Abstract
To preclude, the concept of poeticity, coined by R. Jakobson, (1996:750) has its monolithic meaning created from linguistic resources and as part of a system for reformulating meaning which is set out by phrases, clauses and sentences, along with specific poetic function. Not whatsoever, the form and meaning of poetic communication are fused to have a monistic faculty reluctant to intercultural rendering. Poetic text being a collage texting of lexis, images and conceptions have their qualities foregrounded. The poetic function interacts with descriptive, associative, and interpersonal meanings, making them as a titular feature of the poeticity craft. Prototypical iconicity, on the other hand, is a linguistic form motivated by the similarity of metaphorical extension, and over extension of images involved. Poeticity and iconicity, in crux, are foregrounded into the versified organic body making its translatability as hard to articulate and self-monitored as the enigmatic soul-body would be. Hence, distinctive qualities of the figurative language, in general, the scheme of rhythmic repetition of identical linguistic forms, the tropes of non- literal meanings; and the poetic affinities in specific cause some lengthy tripping of deviations and illegitimate conversions (BBC, 1999: 8-10). A case well monitored in the intralingual rendition of the versified, and in the process of creating parallel versification of the same interlingally. The notness, the isness, and then the beingness overtly neologize the encoding-decoding-recoding swindle of transfer of human poetic severability.