ATLAS OF LANGUAGE

AT-HAR4-0017 · ATLAS 260

Symperasma

A concluding summary that gathers preceding reasons or observations.

Part of the subject path Rhetoric and Style

Why is this entry in the Atlas?

F · Figure / procedure R1 · Distinct contribution to understanding

Symperasma identifies a concluding synthesis that draws on prior reasons rather than simply listing the points already made. Recapitulation can repeat prior material without drawing it into a concluding inference.

Colours and admission grounds

The rectangular label identifies the entry function: F – linguistic figure or procedure; A – analytical concept; G – foundational concept; E – selected concrete case. The rounded badge indicates the admission ground: R1 – distinctive contribution; R2 – necessary foundation; R3 – justified illustrative case. This editorial rationale explains the current selection rather than claiming an undocumented original selection history.

Explanation

Symperasma is a concluding synthesis that gathers preceding reasons, examples, or observations into a final inference. It does more than repeat: it orders prior material into an outcome and marks the transition from analysis to consequence. The synthesis may weigh evidence fairly or selectively include only points supporting the desired conclusion. Its persuasive force therefore depends on coverage and inferential adequacy. The conceptual movement inventories preceding reasons independently, compares them with the concluding formula, and tests which elements are compressed, omitted, or altered in strength.

Movement of thought

1. Preceding reasons and observations are inventoried independently of the concluding formula. 2. The summary sentence is divided into its distinct asserted consequences. 3. Each consequence is tested for actual support in the preceding material. 4. Omissions and shifts of weight reveal possible strategic selectivity in synthesis. 5. An alternative summary shows whether other concluding directions remain defensible.

Scientific use case

Argumentation theory, rhetoric, science communication, and text linguistics study symperasma through coverage, inferential strength, and selectivity. Systematic comparison between evidence sections and conclusions reveals overreach.

Example

After presenting data on cost, waiting time, and error rate, a report concludes: “Taken together, these findings show that the transition was not only cheaper but faster and more reliable.”

Counterexample

Mere repetition of the last sentence or a thematic transition is not symperasma. Several preceding elements must be gathered into an identifiable inference or final overall judgement.

Distinction

Distinguish symperasma from recapitulatio, epilogue, and a conclusion marker alone. Symperasma inferentially gathers preceding reasons; recapitulatio may simply repeat points without drawing a new conclusion.

Effect on thought and perception

Symperasma gives direction to extended reasoning and aids memory. It can condense insight, but may also smooth uncertainty and make heterogeneous reasons appear completely unified.

Resonance

Many preceding lines meet in one concluding node. The conclusion receives their movements and sends them onwards as a single bundled direction.

Cite this entry

Reich, Michael (Hrsg./ed.): „Symperasma“. Atlas der Sprache, AT-HAR4-0017. ATLAS 260, data model 1.6.0. https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-HAR4-0017

https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-HAR4-0017

The address remains stable; editorial content may evolve. Editorial reading state: 2026-10-15. Include your access date for precise references.

Historical background

Position is central to the historical classification. A gathering of points during an argument can prepare further development; a gathering at the end asks the listener to retain a consolidated result. Bullinger distinguishes neighbouring forms of accumulation with this temporal role in view. For the Atlas, the distinction helps to explain why the same list can do different work depending on where it appears. A conclusion may reveal a relation that was difficult to see while its parts were introduced separately. It can also conceal unresolved tensions by making the assembled points sound unanimous. The historical figure therefore invites a counter-test: does the final summary preserve the qualifications and disagreements of the preceding argument, or replace them with an apparently settled outcome? The name itself cannot certify that the conclusion follows.

How conceptual history changes the analysis

Symperasma is a concluding condensation of what precedes; brevity must not create new certainty or omit essential conditions.