ABSTRACT
Moreover, is not a poetic form in its own right; its texts have little life outside performance, and should therefore always be located in a performance context. The first task of analysing the texts on paper therefore consists of transcribing them from performance; some of the problems inherent in this process are discussed in the first
section of this chapter. We subsequently look at metre in on the strength of texts transcribed by me as well as those taken from anthologies, and discuss the nature of
rhyme. Although most texts have a rhyme scheme of sorts, it is rarely exploited to the full in performance; the slow and melismatic utterances of bol banāv
are hardly ever shaped by or structured according to rhyme. The relationship between sthāī and antarā exists on different levels: continuity of
rhyme-where it exists-links the components of a text together on a structural level, and semantic cohesion is provided by a certain continuity of narrative. The often formulaic natures of both theme and rhyme are contributing factors to the phenomenon of the ‘floating antarā’, in which one antarā may be used with a number of different sthāīs. Texts may thus include an element of interchangeability.
