Anantapodoton

[Prufrock]

All right, grammar wizards: Without working too hard, can anyone summarize clearly and precisely how Anantapodoton differs from both:

1.) Anapodoton; and,

2.) Anacoluthon.

Rough sketch: is it appropriate to say that Anantapodoton is a subset of Anapodoton, which in turn is a subset of Anacoluthon?

Edit
I think: Anapodoton is a form of anacoluthon which is strictly limited a subordinate clause suggesting a main clause which either 1.) Does not occur; 2.) Is modified from the expected form; or 3.) Is interrupted by another thought. Anantapodoton, in turn, would be the form of anapodoton wherein the main clause suggested by the subordinate simply does not occur. Is this correct?

 

[CharlieJ]

Best I got:

anapodoton

 

[Prufrock]

Thanks, Charlie. That site did comment on the "trailing off" nature of the Anantapodoton.

I can't find a more thorough explanation in any of my reference grammars, however.

 

[MW]

Anantapodoton, in turn, would be the form of anapodoton wherein the main clause suggested by the subordinate simply does not occur. Is this correct?

Nothing technical, but I've come across it a few times in biblical commentaries, and it's generally used in connection with an expected apodosis. Not sure if that helps.

 

[Prufrock]

Thanks, Matthew. That's actually exactly where my question comes in: it seems that both anantapodoton and anapodoton (two separate figures) do this.

 

[MW]

Thanks, Matthew. That's actually exactly where my question comes in: it seems that both anantapodoton and anapodoton (two separate figures) do this.

Paul, According to this resource, A Dictionary of Literary Devices ... - Google Book Search, anapodoton recasts the sentence as it proceeds, whereas anantapodoton abandons the thought altogether.

 

[Prufrock]

Thanks again, Matthew.

Conclusion: Anantapodoton is an anacoluthon in which the apodosis, though expected to be introduced on account of a preceding protasis, is missing.