Talk:Hylistics

Expert opinion

On 1 April 2024, barely a week after its creation, this article was flagged by User:Klbrain as needing an expert's attention. The concern was: "A technical term, relatively recent in origin and used in few sources. Does this warrant inclusion?"

The same tag was added by User:StarTrekker to the related article Hyleme on 5 April 2024, apparently with a similar concern.

In my opinion, those concerns are unwarranted. While the concept and methods of Hylistics are relatively new in the field of narratology, they are valid concepts which have already been taken up by other scholars. For example, Manuel Ceccarelli applied the methods of hylistics in his papers "Remarks on Mesopotamian Divine Epithets and Their Use in Incantations and Incantation-Prayers" (Journal of Near Eastern Studies 21, 2021, 131–160 [1]) and "Der Mythos als Wirkstrategie in den Beschwörungen: Interdisziplinäre Betrachtungen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des mesopotamischen Materials" (E. Zomer/ N. Heeßel (edd.), Legitimising Magic. Strategies and Practices in Ancient Mesopotamia, Ancient Magic and Divination, Leiden 2023, 91–145 [2]), or by Daria Kondakova and Jakob Kohler in a presentation at a conference in Brussels in 2023 ("Messy Myths: Applying Linked Open Data to Study Mythological Narratives" [3]), where they also showcased a database using hylistic terms and concepts. Their database Messy myths: how can we compare mythological narratives? is available online.

The appreciation for Zgoll & Zgoll's method, which indeed constitutes a new field of study, is also illustrated by their being awarded the price of the Peregrinus Foundation of the Mainz Academy of Sciences and Literature in 2023.

All in all, I think Wikipedia can do without a warning label on this article (and the other one).

Best, Jonathan Groß (talk) 08:26, 12 May 2024 (UTC)