Regardless of exactly what your definition of "recurrent" means,
it seems pretty clear that the map f : R -> R defined by f(x) = x + 1
is equicontinuous but not recurrent. Or f(x) = 0, for that matter.
Since counterexamples are so obvious one suspects you had
some unstated assumptions in mind. (Also, exactly what does
the "d" mean in the definition?)
David C. Ullrich
"Understanding Godel isn't about following his formal proof.
That would make a mockery of everything Godel was up to."
(John Jones, "My talk about Godel to the post-grads."
in sci.logic.)
Something like on a compact metrizable space :)
In such a case, if f is recurrent it is
equicontinuous. I suspect the converse
to be true when f is onto and false
otherwise (f(x)=x/2 on [0,1] is
a counter example).
Best,
Amities,
Olivier