Help-A question of Virgil's Eclogues

Quote:

---

You mean the poet use apostrophes to make a setence rhythmic?

---

Oh, I just saw this post. Yes. If you're reading English or Italian poetry, you should be aware of the importance of the rhythm and length of the line, also known as its "meter." Meter is a complex issue, which I can't cover fully here, but I'll try to give a brief explanation.

In English (and most European languages, including Italian) poets often count the number of syllables (let me know if you don't understand syllables--they are the parts of a word) in a line to make it come out right. The most common meter is iambic pentameter, which basically means ten syllables per line. Most commonly every other syllable is stressed, meaning that it is voiced more strongly, giving the line it's rhythm. Poets can play with where they put stressed syllables to make their poetry sound a certain way.

This may be a lot to take in. Don't worry too much about stresses for now. They may be hard to hear at first if you're not a native English speaker.

Let me start by showing you how the second line of the translation you're looking at looks broken into syllables (it is more regular than the first line and a better example for explanation):

Re-clin-ing, on the slen-der oat re-hearse

This line breaks up evenly into ten syllables, the most common line form in English, and every other syllable is stressed.

The first line is a little tricky because it actually breaks up into eleven syllables:
You, Tit-y-rus, 'neath a broad beech-can-o-py

The poet can get away with the eleven syllables because of the way the stresses are distributed, he's put in an extra unstressed syllable which sort of only partly counts and is allowable (don't worry too much if you don't follow the logic behind this).

The point is that, while the eleven syllable line is sometimes allowable, the poet really doesn't want a twelve syllable line here because it would sound akward (though there are other places where poets use twelve syllable lines) . That is why he takes out a syllable by taking the "be" off of "beneath."

Gibran--Thanks for posting the photos from Yunnan. That is truly beautiful. Now I want to go there more than ever.

Quote:

---

Cudos to you Gibran... Petrarch's Love: I have seen your screen name many times, and have recently started reading some of Petrarch's works... and for some reason I was not able to put two and two together

---

Charles Darnay--Glad you finally figured it out. ;) Only Virg. and Gibran have picked up on my little literary allusion thus far, so you're not alone. By the way, I like your screen name, although I must confess, I've always felt that Carton was the "far far better" man--just kidding. :D And say, as long as we're puzzing things out, your real name isn't by chance D'Evremonde is it? ;)

I don't comletely understand what you'd said in your post.
Such as, what's Iambic Pentameter?

http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~mwh95001/iambic.html

Does this help?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

Let me start by showing you how the second line of the translation you're looking at looks broken into syllables (it is more regular than the first line and a better example for explanation):

Re-clin-ing, on the slen-der oat re-hearse

This line breaks up evenly into ten syllables, the most common line form in English, and every other syllable is stressed.

---

PL has written an excellent summary of Iambic Pentameter, but the way she's written it my not come through to a non-native speaker. Here's the above example, with stresses added:

Re-CLIN-ing, ON the SLEN-der OAT re-HEARSE.

Still, even this is a crude transcription; an approximation. It's like hearing Beethoven's 9th as the ringtone on a cellular phone-- the idea is there but the artistry just doesn't come through. In the quoted line, for example, syllable #4 ("ON") would be stressed lightly, if at all.

The words "Iambic Pentameter" are of Greek origin, I think. An "iamb" is a two-syllable unit, where the first syllable is unstressed and the second syllable is stressed. In the example, "Re-CLIN" or "re-HEARSE" are iambs. And I think the word "iamb" is Greek, but I'm not sure exactly why I think that (for more on this, see below).

"Pentameter" is easier. "Pent", "penta" or "pente" is Greek for "five" (as in "Pentagon", "Pentecost", "Pentagram"). "Meter" is Greek for "measure" (as in "Kilometer", "Thermometer", or simply "Meter").

So, "Pentameter" is a measure of five units. In this case, five iambs.

*****

Having said all that, and hopefully not have confused you even more, I have to say that when it comes to pronunciation (how words sound), and etymology (the history of individual words, like "iamb") English is almost impossible to understand. That's because, like the United States, English is a mix of all kinds of different cultures and influences. This is why English speakers and writers can often rhyme words that are spelled very differently (like "eight", "great" and "late"), and why words that look identical ("read" and "read", "row" and "row") can have different sounds and meanings. It's very confusing; even native English speakers have trouble with this.

All I can say is this: the more you speak and hear, the better you will get. And coming from Chinese, it won't be easy. Still, you've got PL and a lot of other smart people here to help you out.

Best of luck, and we're glad to see you in the Forum!

Thanks for your further explanation,TodHackett!

I looked up my dictionary for the word "meter",and it's said that,

METER-A particular arrangement of words in poetry, such as iambic pentameter, determined by the kind and number of metrical units in a line.

And I read a few books on this, now I seem to know what IAMBIC and syllables are, and how they work. But I don't understand why so many poets observed it, it's so complicated! Maybe it'll improve the rhythm and length like what PL said? :confused:

I want to find a poem of typical Iamb and to listen how the speaker reads, which poem do you suggest?

Tod Hacket--good idea to capitalize to show the stresses. I was trying to think of how to show the sound last night, but the obvious eluded me ;).

Gibran--The question of why poets started using iambic pentameter is a complex one. It really became popular in the Renaissance period (though it was certainly around in the Medieval) when poets like Petrarch in Italy and Shakespeare in England started using these types of lines very effectively and others imitated them. All of Shakespeare's plays are written almost entirely in what is called "blank verse." Blank verse means lines in iambic pentameter that do not need to rhyme. Later poets, and many in the 20th century, decided that formal structure like iambic pentameter were over used and began to write "free verse," which does not have these types of rules but goes along with what sounds best to the ear of the poet (e.e. cummings and Lawrence Ferlinghetti come to mind right away as an example of this).

The main reason for using iambic pentameter is for the sound of the poetry. It is a type of line that flows very naturally in English, and sounds very balanced and pleasing to the ear. Because it is something that is heard, it is a little difficult to explain in writing. Because of this I've located a couple of sites that might be helpful. Here is the first site:

http://server.riverdale.k12.or.us/~bblack/meter.html

This site talks about scansion. "Scansion" just means reading the meter in poetry like what we have been talking about. To scan a line means to find where the stressed and unstressed syllables are. On the website the teacher uses this symbol (^) to mark unstressed syllables and this symbol (/) to mark stressed. He also shows different kinds of units poets use in addition to the iamb, but if this confuses you, just ignore it for now.

I chose this site in particular because if you scroll down you will find the first four lines of Shakespeare's sonnet 73 with the stresses marked. Now if you go to this site:

http://poetry.about.com/gi/dynamic/o...g%2Flisten.htm

you can find an audio reading of sonnet 73 to listen to. Maybe looking at the poem as marked while listening to it you can hear a little of where the stresses are in the sonnet and how the rhythm sounds. You can also listen to other poems on this site to get an idea of the sound, since most of them are in good iambic pentameter. Most of these poems are available to see right here on the Literature Network if you want to read along while you are listening.

Hope this helps some. Do not worry too much if it is difficult to hear. Students who are native English speakers have difficulty understanding this all the time. :nod:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

Gibran--Thanks for posting the photos from Yunnan. That is truly beautiful. Now I want to go there more than ever.

Charles Darnay--Glad you finally figured it out. ;) Only Virg. and Gibran have picked up on my little literary allusion thus far, so you're not alone. By the way, I like your screen name, although I must confess, I've always felt that Carton was the "far far better" man--just kidding. :D And say, as long as we're puzzing things out, your real name isn't by chance D'Evremonde is it? ;)

---

That would've been cool if it was.... no, I don't have a literary allusion in my name, he's simly my favourite liteary figure, and a pseudoname used for many Internet forums and the like.... my real name is Alex.... not that excting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

Tod Hacket--good idea to capitalize to show the stresses. I was trying to think of how to show the sound last night, but the obvious eluded me ;).

---

Thanks! It's a convention I've seen elsewhere, but I can't say where, exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

The main reason for using iambic pentameter is for the sound of the poetry. It is a type of line that flows very naturally in English, and sounds very balanced and pleasing to the ear. Because it is something that is heard, it is a little difficult to explain in writing.

---

K. Gotta say this; know you'll probably dis me for it, PL...

I consider myself pretty good with words & sound. Been a choral musician all my life (since I was 7-- 20 years. Gawd, I feel old!), and I have an MA in English (Well, "Literary & Cultural Studies". That's what they called it at CMU. But then, it was a department full of Marxists).

The first time I heard pentameter and was really listening to it, it jarred me. I was all like, "What's up with the extra syllables?"

Tetrameter has ALWAYS made more sense to me. I'm guessing that this is b/c I'm a child of 80s electronica, Nirvana and gangsta rap (not in the "raised in the hood" sense; more in suburban white boy wannabe, "this $hit is fly, mom!" sense. I hear Dre, Ice Cube or Chali 2na, and I groove. It's infectious!). I guess that what I'm saying here is that, to me, pentameter isn't "pleasing to the ear". And to me, that says that (big surprise!) the sound of the language-- especially what one finds "pleasing"-- is culturally and temporally contingent.

So to me, the more interesting question is not "Why is pentameter naturally more balanced and pleasing?", but "Why does it seem that pentameter was 'naturally' more balanced and pleasing to certain English-speaking peoples, at certain times?" It's clear to me that I dig tetrameter because I grew up singing vocal jazz (which is HUGE in the Pacific Northwest), and listening to jazz, pop, rock and rap-- most of which is in 4/4. What's not clear to me is why pentameter might seem natural to others... was it b/c of some contemporary technology, or musical convention (I don't know of any time and/or place where "5" was popular. Until the 20th century!), or some other factor?

So, I'd like to hear your comments. Disagree, but don't Disrespect!

As I understand it (and I'm no expert so I'm probably wrong), iambic tetrameter is more sing-songy than iambic pentatmeter, and that seems to be what TodHackett means by 'pleasing to the ear'. I think the extra syllables in iambic pentameter made the verse read more like speech (ie, more 'naturally flowing') and less like nursery rhymes. I guess nobody asked for my opinion, but that has never stopped me from giving it.

On another note, iambos is, in fact, Greek.

Gibran,
I think the usual English meters (iambic pentameter, etc.) are far simpler than the meters and rhyme schemes in Chinese poetry. Of course, Chinese poetry is far more beautiful sounding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluevictim

Of course, Chinese poetry is far more beautiful sounding.

---

blue--

Yeah, tetrameter may be juvenile or nursery-rhymy. But I dig it, all the same. And I'd be curious to know why you think pentameter connotes speech. Do you listen for it in conversation? What do you hear?

So "iambos" is Greek. That only proves how brilliant I am, despite being hopelessly ignorant of all things Greek (and a lot of things non-Greek). Yay me!

But on to the quote...

The thing I REALLY dig about Chinese is the way they incorporate pitch into the language. It's like lyrics every time you speak... truly amazing! One of my idols, Ezra Pound (his arrogance and his career as a Nazi apologist notwithstanding) was big into Chinese and I can see why. Someday, man, someday... I gotta learn that language!

Thanks for your post, blue!

Tod,
Of course I didn't mean to imply that tetrameter is juvenile; perhaps I should have used the word 'lyrical' instead of 'nursery-rhyme-y'. As far as pentameter being close to natural speech, I'd be tempted to scan one of your sentences thus:

THAT ON ly PROVES how BRILL i ANT i AM
des PITE BEing HOPE less ly IG no RANT
of ALL things GREEK (and a LOT of THINGS non GREEK).

As a matter of fact, English speakers incorporate pitch in language, as well. The pitch is bound to mood/emotion ('you?' versus 'YOU!'), however, rather than bound to 'words', as in Chinese. I agree that the pitch aspect (aka tonal accent) is fundamental to the sound of Chinese.

Hi Tod--An interesting question. Let me first state that I had actually not meant to imply that iambic pentameter was necessarily the one great meter that was universally pleasing to all ears. That would be a silly argument indeed, and I have also experienced great pleasure in hearing tetrameter, hexameter, and any number of other poetic lines both measured and free. :) I was trying to explain to someone who has little knowledge of any of these why English meter is of any interest at all, and what I should have said was that iambic pentameter is among those meters which are pleasing to the ear, or better yet that it is an example of one kind of meter and that meter in general is employed as a tool with which the poet controls the sound of his poetry and, through sound, the effect it will have on the reader/listener.

That said, let me try to address your question--I think an incredibly good one-- as to why this meter has been so hugely influential in English. This is something I've pondered a fair amount without any claim to having a definitive answer, since I'm not sure there's ever an absolute single right answer for explaining cultural tastes. Here, however are a few takes on the issue, all of which I think are contributing factors:

1.Obviously one could similarly ask why so many song lyrics employ tetrameter. On a certain level pentameter became popular, just as I stated above, because the sound of it was appealing to enough people that it caught on.

2.Most art forms, poetry being no exception, seem to develop some sort of forms and guidelines somewhere in their evolution, which artists either employ in an attempt to make their work more effective, or (after such forms have become too standard) rebel against in order to make their work stand out. For English poetry one of the major formal features that poets have followed/rebelled against is the iambic pentameter line.

3. But of course you are asking why this particular meter was chosen to function in this way. As a scholar of the late Medieval and Renaissance periods—the era when iambic pentameter was really established as the meter of choice for English poetry—I can try to give an answer from the historical perspective. There was in fact a fair amount of debate about how poets should go about writing during this time period. In England this occurred especially in the sixteenth century (just before and during the age of Shakespeare). The poets of this period went about trying to define what would make their poetry work best and experimented with different approaches to using meter, rhyme, etc. One idea was to try to apply the classical method of scansion (the method of the Greek and Roman poets) which depends not on stressed and unstressed syllables but long and short length syllables. This works pretty well with Latin, but (I can tell you from attempts I’ve seen) did not work well at all with English. What emerged was an adaptation of the classical system reliant on stresses to suit the modern languages. Anyway, having read a fair number of early experiments in English verse, I can tell you that iambic pentameter did really stand out as one of the better options, and the best adapted to the English language (much better than the often rather clumsy “fourteener” that was popular for some time—though it has its defenders). Iambic pentameter was elected the meter of choice for some of the best poets of this period, who in turn had a profound influence on the works of subsequent generations of poets.

4.There have actually been some studies done that iambic pentameter is the poetic meter which occurs most often naturally in day to day speech in English. I think Shakespeare demonstrated the potential of this meter to sound “natural” beautifully in his plays. His use of blank verse flows so easily, that most students first coming to Shakespeare don’t even realize to what extent he is sticking to the meter.

5. One final note on Tetra vs. Penta :): I agree with you that tetrameter is very well suited to songs (and pentameter not so much), but I'm with Blue that it doesn't flow as easily as pentameter in poetry. Tetrameter tends to really make the rhythm of the poem stand out. This can be a good thing in providing a poem with a real driving rhythm, but it can also come across as a bit “sing song” if not handled right. I don’t claim one is better than the other, just that they suit different types of poetry.

Well, you can tell I could discuss prosody all day, so I’d better stop before I bore you to death (though I may already have acheived this)! There’s still lots to think on in your question. It's intriguing to contemplate what draws certain cultures to certain forms. The above discussion makes me wish I knew more about Chinese poetry (not to mention Chinese language) so I could compare a very different system to the European forms I'm familiar with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

In England this occurred especially in the sixteenth century (just before and during the age of Shakespeare). The poets of this period went about trying to define what would make their poetry work best and experimented with different approaches to using meter, rhyme, etc. One idea was to try to apply the classical method of scansion (the method of the Greek and Roman poets) which depends not on stressed and unstressed syllables but long and short length syllables.

---

PL-- can you (1.) recommend any books/articles on this and (2.) explain "scansion" to me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

There have actually been some studies done that iambic pentameter is the poetic meter which occurs most often naturally in day to day speech in English.

---

I'd like to see these studies/articles/books. Could you give me any citations?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

Tetrameter tends to really make the rhythm of the poem stand out. This can be a good thing in providing a poem with a real driving rhythm, but it can also come across as a bit “sing song”

---

Why is this bad? What's the taboo against "sing song" poetry? I should think that poets would want their poems to be musical.

At the same time, I can understand how some poets, at certain points, would want to foreground things other than rhythm. But that would mean that they would move in and out of tetrameter, wouldn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

Well, you can tell I could discuss prosody all day, so I’d better stop before I bore you to death...

---

I, too, could discuss prosody all day. Let's jive!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluevictim

I'd be tempted to scan one of your sentences thus:

THAT ON ly PROVES how BRILL i ANT i AM
des PITE BEing HOPE less ly IG no RANT
of ALL things GREEK (and a LOT of THINGS non GREEK).

---

Huh. See, I hear it defferently, thus:

That ONly PROVES how BRILliant i AM...

I've used bold to denote duple meter, and italics to denote triple. "Brilliant" is a strange case, b/c it's the second half of a duple, in up-tempo three. This would all be clearer, I think, if I could put in musical notes. The duples would be eighth notes, the triples (if there were any, which there aren't in this line) would be eighth-note-triples, and "BRILliant" would be a sixteenth-note-triple. All-in-all, then, this would be four, eighth-note couplets, or one complete bar in 4/4.

To me, the rest of the phrase would sound differently also. My point in all this is to ask the following question: to what degree is English speech "naturally in" pentameter, and to what degree are you (meaning scholars, poets, etc.) putting it in pentameter? And is there a tension-- a struggle for vocal hegemony-- between those who tend to "hear in four" and those who tend to "hear in five"?

Another way to think about it: do all people hear speech-rhythms the same? In spoken speech, perhaps, but what about when speech is written? And what about people from cultures (I am thinking of the urban US) where speech is often overlaid onto 4/4 beats? Are these people likely to "read with a different rhythm"?

I'm ASK ing the QUEStions 'cause I'm CURious like that. [These last two are somewhere between stressed and unstressed, with equal "weight". But there's definitely a beat there!]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

Hi Tod--An interesting question. Let me first state that I had actually not meant to imply that iambic pentameter was necessarily the one great meter that was universally pleasing to all ears. That would be a silly argument indeed, and I have also experienced great pleasure in hearing tetrameter, hexameter, and any number of other poetic lines both measured and free. :) I was trying to explain to someone who has little knowledge of any of these why English meter is of any interest at all, and what I should have said was that iambic pentameter is among those meters which are pleasing to the ear, or better yet that it is an example of one kind of meter and that meter in general is employed as a tool with which the poet controls the sound of his poetry and, through sound, the effect it will have on the reader/listener.

That said, let me try to address your question--I think an incredibly good one-- as to why this meter has been so hugely influential in English. ...

---

Petrarch - You are an incredible asset to this forum. I am so happy you are with us. I hope you never leave. This was tremendously informative. I would love to be a student in one of your classes.