Crippled, Lame and Blind
The Invitations of LV are sent out to rujot, rammat and verisokeat, the “cripples”, “lame” and “blood-blind” across all regions. Historiolae describing the origins of magic shot present three figures: one crafts the “shot”, one draws the bow, and the third is the shooter. The three figures are rujo, rampa and verisokea – “cripple”, “lame” and “blood- blind” (see Franssila 1900:esp.462-72). The restricted applications of this combination imply that in LV this was not a conventional merism for “everyone” in contrast to Lemminkäinen. Restricted application presents an indexical relationship which is indicative of a development of word power being applied from one context in another although this became conventionally established in the new context.213 The rujo-rampa-
verisokea sequence function(ed) as an indexically loaded series of explicit propositions
apparently intended to import the historiola of the “blind shooter” into the communication as an implicit proposition for the generation of meaning.214 Rather than helpless invalids, within the register this combination anticipates that the drinking-feast will be attended by powerful and hazardous magical figures. It can be compared with the hall of singers and sorcerers overcome by Lemminkäinen in the Savo Jesus-redaction, or could anticipate his death by “magic shot” in the Viena Umpiputki-redaction.215
Estonian translations of rujot and rammat appear in the corresponding context of the Ingrian drinking-feast of birds (§4.3.9.4). There is no corresponding motif related to the crippled or lame in the Estonian songs, nor any association with the “blind shooter”. The Estonian terms appear to be a specifically Ingrian development in the adaptation of the farcical song. This adaptation may reflect a persistence of the motif in Ingria through interference with the Estonian song (§24.4).
213
In Viena, the LV multiform of invitations developed a load with positive connotations and appears for invitations in wedding verses (cf. I3.1541, I3.1544, I3.1546, I3.1551, I3.1552), and they appear as the rowers peopling Väinämöinen‟s boat in I1.442).
214
The reverse development seems unlikely as the figures invited are not attributed with either magic or hostility.
215 The slayer is only blind in Arhippa Perttunen‟s account (I2.758.206, 228:umpisilmä); cf. Krohn
9.4.2. Translation and Cultural Change
Within a cultural milieu, conventions of word power are subject to change. The Finnic trochaic tetrameter was the dominant mode of poetic expression across a tremendous range of genres. At some point, this mode of expression superseded the “unfixed” metres associated with laments and yoiks (Frog & Stepanova forthcoming). This is indicative of changing conventions in the word power of different modes of expression. It is reasonable to assume that some Finnic myths were “translated” (Lotman 1990:15) into this rising mode of expression (e.g. the World-Creation). Rausmaa (1964, 1967, 1968) discusses the Karelian preference for translating prose narrative into kalevalaic verse during the period of collection as opposed to reciting kalevalaic narratives in prose. This was particularly true of narratives with elements or episodes associated with kalevalaic epic and appears related to the rise in “folktale” elements introduced into kalevalaic epics during this period (cf. Kuusi 1949). This stands in contrast to the preference for the translation of verse into prose narrative in the medieval Icelandic manuscript tradition (cf. Finch 1962-1965; Frog 2009b:274-276). The evidence appears to express hierarchies in modes of communication (cf. Lotman 1990:47-48) although it must be remembered that hierarchies in modes of expression are dependent on application (§16.1).
9.4.3. Continuity and Cultural Contact
The APE is culturally bound. The word power of a poetic system invariably requires some form of translation when crossing linguistic-cultural thresholds. The translation is dependent on the established semiosphere in each culture and the distances between them (cf. Vargyas 1983:137). The heavy dependence of the Finno-Karelian incantation tradition on Germanic models implies that Germanic strategies of word power were translated into this poetic system. When the medieval European ballad entered into the Finnic cultural area, it was completely assimilated to the conventional poetic system, losing its characteristic features of melody, metre, rhyme and stanzaic structure. In Lutheran Finland, the rise of alternative singing traditions displaced kalevalaic poetry and led to the rise of the æsthetic value of rhyme, just as in Ingria and regions further south,
kalevalaic poetry gradually became predominantly “women‟s poetry”.216 (Frog & Stepanova forthcoming.)