Words in a musical or artistic sequence can have many non-obvious effects. While a line of song contains words, the sounds and effect of each word can vary based on the words around it.
To look at a non-metal example, the band On have a nice line in the song 'Revolution,' which goes, 'I look back and breathe disintegration.' The line opens with a sound near 'ill,' and hence is effective. It also comes close to evoking 'debris.' The following line, 'Hear the sound,' draws on the obvious connection with 'heart' in a cynical manner, contrasting it and the accompanying hope with the slightly bitter cynicism that the song conveys. It invites listeners to get this connotation, despite its depressing contrast with the pessimistic tone of the song. It otherwise leaves listeners alone with whatever sounds occur in this passage. This all strengthens the later, 'I cannot believe in revolution.' Although following the one with the other is a slightly strange progression from lighter rock music to 'serious' political statements.
Hence, the sequencing of words is of importance here. Let us return to the original word, 'quagga.' We could allow it to repeat indefinitely: 'quaggaquaggaquaggaquagga.' The pattern here slightly resembles a rhyme in the Payolas' 'In your lips I sense a danger / You've got the eyes of a stranger.' This might explain why the quagga allegedly went extinct. In the Payolas track, we can notice the interesting presence of the 'psi' sound before 'I sense,' which firstly gives it a detached sense and secondly (as in ESP, etc.) elaborates on the word 'sense' and gives it more meaning (humorously). Going from 'psi' to 'sense' quietly dilutes the apparent focus and leads to a sense of detachment. It also helps with the 'eyes of a stranger' phrase. While 'the eyes,' repeated mechanically as in a chorus, can resemble 'thighs' and distract from this progression, here a sense of detachment is again present due to 'got,' which blurs into 'the' slightly and limits it. As a note on the side, we can see that even casual phrases like 'In your,' if in a musical context, can have a slightly irregular and convoluted sound. Hence, sometimes even simple phrases will require peculiar music alongside them. The use of 'sense' is replaced with 'see' later on, again leading to something of a 'role reversal' - it is the singer who is presented as having peculiar 'eyes' that 'sense' in a vague sense (strengthened by the 'psi' sound), surprisingly. The use of body parts scattered here and there is still slightly awkward, and not quite elaborated on although the chorus restrains it. This slightly undermines the music, by making it turn on imagery that it can't specify much and hence leaving this indefinite - meaning that the song has little clear definition here. The sound of 'sad anger' is implicit, but slightly melodramatic. However, due to 'psi' and 'sense,' it might also be combined with 'lie,' which is powerful. On a completely different note, 'quagga' also starts with 'qua,' akin to 'in your.' Hence, it is possibly a complex sound.
The 'qua' sound is followed by 'gg,' a slightly indefinite sound. It can reach various different lengths, depending on the singer. It has resemblances to 'anger,' or 'struggle,' and might reveal some things about the singer and their take on the song. From there, 'aqua' or water, and a repetition of 'aggaq,' akin to 'again.' Hence, repeating the sound can change it slightly in this context, or give it a certain progression and development. The 'gg' sound recurs, now modified by 'aqua,' which further complicates how it is sung. From there, the pattern recurs, with the singer's 'free space.' being continually cut off by 'aqua' or 'qua.' This is rather stubborn. The Payolas song is similar, with references to the other's body being continually cut off or redirected in this context. Hence, both of these other than their evident similarities also inhabit a common and slightly stern territory.
This can be applied to sentences. For example, 'I am,' could be followed in many ways. This is another case where a 'simple' sound can be slightly twisted in music. Possible follow-ups could include 'fire-proof,' which however includes another sound mirroring the 'I.' However, this is followed by a combination of 'ire' and 'reprove,' which might seem angsty or self-deprecating. 'I am what I reprove,' would sound similar. This is a peculiar sentence, which might seem appropriate to a religious band. However, it is also stubborn and static, it leaves them little room to act upon the sinful and hence determinedly stands its ground. In saying, "You'll never take me in fire / You'll never take my own desire," they allude to the imagery of the Epistle on the Corinthians, saying that like Paul they will not 'burn' in temptation (or what others desire) and hence can exult fully in a religious path. They also draw on the related image of desire for God contrasted to other desires, and 'leaving behind' other temptations to 'follow' what is highest. Hence, the strengths of that are notable, nonetheless it is still a slightly 'ironic' line in a religious song. Fates Warning use 'tearing walls down.' This draws on the previous, Take what you deserve,' with the addition of 'metre.' It hence accentuates that theme, albeit in a way which can easily be hidden. In a less pronounced way, it might draw on the word 'terror' being close to 'tearing,' by merely characterising themselves as destructive. This is complemented by the repetition as a chorus line, which eventually renders it a repeated sound rather than something the listener is unfamiliar with, and hence the 'all' in 'walls' also accentuates this. Nonetheless, the 'metre' section strengthens this notable passage. Dio's 'I am sin' draws on their being a 'singer,' who is now also apparently a bringer of evil. It's slightly less pronounced than the previous. Lines starting with 'I am s,' or 'I ams,' are also slightly amusing in their resemblance to the Biblical 'our name is Legion.'
The lyrics to a song are hence in some ways intricate, but at the same time can simplify the process because sounds are a fairly evident feature of words. The chosen words then only have to be conveyed, in this way or that. A song should generally rely on things it generates for its aesthetic, not leech off other poignant events which prevents the song from truly having a musical aesthetic. The audience supplies the aesthetic, but the song is not holistic. It merely attempts to emulate this. Often, what seems like music listening is just further events in any given day, and draws on a general flow of emotion without necessarily contributing to it. Music which is mostly 'blank' or has little effect on us can seem to, if we are emotional and it gives even a small opening to this. However, in a continual wave of emotion, music can draw on this without coming to seem significantly serious to people - it represents but cannot inform or react to conditions. This hence leads to passivity or failing to 'remain against the grain' as Bad Religion out it. Music seeming serious is not a crime, you are not expected to listen to music only as a joke.
A vocalist then attempts to convey these words and lyrics. If they attempted to convey a diametrically opposite set of lyrics, it would be comical in effect. Say, 'I saw the innocent birds singing,' sung in a really horrified voice. That is still a result of their relation to the lyrics. Hence, the lyrics are the basic infrastructure of the song and must themselves direct the music. No artificial imposition can turn them into something different, without approaching the comical. Hence, the sounds and meanings thrown up by the words are fundamental to the 'sung' element of a song. This is still a harsh and strict scenario. Of course, if we are dealing with words then as in speech the situation is important. People often emphasise speech by some figures and not others, for instance if an authority figure is 'lecturing,' briefing or berating them. Music is treated as a separate context, but involves much of the same content - listening to someone saying words, and deliberating on how to respond or whether to emphasise it. The words of figures who partake of establishment or authority is 'danced' to, for it involves generic commands and things that people are to take as stimuli. The words of others might encourage or discipline along the way. Hence, vocals aren't always grasped 'in isolation,' they are treated as a combination of the vocals themselves and the perceived situation of it - they partake in some way of the way that words and speech are usually received by people. Hence, especially given a sufficient connection to the establishment, a song only has to use this in some way - to represent a particular interaction between establishment and others. This is, indeed, expected of such figures. Hence, vocals are received as a combination of the situation and the song itself. This is an important caveat, as 'music' can hence be an amorphous category, and the sound of words seem significant for quite other reasons than how they sound. 'Welcome to New York,' with a combination of 'ton,' 'ew,' and 'yuck,' isn't a line that might always stand out - unlike 'Dani California,' for instance, which resembles in sound the famous injunction to 'flee formication' among other things. However, from an establishment figure with high associations it might seem highly re-assuring, and to tell people that they are welcome somewhere. This is an obvious and substantial effect, nonetheless it is not musical or aesthetic. 'Please feel free to beat me [...] We could be happy / I really hope you stay,' from Jakszyk's 'Bruised Romantic Glee Club,' is a case where 'weak' is an effectively used sound, however. Words do not discriminate where situations do. Nonetheless, their organisation is an important part of the strictly musical effect of this kind of music.