Cutting pattern showing two spatially separate actions simultaneously — chase scene alternating between pursuer and prey. Tension through rhythm and proximity.
You cut together two plotlines that unfold spatially separate but temporally synchronized — this is the parallel syntagma. The viewer alternately sees what the pursuer is doing and, simultaneously, where the victim is fleeing. This cutting sequence generates tension not through what happens, but through the rhythm of alternation and the implicit question: When will they meet?
The classic application is found in chase scenes — think of an action film where the hero runs through the city and, in parallel, we see the antagonist following him. With each cut between the two strands, the psychological distance shortens, even if the spatial distance remains the same. This only works if you accelerate the cutting rhythm: longer takes at the beginning, then ever-shorter cuts as the two strands approach their meeting point. The viewer feels the approach through the cutting speed, not through movement within the frame.
Practically, this means: when editing, you must maintain an equal balance between both perspectives — don't linger too long on one, or the tension will break. Sound helps enormously: chase music, breathing sounds, heartbeats — the parallel syntagma thrives on audiovisual synchronicity. In 35mm film, both scenes were often shot with different units, and editing and montage later combined what was never physically together in front of the camera.
This is related to cross-cutting (the English equivalent), and both differ from split-screen in that both images are not visible simultaneously here — the visual splitting happens in the viewer's mind through the logic of the cuts. Modern directors also use parallel syntagmata for dramatic contrasts: while one person is celebrating, another is in prison. Not tension, but irony arises from the juxtaposition of the cuts. The tool is neutral — the rhythm creates the meaning.