For some time, critics tried to circumscribe the “novelty” of digital literature in rather generalist terms, taking either into account its relation to literary avant-gardes, or focalizing on its technical features; these theoretical approaches were often blind to contents. Now that digital literature seems more and more aesthetically convincing, time has come to define with more precision its stylistic features. In order to circumscribe the poetics of interaction, critics first tested the validity of the classical figures of style. It is, however, probably dangerous to use classical rhetoric terms intended to characterize textual phenomena, whereas the signs of digital text almost constantly refer to different semiotic systems (including the visual one). In the following pages of this paper, I will sometimes continue to borrow from conventional taxonomies to describe the stylistic devices of digital literature; in order to avoid fool-hardy analogies, I will try in other cases to invent a new terminology.