Summary 
A formal grammar accounting for artistic 
abilities of a folk story teller is proposed. 
This grammar comprises the following components: 
I) a grammar defining the set of formulae re- 
presenting steps of text generation; 2) a list 
of "messages" underlying the texts of a folk- 
lore genre; 3) a list of "rules of embellish- 
ment" serving to attach artistic qualities to 
"messages" and intermediary steps of text 
generation. 
I. Introduction 
The best way for a researcher to present 
his knowledge of folklore is to demonstrate 
the ability to construct at least rough approx- 
imations of folk stories. This should be done 
with all the techniques accessible to immediate 
observation and checking up. We take the 
standpoint that at the deepest level of a text 
lie thematic elements which constitute the 
"message" of the text. "Rules of Embellish- 
ment" are applied to these elements and attach 
artistic qualities to them. The analysis of 
a text is to be represented as a process of 
generating it by "Rules of Embellishment." 
These Rules are analogous to transformations 
in linguistics. They are "message-preserving" 
devices serving to increase the expressive 
power of themes. 
Every rule of embellishment is a parti- 
cular instance of some "principle of expres- 
siveness," from the set of such "principles" 
proposed by ¥u. Shcheglov and A. Zholkovsky 
(linguists and philoloqists who until recently 
worked in the USSR~ ~ore of their works see 
in the Bibliography in ~. There follows the 
list of the principles of expressiveness. 
Embodiment (EMBOD) - a substitution of 
some more concrete and "vivid" element X 1 for a 
more abstract element X. The element X 1 has 
all the properties of X plus some new 
feature(s). 
Examples: a man ÷ a carpenter; a city ÷ 
New York; a nose ÷ a very big nose. 
Amplification (AMPLIF) - a substitution 
of an "amplified" element X! for a more 
"neutral" element X. The amplification may be 
with respect to dimensions, duration, degree, 
etc. 
Examples: deception ÷ treachery; rape ÷ 
child-rape; talent ÷ genius. 
Repetition (REPET) - a substitution of a 
series of nearly identical elements X, X 1 ..... 
X n for an element X. 
A FORMAL GRAMMAR OF EXPRESSIVENESS 
FOR SACRED LEGENDS 
F. Dreizin, A. Shenhar, H. Bar-ltzhak 
Haifa University, Haifa, Israel 
Examples: a door ÷ the first door, the 
second door, the third door .... ; a waiter ÷ 
the first waiter, the second waiter .... 
Variation (VAR) - a substitution of a 
series of substantially different elements 
X I, X 2 ..... X n for an element X so that each 
one is the result of an EMBOD applied to X. 
Examples: a man ÷ a carpenter, a student, 
a taxi-driver .... ; a building ÷ a church, a 
mosque, ... 
Detailization (DET) - a substitution of a 
detailed description Y1 of a thing, situation 
or action Y, for Y. 
Examples: X is ill ÷ X stays in bed and 
X has no appetite and X has a high tempera- 
ture; an old Jew dies ÷ an old Jew isn't well, 
other Jews come, they pray together, the Rabbi 
comes to visit the old Jew, the old Jew is dead 
and the body is carried to the cemetery. 
Compare an EMBOD of 'X is ill' ÷ 'X has 
pneumonia' 
Contrast (CONTR) - a substitution of two 
contrasting elements X and Anti-X for an 
element ×. 
Examples: death ÷ perfect health, death; 
treachery ÷ loyalty, treachery. 
Exposition (EXPO) - a substitution of two 
elements pre-X and X for X, where pre-X pre- 
cedes X in the text; pre-X may be: 
a) incomplete X (the shadow of X appears and 
then X itself); 
b) the felt absence of X (everybody is waiting 
for X, then X appears); 
c) Anti-X followed by X. The only difference 
between this case and CONTR is the order of 
Anti-X and X. 
Adjustment (ADJ) - of X to Y with respect 
to a feature f: X 1 is substituted for X, where 
X 1 has all the essential properties of X, plus 
some feature f of an element Y occurring in the 
derivation of a text. 
Examples: touch (X), love (Y); Xl = 
embrace; house (X), many people meet (y); 
X 1 = club. 
Amalgamation (AMALG) - of X with Y - a 
substitution of an element Z for X and Y where 
Z is the result of EMBODs applied both to X and 
Y. 
Examples: death (X), love (¥); Z = roman- 
tic suicide; presence (X), absence (Y), Z = 
a person in disguise. 
Reduction (RED) - a substitution of X 1 for 
X, where X 1 is such a part of X that all the 
thematically important information contained 
159 
in X can be restored by means of X I. 
Examples: M. Dayan ÷ one-eyed Israeli 
Minister; murder + a blood-stained knife; 
Jewish religion ÷ a Torah scroll; communism ÷ 
The Red Banner. Compare EMBOD: Jewish religion 
÷ orthodox Jewish religion; communism ÷ Chinese 
communism. 
It seems to us that the most important 
innovations of ShcheglovandZholkovsky are ADJ 
and AMALG. The hypothesis that these princi- 
ples are employed in the construction of 
literary texts means the presence of intensive 
links between text elements. Let us give a 
simple example of the intensification of such 
links. Consider a "theme" 
I. A person X uses an object Y to injure 
a person g who uses an object d for aggressive 
purposes. We shall establish links between 
some elements of this text. First, we shall 
declare Y and d to be the same object: 
2. A person X uses an object s to injure 
a person g who injures others with this very 
object s. Now we shall establish a link be- 
tween g and s. Let's make s a sort of RED(g): 
3. A person X uses an object s, which is 
used for aggression by g and is inherently 
typical of g, to injure g. This quasi-text 
has obvious artistic qualities and may be 
interpreted, for example, as: 
4. The hero causes the situation where 
the Dragon bites itself with its venomous 
teeth. 
"k "k 
Some applications and specifications of the 
above ideas follow. 
We were looking for the answers to 
questions like: What are creative abilities of 
folklore story-tellers? What are poetic 
systems of different folklore genres? As the 
first object of our investigation we have 
chosen sacred legends of Moroccan Jews. 
To make the "Principles of Expressiveness" 
technically workable, we represent steps of 
text generations by formulae of a formal 
language devised especially for this purpose. 
So analyzing a given text (a legend) - re- 
written in our formal language - means con- 
struction of a minimal sequence of formulae 
of this language so that: 
I. The last formula is an approximation 
of a given text. 
2. One or more formulae of the sequence 
are themes ("messages"). 
3. Every formula Q4, which is not a 
"message", is obtainable with an appli- 
cation of a rule of embellishment 
from one or more formulae Qj, j < i. 
This resembles a proof of a theorem, where 
a "message" is a sort of axiom, Rules of 
Embellishment are rules of inference, and a text 
is a theorem to be proved. By the set of pos- 
sible "messages" and Rules of Embellishment, the 
set of all possible texts(i.e., the genre of 
Moroccan Jewish sacred legends) is given as the 
set of all provable theorems of our calculus. 
2. Well-Formed Formulae 
We present below a grammar of the context- 
free language defining the set of all well- 
formed sentences (formulae) used to represent 
steps in the generation of sacred legends. The 
well-formedness is understood as a purely syn- 
tactical feature, 
Rule I. 
<text>÷#<t-section>(><t-section>)*# 
Here #~ a terminal boundary symbol, ~ means 
"then", "and after that", * is Kleene's star 
operator; the parentheses are neither terminal 
nor nonterminal symbols, they only mean that 
the sequence ><t-section> is to be repeated as 
a whole, A t-section represents an event. For 
example we may obtain with the Rule I: 
#<t-section> > <t-section> > <t-section># 
Rule 2. 
<t-section> ÷ <sign>(<t-section>) 
Rule 3. 
<sign> ÷ + I- I = I ~ 
The sign + marks an event which is good for the 
Jews; the sign - marks an event which is bad for 
the Jews; the sign = marks an event which is 
particularly bad for the Jews; an event with 
is neither bad nor good for the Jews, but 
implies a hope or a possibility for the good, 
Rule 4. 
<t-section> ÷ (<t-section>(~<t-section>)*) 
Here the inner pair of parentheses is used as in 
Rule I. The siqn ~ is used to say that two or 
more events are amalgamated:(a~b) is one event 
which is an AMALG for two events a and b; ~Qb~c) 
means that three events, a,b, and c are amal- 
gamated into one, etc. More about the amalga- 
mation of events will be said below. 
Rule 5. 
<t-section> ÷ STAT(<t-section>) 
The operator STAT can make any event into a 
"stative" event. A stative event is, in a way, 
timeless. STAT makes a lasting situation out 
of an event. For example, STAT(x loses y) may 
mean "x has lost y", or else "x would usually 
lose y". 
An action in the scope of STAT loses in 
part its usual consequences (a crime against 
the Jews performed under STAT is not punished, 
for example). Protagonists involved in actions 
under STAT may be more general than outside the 
160 
scope of STAT (Jewish community vs a Jew, for 
example). That is, a term in the scope of STAT 
may not undergo an EMBOD affecting its occur- 
ences in the rest of the formula. 
Rule 6. 
<t-section> + STEP(<t-section>) 
The operator STEP makes a partial event from a 
complete one. For example, STEP(x comes) may 
be understood as "x knocks at the door", or 
else "x is seen through the window", etc. In 
this case, STEP(STEP(x comes)) may be under- 
stood as "x is unclearly (or partially) seen 
through the window". 
Rule 7. 
<t-section> ÷ QUASl(<t-section>) 
The operator QUASI is used to designate a sym- 
bolic or ritual counterpart of an event. For 
example, QUASl (The army occupies the city) may 
be "The army leader receives the keys of the 
c i ty". 
Rule 8. 
<t-section> ÷ <adverb>(<t-section>) 
Rule 9. 
<adverb> ÷ MIR I ANTI I NOT 
MIR means "miraculously"; ANTI means "opposite 
to..."; NOT may be understood as negation. 
Rule I0. 
<t-section> ÷ <predicate expression>(&<predi- 
cate expression>) 
A more complex event is represented as an un- 
ordered set of simpler events. 
Rule II. 
<predicate expression> + <sign>(<predicate 
expression>) 
Rule 12. 
<predicate expression> ÷ <adverb>(<predicate 
expression>) 
Rule 13, 
<predicate expression> ÷ DISTRESSED(< e~rm>)l 
TRY(< e~rm, <t-section>)IDESTROY(< e~m>,< e~rm>)l 
Falk(~e~m>,<t-section>)IPROSELYTIZED(<~e~m>)l 
GUILTY (<e>t----<rm>)IkOSE(<e~-<rm>,<e>~-<m>)INEGkECT , 
(< e~rm>,< e~)IUSE(< e~,< e~rm>)IFIND(< e~m>, 
<~-er~<>)ICAREgOR(<e>~-~rm>,<e>t----<rm>')llNaURE(<e~----<rm>, 
< e~rm>)ICAUSE(<t-section>,<t-section>)IGIVEBACK 
(< e~rm>,< e~rm>)IPRAISE(< e~rm>,< e~rm>)IREVENGE 
(< e~rm>,< e~rm>)IRESPECT(< e~>,< e~)IRESTORE 
(< e~rm>,< e~rm>)IMISAPPROPRIATE(< e~rm>,< e~rm>) 
IABASE(< e~m>,< e~m>)IDEFIkE(< e~m>,< e~m>)l 
DISABLE(< e~rm>,< e~rm>)IPETRIFY(< e~,< e~rm>)l 
INATTACK(<e~---<rm>,<e~---<rm>)ICURE(<ee~>,<e~-<rm>)l 
CANCELED(<t-section>)IACTI6N(<te~rm>)IKILL 
(<eee~m>,<e~e~-<m>)IPROHIBIT(<e~----<rm>,<t-section>)l 
PROTECT (<t>T-rm~,<ee~m>)ISTARVED (<t~><)l 
DAMAGED(<e>t-----<rm>)IBLIND (<e~m>,<e~m>)IPRESENT 
(< e~>,< e~>,< e~>)IMAKESEE(< e~rm>,< e~rm> ) 
DISTRESSED(x) is a state or an event which 
is bad for x with respect to material, moral or 
physical conditions. PROSELYTIZED (x) means 
that x imposes on himself, partially or com- 
pletely, the laws of the Jewish religion, 
GUILTY(x) is a state of x which is punishable 
by the authorities for an offence against them. 
USE (x,y) is a typical, normal relation between 
human x and a thing y, y being conceived ex- 
clusively as a means of x's well-being. The 
exact nature of this relation depends on x and 
y. For example, x beinq a community and y 
saint's shrine, USE becomesvisitingandpraylng, 
asking for help, being cured, etc. INJURE(x,y) 
is x's doing any harm to y. CAUSE (A,B) means: 
the event A happens and involves the event B. 
RESTORE (x,y) means liquidation of the conse- 
quences of x's injuring y. DISABLE and PETRIFY 
are two forms of paralysis, the first one par- 
tial, the second one complete. INATTACK (x,y) 
is involuntary injuring y by x. CANCELED (A) 
means: all the consequences of the event A 
become non-existent. MAKESEE (x,y) means that 
x causes the blind y to see. 
Rule 14. 
> < The symbol over a term may be rewritten 
as ~ - ~,~_mean For a term x the ex- 
pressions T, respectiyely, that the 
occurrence of a predicate, with x, ~, x fill- 
ing up a slot, is bad for x, good for x, or 
involves a hope for the good for x. > < may 
also be omitted. 
This rule can be easily rewritten in a context- 
free form, without diacritical marks and the 
possibility of a mark deletion. (A change in 
the Rule 13 is also needed.) 
Rule 15. 
<term> ÷ <variable feature>(~<feature>)*l 
<feature>(,<feature>) 
The asterisk occurring between features is a 
terminal symbol and should not be confused with 
Kleene's star operator. 
Rule 16. 
<variable feature> ÷ x I \] x2 I x 3 ..... 
Rule 17. 
<feature> ÷ <simple feature>l<functor feature> I 
<negative feature> 
Rule 18. 
<simple feature> ÷ THINGISYMBOLIHUMANISINGLE I 
GROUPIVALOBJICARPETIJIAISPICOMIMONEYIMOSQUE 
ISYNAGOGUEIFOOD\]MALEIFEMALEJSIMPLEIIMPORTANT 
161 
IVER!MPIOFFICIALIHAWKERISHEPHERDIRICHI, 
POORtRELAISECAIRABBIIITZHAKIPINTOIKADI l 
SHEIKIKINGITROUBLEDIILLIFEVEREDISTERILEI 
HYPOCRITE 
SYMBOL is an important object which has some 
ideological value for a community. VALOBJ is a 
valuable object without ideological importance. 
J means Jewish. A means Arabic. SP is an ob- 
ject possessing sacred power. CON means commun- 
ity. VERIMP means a very important person. 
RELA is religious authority. SECA is secular 
authority. TROUBLED means in trouble. HYPOCRITE 
means "pretending to be a friend of the Jews". 
ITZHAK and PINTO are proper names of typical 
Jewish rabbis. 
Rule 19. 
<functor feature> + GRAVE~<simple feature> 
(*<simple feature>) )\[SHRINE(<simple 
feature>(,<simple feature>)~)ISON(<simple 
feature>(,<simple feature>)~)IWIFE 
(<simple feature>(,<simple feature>)*)l 
DAUGHTER(csimple feature>(,<simple 
feature>)~)IPROPERTy(<simple feature> 
(,<simple feature>) ~) 
Rule 20. 
<negative feature> ÷ #(<simple feature>(,<simple 
feature>)*) 
A term including a negative feature is char- 
acterized by the negation of at least one simple 
feature included in the given negative feature. 
A term corresponds, generally, to an object 
characterized by the conjunction of the non- 
negative features which it is composed of. For 
example, 
MALE*SINGLE,SHEPHERD*#(RICH*ILL) 
means: 
"A (male) shepherd who is either not rich or 
not ill, or else is neither rich nor ill". 
3. The Messages 
I. # -(DISTRESSED(J*~)) ~ +(ACTION(J*RELA))> 
+(ANTI(DISTRESSED(J*~)))# 
2. # -(INJURE(HUMAN*A,J)) ~ +(MIR(PROTECT 
@,SP ,~) ) ) # 
3. # -(INJURE(HUMAN,Aj)) ~ +(HIP(REVENGE 
(J*SP,HUMAN*A)))# 
4. # -(INJURE(HUMAN*A,J)) > +(HIP(REVENGE 
(J,SP,FFOI~TAN,~))) > +(RESPECT(A,~)) > +(MIR 
(RESTORE(J,SP,~)))# 
The well-formedness of the above four 
messages can be easily verified. Using the 
informal semantics given above with the formal 
syntactical rules of our language, we can read, 
for example, the second message approximately 
as follows: 
"A human Arab agent (HUMAN,A) injures a Jewish 
object (J), which is bad for the Jews (the 
event is marked by minus), and after that (>) a 
Jewish bearer of Sacred Power (J*SP) miracu- 
lously (MIR) protects the (above) Jewish object, 
which is good for the Jews (marked by plus)." 
The above messages can be developed into 
separate stories. But a subset of them can be 
also "amalgamated" to a single story by the 
appropriate rule of embellishment. 
4. The "Rules of Embellishment." 
These rules are the central part of our 
grammar. There are many of them; we cannot 
present here more than several typical examples 
taken from our technical reports(see 2).The set 
of possible objects (protagonists and things) 
of the legends is described in 2 by a network 
grammar: a possible object is an unordered set 
of features picked up from the arcs of the net- 
work by moving from the initial state to a final 
state. Asterisks are inserted between the 
features. Examples: the term HUMAN,SINGLE, 
VERIMP,RELA*J*SP*MALE can be understood as "A 
Jewish Saint"; the term THING*SINGLE*SYMBOL*A* 
GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA*A*MALE*KADI) can 
be read as "the grave of an Arab Kadi." 
The same network serves to EMBOD terms: to any 
set of features which belong to a path in the 
network we may add any set of features which 
belong to the same path. So, for example, 
HUMAN,GROUP ÷ HUMAN,GROUP,A,SIMPLE,MALE 
("people" ÷ "some Arabs") 
is a rule of embodiment for terms by virtue of 
the fact that there is a path in the network to 
which both the left-hand set of features and 
the right-hand set belonq (see the network in 
2 pp. 15-18; the report 2 is to be distri- 
buted among the participants of COLING-80). 
NB: Any rule of embodiment, when chosen, 
is to be applied to every occurrence of the 
expression Ifor exampie, the term) which is to 
be substituted for. There are complications, 
for example, with EMBOD of RESPECT, but we shall 
not deal with them here. 
By a rule of such kind we can obtain, for 
example, from the second message the following 
formula: 
# -(INJURE(HUMAN*A*VERIMP,SlMPLE*J)) > +(MIR 
(PROTECT(J*SP,SIMPLE*J)))#. 
The following rule is an example of EMBOD 
for predicate expressions: 
INJURE(HUMAN,A, HUM~) ÷ MISAPPROPRIATE(HUMAN, 
~, PROPERTY(HUMAN*J)). 
The applicability of such rules is con- 
ceived so as to make possible the application 
of this rule to the above formula (cf. 2, pp. 
29-32), with the following result: 
-162 
#-(MISAPPROPRIATE(HUMAN*A*VERIMP, PROPERTY 
(SIMPLE*HUMAN a))) > +(MIR(PROTECT(J*SP, 
S IMPLE*J) ) ) #. 
The feature HUMAN (which is, in our grammar, 
predictable by the feature SIMPLE) can be in- 
troduced to the last term by obligatory ADJ 
to SIMPLE*HUMAN,J (which is considered an 
immediate descendant of SIMPLE,J), with the 
result: 
#-(MISAPPROPRIATE(HUMAN,A,VERIMP, PROPERTY 
(SIMPLE,HUMAN*J))) > +(MIR(PROTECT(J*SP, 
SIMPLE*HUMAN*J)))#. 
So the identity of the Jewish protagonist is 
restored, Now we can amalgamate the above 
formula with the third message. This is the 
simplest case of AMALG: the two chains of 
events are mixed up to produce one chain 
comprising all the events. This is done under 
control of the (thematic) principle prescribing 
that all "minus-events" precede all "plus- 
events": 
#-(INJURE(HUMAN*A,J)) ~ -(MISAPPROPRIATE(HUMAN* 
A*VERIMP, PROPERTY(SIMPLE*HUMAN*J))) > +(MIR 
(REVENGE(J,SP, HUM~))) > +(MIR(PROTECT(J*SP, 
SIMPLE*HUMAN*J)))#. 
Now, we do not need two different villains. 
One villain will do: we can polish the formula 
by ADJ of the term HUMAN,A to the term HUMAN,A, 
VERIMP. This optional adjustment is a specific 
case of EMBOD: an expression is EMBODed so as 
to become similar (in the limit case-identical) 
to another expression of the operand formula. 
So we obtain: 
#-(INJURE(HUMAN*A*VERIMP,J)) ~ -(MISAPPROPRIATE 
(HUMAN*A*VERIMP, PROPERTY(SIMPLE*HUMAN*J))) 
+(MIR(REVENGE(J*SP, HUMAN*A*VERIMP))) ~ +(MIR 
(PROTECT(J*SP, SIMPLE*HUMAN*J)))#. 
The term J of the first t-section can 
underqo an analoqous operation, and now we 
shall have only one Jewish protagonist in the 
story (a "SIMPLE" one): 
#-(INJURE(HUMAN,A,VERIMP, J,SIMPLE*HUMAN)) > 
-(MISAPPROPRIATE(HUMAN*A*VERIMP, PROPERTY 
(SIMPLE,HUMAN,J))) > +(MIR(REVENGE(J*SP, 
HUMAN*A*VERIMP))) > +(MIR(PROTECT(J,SP, SIMPLE* 
HUMAN*J)))#. 
Two different acts of'~njuring" can be 
amalgamated to one by the followin 9 rule: two 
different t-sections X and Y such that Y can be 
obtained from X by rules of EMBOD, can be amal- 
gamated by dropping X. Now Y serves to 
represent both X and itself. By applying this 
rule to the above formula, we obtain: 
#-(MISAPPROPRIATE(HUMAN,A, VERIMP,PROPERTY 
(SIMPLE*HUMAN*J))) > +(MIR(REVENGE(J,SP, 
HUMAN*A*VERIMP))) > +(MIR(PROTECT(J*SP, SIMPLE, 
HUM~)))#. 
Now, one can amalgamate the SP's acts of 
revenge and protection, with the result: 
#-(MISAPPROPRIATE(TIUMAN,A*VERIMP, PROPERTY 
(SIMPLE*HUMAN*J))) ~ +(MIR(REVENGE(J*SP, 
HUMAN*A*VERIMP)) ~ MIR(PROTECT(J*SP, S'iMPLE* 
HUMAN*J)))#. 
This formula can be read as follows: 
"A human Arab agent belonging to the highest 
social stratum misappropriates a property of a 
Jewish person of low status. After that an 
event occurs which is at the same time an act 
of Jewish Saint's revenge with respect to the 
Arab, and an act of this Saint's protection 
with respect to the Jew." 
This story still needs an interpretation, 
but we think that even at this stage the above 
text possesses some artistic potential accumu- 
lated in the process of its derivation from the 
themes (messages). A rough interpretation of 
this text could run as follows: 
"The Sheik misappropriates a valuable 
thing belonging to a Jewish shoemaker (or 
carpet-maker), and the Rabbi causes this thing 
to return miraculously to its legal possessor 
In a way which damages the Sheik." 
A more delicate interpretation can give 
us something like: "...the misappropriated 
carpet (in the case of a carpet-maker, with an 
appropriate ADJ) miraculously returns to its 
possessor carrying the frightened Sheik on it." 
Or else: 
"... the misappropriatedpair of shoes (in the 
case of a shoemaker, with an appropriate ADJ) 
miraculously returns to its possessor carrying 
the Sheik wearing them." 
Such interpretations are beyond the 
capabilities of our grammar, but (we hope) not 
far beyond the capabilities of grammars of 
the kind proposed. 
Interpretations for simpler cases of 
AMALG for events are easily achievable techni- 
cally, for example: 
(INJURE(A,J) ~ INJURE(HAWKER,SHEPHERD)) ÷ 
INJURE(A,HAWKER,J,SHEPHERD), etc. 
Amalgamated events are usually good for the Jews. 
Events which happen to be good for the Arabs 
are simple, trivial. Let us take now one more 
example, rather typical for our material: 
... ~ +(INJURE(SP, SIMPLE*A)) > +(INJURE(SP, 
VERIMP*A)) > ... 
--163-- 
Amalgamating injuries with two different 
persons injured is a typical artistic device 
in Moroccan Jewish sacred legends. At present, 
we only assume the "intention" of a story- 
teller (or a story author) to amalgamate 
the above events: 
... ~ +(INJURE(SP,SlMPLE,A) ~ INJURE(SP, 
VERIMP,A)) > ... 
Now, how is this aim achieved? Typical 
Jewish legend uses a technicality which may 
be called Deposite. Deposite is a thing or 
a person related to authorities but temporarily 
under the responsibility of a "simple" person. 
Injuring a deposite means injuring both the 
"simple" person and the "very important" 
person involved. In the story analyzed in 2 
the deposite is the Sheik's son. In another 
story the role of a deposite is played by a 
gift (of a group of "simple" Arabs to the 
Sheik). 
The amalgamated character of SP actions 
is so typical of our legends that it may be 
conceived as nearly thematical. In general, 
an optional artistic device can move to the 
thematic sphere and become obligatory. It is 
nearly so in the case under discussion where 
the amalgamation around an SP action is 
preferable, though a concrete realization of 
the operator~leaves considerable freedom to 
a story-teller. 
There follow more examples of rules of 
embellishment. 
#s(a)>+ #s(STAT(s(a))) 
Here s is a sign. This rule serves to turn 
the opening event of a story to the exposition, 
a standing situation which is to become the 
background for the rest of events. 
>s(a)# ÷~s(STAT(s(a)))# 
This is an analogous rule for the transformation 
of the last event to the coda, the epilogue of 
a story. 
There follow two rules for EMBOD of STEP: 
STEP(a) ÷ QUASI(a) 
s(STEP(s(a I &a 2&... &ak))) + s(ai)(i=l, 
or i=2 ..... or i=k) 
The last rule is a way to EMBOD an EXPO 
for a set of events: an event from the set 
occurs. 
Now we shall present a rule of EXPO (which 
exists in three different forms): 
>-(T) >4> -(TRY(-t-,-(T)))>-(T) 
#-(T) >+# -(TRY(-{-,-(T)))>-(T) 
>+(T) >÷> -(TRY('t-,+(T)))> ,(T) 
TAe above rule works for a t-section T 
where t appears in the first place of the high- 
est predicate of T which does not appear 
immediately after ANTI or NOT; otherwise Y 
should appear in the first place of the highest 
predicate. 
Example: the expression 
... ~ +(ANTI(DISTRESSED(HUM~)))~ ... 
can be transformed by the above rule to 
... ~ ~(TRY(ROMAN~J,+(ANTI(DISTRESSED(HUM~))))) 
+(ANTI(DISTRESSED(FF~-)))> ... 
An example of AMPLIF (or CONTR, or rather 
AMPLIF by CONTR): 
-(PROHIBIT(A,+(P(t I)))) ~ + >-(PROHIBIT(A,+ 
(P(tl))))~ -(P(a))~ 
Here P(tl) is a predicate expression with a 
term ~I in its first place (or the only place). 
The t-section P(A) is obtained by substituting 
the term corresponding to A (an a~ab_agent) 
for t I in P(t), and changing any tilt I to t i. 
This is an AMPLIF for prohibition: an Arab 
agent not only prohibits t's doing P, but 
does P himself (or herself). Example: 
... > -(PROHIBIT(A*VERIMP,+(USE(SIMPLE*J, 
J*SYMBOL))))~...+ ...>-(PROHIBIT(A*VERIMP, 
+(USE(SIMPLE*J,J*SYMBOL)))) > -(USE(A,VERIMP, 
J*SYMBOL))p .., 
The principle of CONTR is exemplified also 
by the following rule: 
s(TRY(-t-,T)) ÷ s(TR¥(-t-,T)) > FAIL(t,T), 
where s is a sign, t is a term and T is a t- 
section. 
Many other rules of embellishment, amon~ 
them some more sophisticated ones, see in 2 
Some transformations, which we call Formal 
Equivalences, do not contribute to expressive- 
ness, but serve only to improve readability of 
a formula and to facilitate implementation of 
the Rules of Embellishment. There are rules 
eliminating adverbial expressions: 
so(ANTI(si(ABASE(tl,t2)))) ÷ So(PRAISE(tl,t2)) 
or el se 
so(ANTl(sl(DISaBkE(tl,t2)))) + so(CURE(tl,t2)); 
there are rules dealing with signs: 
NOT(-(T)) ÷ +(NOT(-(T))) 
or el se 
So(So(T) ) ÷ So(T), and many others. 
Here s o and s I are signs, t I and t 2 are terms, 
and T is a t-section. 
5. The Final Example. 
We present below a typical Moroccan Jewish 
sacred legend - the text and the final step of 
a rather lengthy derivation representing an 
analysis of the legend in our grammar. This 
is a very rough approximation of the Text. The 
-164 
derivation see in 2 The formula is obtained 
from the "messages" i and 4. 
HOW A HOLY JEWISH TOMB WAS DISCOVERED 
Once the Arabs of Teluat near Marrakesh 
built a fence around their graveyard. In this 
graveyard was buried a great and learned rabbi. 
The Arabs did not know of this, for in the 
village in which the graveyard was situated 
there were only Arabs, and no Jews at all. 
One night one of the women of the village 
dreamed that a man dressed in a long white 
shirt and with a long white beard came to 
her. He said to the woman: "In the morning 
inform the men of the burial society of the 
Jews in the neighbouring town that their 
rabbi, who is buried in the Moslem graveyard 
in the village, has no peace." 
"Iris just a dream," said the woman to 
herself. But the dream was repeated. Again 
the woman said: "It is just a dream." But 
when the dream was repeated for the third time, 
she knew that the dream spoke truly to her. 
On the following day she went to the town to 
tell about her dream. 
Themen of the burial society came to 
the sheik of Tthe village and said to him: 
"Our,~rabbi is buried in yQur graveyard. Permit 
us to seek outthe place. We shall pay you 
much money if you will allow us to build over 
the grave a place for prayer." 
"Good," the sheik agreed. 
The men Of the burial society sought 
and sought but they found nothing. The son 
~'the sheik began to get angry and began to 
durse them and &ay: "What are you looking for 
~pre? A rabbiwwho died a hundred years ago? " 
He turned aside to,,ease himself b~tHe fence, 
and then suddenly he stood like-a stone, 
paralysed. 
When the men of the burial society who 
were already getting ready to go back to the 
town saw the sheik's son standing like:a stone 
statue, they understood: Here was the grave 
of the rabbi. 
The Arabs asked: "What shall we do with, 
the sheik's son? The sheik will kill us if ,- 
he hears that his son has become paralysed."" 
"Break down the fence!" the men of the 
burial society commanded. And straight away 
the Arabs broke down the fence. 
Then they drew a circle about the spot 
where the sheik's son was standing,,took 
stones and wrote upon it "A holy ~e~i,sh grave". 
Then the sheik's son began to move,~is limbs 
and move from the place. "Where am I?" he 
asked. "What has happened to me?" 
They told him everything and then he said: 
"If that is the case then your rabbi is indeed 
great." 
The Arabs erected a monument on the grave, 
and every year the Jews came there to celebrate 
the Rabbi's birthday. 
See Dov Noy 3 , pp. 42-43. The last few lines 
are an addition from the Hebrew version of the 
legend. 
The final step of our derivation: 
#-(STAT(-(-(LOSE(HUMAN*COM,J, THING*SYMBOL* 
SINGLE*J*SP*RELA*GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA* 
J*SP*MALE*RABBI))) & -(NEGLECT(J,HUMAN*COM, 
THING,SYMBOL*SINGLE*J*SP*RELA*GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE 
*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*MALE*RABBI))) & -(NOT(+(USE 
(J,HUMAN*CON, THING*SYMBOL*SINGLE*J*SP*RELA* 
GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*MALE* 
RABBI)))))))) > -(MISAPPROPRIATE(HUMAN,GROUP,A* 
IMPORTANT,MALE,OFFICIAL, THING*SYMBOL,SINGLE*J* 
SP*RELA*GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP* 
MALE,RABBI))) ~ ~(TRY(AOMAN~GROOP~J~iMPOR~ANT~ 
~\[E~O~T~\[,+(+(FIND(HUMAN,GROUP,J*IMPORTANT* 
MALE,OFFICIAL, THING*SYMBOL*SINGLE*J*SP*RELA* 
GRAVE (HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*MALE * 
RABBI))) & +(CAREFOR(HUMAN*GROUP*J*IMPORTANT* 
MALE*OFFICIAL, THING*SYMBOL*SINGLE*J,SP,RELA,GRAVE 
('HUMAN,SI NGL'E*VERI MP*RELA*J-,SP,MALE,RABB I ) ) ) & 
+( US E (HUMAN*GROUP*J*I MPORTAN=T*MA-L E*OFFI CI AL, 
THING*SYMBOL*SINGLE*J*SP*RELA*GRAVE*(HUMAN* 
SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA~J*SP*MALE*RABBT)))))) ~ - 
(ABASE(HUMAN*SlNGLE*VERIMP*A*MALE*SON(HUMAN * 
SINGLE*VERIMP*A*MALE*SECA*SHEIK), HUMAN*GROUP* 
J*IMPORTANT*MALE*OFFIClAL)) ~ -(FAIL(HUMAN* 
GROUP*J*IMPORTANT*MALE*OFFICIAL, +(+(FIND(HUMAN 
• GROUP*J*IMPORTANT*MALE*OFFICIAL, THING*SYMBOL* 
SINGLE*J*SP*RELA*GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA* 
J*SP*MALE*RABBI))) & +(CAREFOR(HUMAN*GROUP*J* 
IMPORTANT*MALE*OFFICIAL, THING*SYMBOL*SINGLE*J* 
SP*RELA*GRAVE (HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*- 
MALE*RABBI))) & +(USE(HUMAN*GROUP*J*IMPORTANT* 
MALE*OFFICIAL, THING*SYMBOL*SINGLE*J*SP*RELA* 
GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*MALE* 
RA~)))))) > +(CAUSE(DEFILE(HUMAN*SINGLE* 
VERIMP*A*MALE*SON(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*A*MALE* 
SECA*SHEIK), THING*SYMBOL*SINGLE*J*SP*RELA* 
GRAVE (HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*MALE* 
RA~)), +(MIR(+(DISABLE(THING*SYMBOL*SINGLE*J* 
SP*RELA*GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP* 
-165 
MALE*RABBI), HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*A*MALE*SON 
(NUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*MALE*A*SNEIK))))) 
INATTACK(HUMAN*GROUP*A*IMPORTANT*MALE*OFFIClAL, 
HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*A*MALE*SECA*SHEIK)~ +(QUASI 
(+(CAREFOR(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*A*MALE*SON 
(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*MALE*SECA*SHEIK*A), THING* 
SYMBOL*SlNGLE*J*SP*RELA*GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE* 
VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*MALE*RABBI))))) ~+(FIND(HUMAN* 
GROUP*J*IMPORTANT*MALE*OFFICIAL, THING*SYMBOL* 
SINGLE*J*SP*RELA*GRAVE (HUMAN*SlNGLE*VERIMP* 
RELA*J*SP*MALE*RABBI))))) > +(GIVEBACK(HUM~ 
GROUP*A*IMPORTANT*MALE*OFFICIAL, THING,SYMBOL, 
SlNGLE,J,SP,RELA,GRAVE~HUMAN,SINGLE,VERIMP*RELA* 
J*SP*MALE*RABBI))) > +(QUASI(+(CAREFOR(HUMAN* 
GROUP*A*IMPORTANT*MALE*OFFICIAL, THING*SYMBOL* 
SlNGLE*J*SP*RELA*GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP* 
RELA*J*SP*MALE*RABBI))))) > +(MIR(CURE(THING* 
SYMBOL,SINGLE,J*SP,RELA,GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE* 
VERIMP,RELA*J*SP*MALE*RABBI), HUMAN*SINGLE* 
VERIMP,A*MALE*SON(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*A* 
MALE*SECA*SHEIK))) ~ MIR(CANCELED(GUILTY(HUMAN* 
GROUP~A,IMPORTANT*MALE,OFFIClAL)))) > +(PRAISE 
(HUMAN,SlNGLE*VERIMP*A*MALE*SON(HUMAN*SlNGLE* 
VERIMP*A*MALE*SECA*SHEIK), HUMAN*GROUP, J* 
IMPORTANT*MALE*OFFICIAL) ~ PRAISE(HUMAN*SINGLE* 
VERIMP*A*MALE*SON(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*A*MALE* 
SECA*SHEIK), THIN G*SYMBOL*SlNGLE*J*SP*RELA* 
GRAVE(HUMAN*SlNGLE*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*MALE* 
RABBI)))~+(STAT(+(+(FINB(~HUMAN~COM, THING* 
SYMBOL*SINGLE*J*SP*RELA*GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE* 
VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*MALE*RABBI))) & +(CAREFOR 
(J,HUMAN COM, THING*SYMBOL*SINGLE*J*SP*RELA* 
GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP*RELA*J*SP*MALE* 
RABBI))) & +(USE(J*HUMAN*COM, THING~SYMBOL* 
SlNGLE*J*SP*RELA*GRAVE(HUMAN*SINGLE*VERIMP* 
RELA*J*SP*MALE*RABBI))))))# 
We shall informally describe some artistic 
features of this legend which we tried to 
account for by our analysis. 
The discovery of the holy grave is preceded 
by attempts to find it. This is not a simple 
repetition which is characteristic of fairy 
tales ("... tried once and did not succeed, 
tried the second time and did not succeed, 
tried the third time and succeeded..."). In 
our legend the failure is to be taken more 
seriously: the Jews acknowledged the defeat 
and were ready to leave the graveyard. A 
professional story writer (for example, a 
detective story writer) would not ignore such 
a device: the detective tries to find the 
decisive evidence, admits his failure (for 
example, calls to the police office: "Nothing 
of interest!") and then - by accident - finds 
the desired object. In our story, too, the 
discovery is accidental. It does not result 
from any additional effort by the Jews. More 
than that, it is caused by a hostile action. 
The punitive action by SP (the Sheik's son 
being petrified) creates a knot of entangled 
events; in fact, one event which comprises 
different actions. The petrification is, at 
the same time, the discovery of the holy grave 
by the Jews (no separate action of finding is 
involved). The petrification means that the 
Jews have found the holy grave, Tt is a sign 
of the holy grave being here. More than that: 
the Sheik's son being pet~ied means danger 
for the group of Arabs who are responsible for 
his peaceful return home. The Arab community 
is punished by endangering a representative 
group of Arabs ("officials"). The last compo- 
nent of the complex event under consideration 
is the Sheik's son's being turned to a sort 
of stone, a sort of statue. The symbolic 
significance of this act was recognized not 
only by us but also by some students, including 
those of Moroccan Jewish origin: petrifying 
the Sheik's son is a symbolic counterpart of 
erecting a monument on the holy grave. The 
Sheik's son is forced to erect a sort of 
monument with his own body. Thus an action 
which is to be performed by the Jewish com- 
munity is in fact performed (in symbolic form) 
by a hostile agent. This is a manifestation 
of a principle which the whole story is per- 
meated with: plus-actions are regularly per- 
formed by the potential or actual enemy - the 
Arabs. The Rabbi appears in the dream to an 
Arab woman. It is up to her to inform the 
Jewish community of the problem which has ari- 
senl. The symbolic monument is first erected 
with the Sheik's son's body. The Arabs them- 
selves destroy the wall around the cemetery, 
not just permitting the Jews to do so. The 
Arabs encircle the holy grave, to designate 
its exterritoriality in the Arab graveyard. 
They then erect a temporary monument with some 
stones. Finally, the Arabs build the proper 
monument. 

References

I. Shcheglov, Ju. K. and A.K. Zholkovskij, 1976. 
Poetics as a Theory of Expressiveness. 
Poetics 5:207-246. 

2. Dreizin F., Shenhar A., Bar-ltzhak H., 1979. 
From Theme to Text via Rules of Embellish- 
ment: A Grammar of Expressiveness for Moroc- 
can Jewish Sacred Legends. FOCUS Project, 
Technical Report No. 2, The University of 
Haifa, Haifa. 

3. Noy, D. (ed.), 1966. Moroccan Jewish 
Folktales. N.Y. 
