Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
A History of European Versification$

M. L. Gasparov, G. S. Smith, and Leofranc Holford-Strevens

Print publication date: 1996

Print ISBN-13: 9780198158790

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2011

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198158790.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: null; date: 25 February 2017

(p.296) (p.297) Appendix

Source:
A History of European Versification
Publisher:
Oxford University Press

METRISTS have long been accustomed to using calculations as the most objective way of capturing and comparing various facts in their research. Calculations have been used since the nineteenth century, if not earlier, to help solve problems of the chronology and attribution of verse texts (classical, medieval, Shakespearean). Andreĭ Belyĭ in his book Simvolizm (1910), whose subject was Russian poetry, was the first to apply such a methodology systematically in constructing a theory and history of verse. Studying verse texts with the help of statistical analyses, scholars usually calculate the regularity of occurrence of a certain metrical or rhythmical phenomenon. For example, we may establish the most typical (or mean) syllabic size of lines in a text (e. g. the Spanish Cantar de Mio Cid; see § 37); the frequency of a word boundary after a certain syllable (the latter analysis verifies whether or not the verse concerned has a caesura); or the regularity of missing stresses in such-and-such a foot. Such calculations may be applied to texts by the same poet, and to texts by different poets of the same or different epochs. The results obtained for several different authors may then be compared.

It is even more interesting to compare a poet’s rhythm not with that of another poet, but with the natural rhythm of the language. Such a comparison makes it possible to establish which particulars of verse have been conditioned by the particulars of the language material, and then, against the background of the first, to discover those features that have been generated by the creative will of the poet. It is the latter phenomena that should be the primary objects of attention and interpretation by the metrist and literary critic. To establish which features of verse are language-specific and which are verse-specific, actual verse is compared not with other samples of actual verse but with its theoretical model (also called ‘language model’ and ‘probability model’ of verse). The first step in constructing such a model was taken by Boris Tomashevskiĭ in a series of articles and books from 1916 onwards; in the 1960s this model was elaborated by the renowned probability theorist Academician Andreĭ Kolmogorov (1903–87) and became an everyday tool of Russian metrists. Constructing theoretical models of verse is practised by the Slavonic metrists of Eastern Europe, but the procedure has not been applied, as far as I know, to West European poetry, except for my own work (Gasparov 1987). A simpler kind of verse model, the so-called ‘speech model,’ was constructed for Russian verse by Taranovski (1953) and Gasparov (1974, ch. 4), and for English and German verse by Tarlinskaja (1987, 1993).

(p.298) Computing the language probability model of verse is based on the assumption that in natural languages, words are rhythmically independent of each other, that is, their co-occurrence in a phrase is not caused by their rhythmical forms, but by other factors, such as the semantics and syntax of the utterance. If this assumption is correct, then the probability of finding a combination of such-and-such rhythmical forms of words in a text equals the product of their probabilities in the language. The language probability of each rhythmical word form is calculated from large portions of prose texts (thousands of words). Such a procedure makes it possible to calculate the language probability of every string of words that may constitute a line and fit into the rhythm of a given metre (for example, the language probability of every line type of the English iambic tetrameter acceptable by poetic convention), and to compare the proportion of each string of words in the language model of verse with its occurrence in actual verse. If the data are close, it means that the poet was aesthetically indifferent to the phenomenon in question, and was using it automatically, with the frequency preconditioned by the language material and manifested in prose (if we assume that prose writers follow no rhythmical considerations and choose words guided only by language factors, such as semantics and syntax). If the data significantly diverge, it will mean that the poet (consciously or subconsciously) was favouring, or avoiding, the phenomenon in question.

Consider, as an example, the line ‘When rósy plúmelets túft the lárch’ (Tennyson, In Memoriam, 41, 1). The language probability of the ‘phonetic words’ (that is, stressed words together with their unstressed clitics) constituting this line are: .12 (‘When rosy’); .13 (‘plumelets’); .21 (‘tuft’); and .19 (‘the larch’). These data were obtained in the following way: all the ‘phonetic words’ of every rhythmical form occurring in a large sample of prose were taken as 100%. Trisyllabic words stressed on the second syllable constitute 12% of the total, disyllabic words stressed on the first syllable constitute 13%, and so on. The product of these probabilities (taking into account possible hypermetric stresses on the first syllable of the line) is .000787. It means that 787 out of every 1 000 000 random four-word combinations in English prose will fit the iambic tetrameter line variant of the rhythmical type ‘ta-ta-ta / tata / ta / ta-ta’ (‘When rosy / plumelets / tuft / the larch’). The sum of such products calculated for all rhythmical variations of the English iambic tetrameter (see Table 2) is .045 895. This means that out of every 1 000 000 random eight-syllable word strings in English prose, 45 895 may fit into English iambic tetrameter as it has been established by the English poetic tradition. The index of the rhythmical line type taken as an example above (.000 787) constitutes 1.71% of the total. What does this figure show us?

If an English poet wrote iambic tetrameter guided only by the natural laws of English language rhythm, such a line type would occur 171 times per 1000 lines. In reality it occurs 230 times per 1000 lines in Browning’s verse, and 364 (p.299) times per 1000 lines in Tennyson’s verse. This means that both poets, Tennyson in particular, noticeably preferred this rhythmical line type.

Stresses in verse occur more frequently than in prose: for example, every 100 lines of our iambic tetrameter verse model contain 291 stressed syllables, while every 100 lines of actual verse by Browning and Tennyson contain 334 stresses. Therefore it is sometimes advisable to calculate an adjusted verse model: its stressing is adjusted to the stressing of the actual verse text studied. Such adjusted data in the tables below are marked with an asterisk.

All figures in the tables below indicate percentages; to avoid the illusion of extreme precision, they all have been rounded out, where possible, to whole numbers.

Tables 1 shows the rhythmical vocabulary of the languages for which theoretical verse models have been computed. The material used for the models was prose texts by the following authors. For the English model, 6817 phonetic words from Defoe, Swift, Sterne, Scott, Dickens, Thackeray, Henry James (the calculations were done by Al’mira Safarova); for the French model, 4278 phonetic words from Racine (forewords to his tragedies), Molière, Voltaire, and Balzac; for the Italian model, 2000 words from 10 prose writers of different centuries, from Boccaccio and Sacchetti to Verga and D’Annunzio; for Spanish, 1000 words from Cervantes’ Don Quixote’, for Latin, Petronius and St Augustine, 1000 words from each author.

Tables 23 contain lists of strings of words (‘rhythmical variations’ of lines) possible in the English iambic and trochaic tetrameter. Rare and exceptional line variants have been disregarded. I differentiate 7 ‘rhythmical forms’, i. e. strings of words differing by the placements of stresses on strong positions, e. g. ‘For tástes and smélls and sóunds and síghts’, ‘And with my héart I múse and sáy’, ‘No dóubt—as is your sórt of mínd’, and within them, 38 ‘word boundary variations’, differing only by the placement of word boundaries between phonetic words, for example: ‘The wórds / were hárd / to understánd’, ‘Of frúit, / tobácco, / and cigárs’, ‘He pláy’d / at cóunsellors / and kíngs’, and so on. To these I added variations with an hypermetrical stress on the first syllable of iambic tetrameter, but excluded variations with a missing stress on the final, eighth syllable (such lines were excluded from the actual verse used for comparison). The actual verse material compared with the models was 1400 lines from Tennyson’s In Memoriam, 1000 lines from Browning’s Dramatic Lyrics, Dramatic Romances, and Christmas-Eve and Easter-Day, and the first 1000 lines of Longfellow’s Hiawatha.

Tables 7, 9, 11, 14 present the same lists, but in a concise form: they contain only rhythmical line forms, but no word boundary variations.

Tables 46 display generalized characteristics of the English iambic tetrameter. They confirm the results of Tarlinskaja (1976) and Bailey (1975), and at times add to their conclusions. The tables demonstrate the following tendencies, (a) A decrease of stressing in a stanza towards its end (the mean (p.300) stressing of strong positions decreases from line one to line four in Tennyson’s quatrains), (b) The trochaic model displays an alternating rhythm of stressing (more frequently stressed feet alternate with less frequently stressed), and actual verse emphasizes this tendency. The iambic verse model displays an even rhythm: the frequency of stressing decreases from foot 1 to foot 3, while the genuine trochee hints at an alternating rhythm, (c) Hypermetrical stresses concentrate on position 1 of the iambic tetrameter (particularly in line forms II and IV with a missing stress on position 2), and they gradually decrease towards the end of the line. Browning has more hypermetrical stresses than Tennyson. Unexpectedly, Longfellow’s trochee displays an alternating rhythm of hypermetrical stresses (their peaks occur on the weak positions 4 and 8 in the endings of the two hemistichs). (d) Word-boundary forms that prevail in the model become even more prevalent in actual verse. The frequency of masculine word boundaries in monosyllabic intervals between adjacent stresses increases in actual verse compared with the model, for example: ‘This róund / of gréen, / this órb / of fláme’ (In Memoriam: 34.1), and the frequency of feminine word boundaries in actual verse increases when a missing stress on a strong position yields a trisyllabic interval between adjacent stresses, for example: ‘And Lóve would ánswer / with a sigh’ (In Memoriam, 35.1). Most of these tendencies (with a different frequency) have been observed in Russian verse.

Tables 78. The material used is 27 Latin poems (1989 lines) of the Carolingian epoch, whose rhythm had been previously studied by B. I. Yarkho (Moscow, Central State Literary Archive, MS 2186, 1, 7). Yarkho, following Wilhelm Meyer, considered this verse to be syllabic with a syllabo-tonic tendency. To compare with actual poetry I computed three theoretical models of the Latin decapentesyllable: (a) purely syllabic (encompassing all strings of words which can fit into the syllabic scheme 8f+7d); (b) syllabic, but with two additional caesuras, [4+4f] + [4+3d], which amplify the trochaic rhythm; and (c) syllabo-tonic: regular trochee, 4 feet+3 feet. Comparing actual verse with the three models, we may reach the following conclusion: the characteristics of actual verse are closer to model (c) than to either (a) or (b). The actual verse, then, should not be considered syllabic, but rather a somewhat loose syllabo-tonic with a syllabic tendency.

Tables 910. German scholars consider the Italian (and Spanish) hendecasyllable to be iambic with breaches of rhythm which add syllabic features to the iambic form. Italian scholars consider it syllabic, but with obligatory stresses on syllables 4 and/or 6. I computed four theoretical models of this verse: (a) purely syllabic, with no restrictions in stressing; (b) with certain restrictions, requiring stresses on syllables 4 and/or 6; (c) with one more restriction, ruling out phonemic stresses on syllable 7; (d) regular syllabo-tonic iamb. My comparative material was 500 lines each from Italian poets from the Sicilian school to Gozzano, from Spanish and (p.301) Portuguese poets from Garcilaso to Darío (Table 10 presents only the most characteristic authors). The rhythm of actual verse evolves from type (b) to type (c), and the evolution occurs in two cycles: first from Dante to Metastasio and Parini, next from Manzoni to D’Annunzio and Gozzano. (See Gasparov 1981.) One can say that the form of Italian verse is half-way between pure syllabic and syllabo-tonic.

Tables 1113. The material here is Spanish romances: (folk romances from the anthology edited by Jean Ducamini, and literary romances of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries from Manuel José Quintana’s Tesoro del Parnaso español), and of the nineteenth century from poems by Zorrilla; a total of 3480 lines. For comparison I used a French cycle, ‘Romancero du Cid’, from Hugo’s La Légende des siècles. I singled out three groups of rhythmical variations: trochees (with stresses on syllables 3, 7; 5, 7; 1, 3, 7; 1, 5, 7; 3, 5, 7; 1, 3, 5, 7), dactyls (with stresses on syllables 4, 7; 1, 4, 7), and mixed (all the rest). The tables show that the indices of actual verse coincide almost fully with those of the theoretical model. This means that actual verse closely followed the natural language rhythm; this verse is purely syllabic without any specific constraints. The Spanish literary endecasílabo, with its syllabo-tonic tendency, and the purely syllabic folk octosílabo characteristically complement each other.

Tables 1416. The material analysed comprises Du Bellay’s Roman sonnets, Racine’s Mithridate, Chénier’s Bucoliques and Élégies, and Baudelaire’s Les Fleurs du mal; 600 or 1 000 lines from the beginning of each text, or from each poet. My analyses of actual verse and the computed models took account of three groups of rhythmical variations in the hemistichs: iambs (stresses on syllables 2, 6; 4, 6; 1, 4, 6; 2, 4, 6; 1, 2, 6; 2, 5, 6), anapaests (3, 6; 1, 3, 6; 3, 5, 6), and mixed (all the rest). Actual verse fully follows the models. One may add that the first and the second hemistichs do not tend to display a rhythmical similarity (lines of the type ‘iamb+iamb’, ‘anapaest+anapaest’, are no more frequent than their language probability). There are weak tendencies (a) for an iambic hemistich to begin a line, and for an anapaestic hemistich to end it, and (b) for the mixed rhythm to occur below its theoretical probability. On the whole, the French alexandrine is purely syllabic verse: it displays none of the syllabo-tonic tendency suggested by German scholars.

Using the same methodology I showed (Gasparov 1971) that the Russian thirteen-syllable verse of the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries is also purely syllabic.

Such are the first attempts to apply the ‘Russian method’ James Bailey’s term) to West European poetry. One can hope that more work in the same direction (adding more material, doing more detailed statistical analyses) will help to clarify many aspects of the history of European verse.

(p.302)

Table 1. The rhythmical vocabulary of English, French, Italian, Spanish, and Latin

Number of syllables

Position of stress

English

French

Italian

Spanish

Latin

1

1

21

4

6

5

2

1

13

2

11

12

29

2

19

15

13

12

1

3

1

2

2

1

12

2

12

13

23

23

21

3

11

19

11

10

4

1

1

2

2

3

3

10

3

7

14

16

12

12

4

3

14

4

4

5

3

2

1

1

4

4

2

7

7

9

3

5

1

6

1

1

6

4

1

1

5

1

3

2

2

1

6

2

Other

2

1

4

1

(p.303)

Table 2. The English iambic tetrameter

Rhythmical forms and examples

Model

Tennyson

Browning

1.1. For tástes and smélls and sounds and sights

3–38

12.3

11.9

2. And thus we sit together now

2.46

7.21

5.3

3. Withdrew the dripping cloak and shawl

2.46

6.14

5.9

4. To see the sunlight every day

1–73

4.43

1.9

5. Effecting thus, complete and whole

2.46

6.50

7.1

6. A doubtful gleam of solace lives

1.78

5.86

3.0

7. A soldier’s doing! What atones

1.71

3.64

2.3

8. And ‘Ave, ave, ave’ said

1.20

2.07

1.4

Total with stresses on syllables 2, 4, 6, 8

17.2

48.0

38.8

2.1. And with my héart I múse and sáy

4.33

5.07

5.4

2. But since it pleased the vanish’d eye

3.16

3.71

3.2

3. And I untightened next the tress

3·56

2.29

4.4

4. Out of a myriad noises soft

2.50

1.50

1.3

Total with stresses on syllables 4, 6, 8

135

12.6

14.3

3.1 No dóubt-—as is your sórt of mínd

3–15

1–79

1.8

2. Conceive of the Creator’s reign

2.71

1.79

1.0

3. The chalice of the grapes of God

6.66

5·36

5.9

4. As arrows and privations take

5–12

6.64

4.4

5. With carelessness enough, no doubt

1.96

2.5

6. To Italy, our mother: she

1.46

0.43

0.7

7. A scientific faith’s absurd

0.44

0.07

0.1

8.*indubitably feeble verse

0.31

Total with stresses on syllables 2, 6, 8

21.8

16.1

16.4

4.1. The wórds were hárd to understánd

3–15

2.43

4.0

2. Of fruit, tobacco and cigars

6.70

7·36

7.1

3. He play’d at counsellors and kings

2.39

0.71

1.7

4. In vain: a favourable speed

0.43

0.14

5. That duty up to his ideal

2.29

1.50

2.4

6. What horror followed for my share

4.67

4.50

3.3

7. The herald melodies of spring

1.47

0.64

0.9

8. Let random influences glance

0.35

0.07

0.2

Total with stresses on syllables 2, 4, 8

21.4

17.4

19.6

5.1. And I am so much móre than thése

0.94

0.07

0.2

2. For I am but an earthly Muse

0.53

0.07

0.5

Total with stresses on syllables 6, 8

1.50

0.10

0.70

6.1. For thou wert stróng as thou wert trúe

4.04

1.36

2.7

2. That the Eternal and Divine

9.69

3.57

4.7

3. That simultaneously take snuff

4.02

0.57

1.3

4. And at the spiritual prime

0.66

0.07

0.1

Total with stresses on syllables 4, 8

18.40

5.60

8.80

7.1. Of sléep, and we are on the brink

0.51

0.3

2. My Arthur, whom I shall not see

2.60

0.07

0.3

3. The dust on him I shall not see

1.83

0.14

0.6

4. Fantastically in the dust

1.20

0.2

Total with stresses on syllables 2, 8

6.20

0.20

1.40

Total number of lines

1400

1000

(p.304)

Table 3. The English trochaic tetrameter

Rhythmic forms and examples

Model

Longfellow

1.1. Cálls the déer and cálls the húnter

2.63

5.7

2. Long ago departed southward

1.75

2.5

3. Green in summer, white in winter

2.05

4.6

4. Brought the tender Indian Summer

1.17

1.7

5. Warning said the old Nokomis

1.75

2.1

6. Many things Nokomis told him

1.17

0.7

7. Every human heart is human

1.17

0.9

8. Ever sighing, ever singing

0.88

0.7

Total with stresses on syllables 1, 3, 5, 7

12.6

18.9

2.1. Till it tóuched the tóp of héaven

1.46

8.6

2. Chetavaik, the plover, sang them

4.97

5.5

3. With the sacred belt of wampum

5.56

7.8

4. And retreated, baffled, beaten

3.80

2.5

Total with stresses on syllables 3, 5, 7

15.8

24.4

3.1. Léapt into the light of mórning

2.63

2.6

2. Then Kabibonokka entered

2.05

1.3

3. Listen to the words of wisdom

4.97

4.3

4. Listen to the Indian legend

3.80

2.2

5. Silently he stole upon him

1.46

1.2

6. He it was, whose silver arrows

1.17

0.3

Total with stresses on syllables 1, 5, 7

16.1

11.9

4.1. Sáng the sóng of Hiawátha

2.92

5.6

2. Dwelt the singer Nawadaha

5.51

9.4

3. Young and beautiful was Wabun

1.75

1.7

4. Making dints upon the ashes

2.05

2.0

5. Rippling, rounding from the water

3.80

2.3

6. Getche Manito the mighty

1.17

1.8

Total with stresses on syllables 1, 3, 7

15.2

22.8

5.1. For he was alóne in héaven

2.34

1.3

2. From Kabibonokka’s forehead

2.92

0.8

Total with stresses on syllables 5, 7

5.20

2.1

6.1. To the fierce Kabibonókka

7.89

4.8

2. And hereafter and forever

16.08

11.5

3. Like a cowardly old woman

6.14

1.7

4. The hereditary hatred

0.88

0.7

Total with stresses on syllables 3, 7

31.0

18.7

7.1. Téll us of this Nawadáha

2.34

0.7

2. Patiently sat Nawadaha

1.75

0.5

Total with stresses on syllables 1, 7

4.10

1.2

Number of Lines

1000

(p.305)

Table 4. Rhythmical schemes of the English iambic and trochaic tetrameter

Ictuses

Average stress

No. of lines

I

II

III

IV

4-stress iamb: model*

81

79

70

100

85.5

Tennyson

in 1. 1 of stanza

80

83

83

100

86.5

350

in 1. 2 of stanza

84

83

79

100

86.5

350

in 1. 3 of stanza

78

85

76

100

84.7

350

in 1. 4 of stanza

83

83

69

100

83.7

350

total

81

84

77

100

85.5

1400

Browning, total

79

82

70

100

82.5

1000

4-stress trochee: model*

60

74

62

100

78.5

Longfellow, total

55

85

57

100

79.0

1000

Table 5. Percentage of extrametrìcal stresses on various positions English iambic and trochaic tetrameter

On first syllable of iambic tetrameter

Rhythmical Form

I

II

III

IV

VI

Model*

19

40

16

19

39

Tennyson

7.5

21.0

10.5

6.0

20.5

Browning

12.0

54.5

12.0

14.5

57.0

On weak positions of iambic tetrameter

Positions

Av.

1

3

5

7

Tennyson

10.5

5.0

1.5

1.0

4.5

Browning

22.0

16.0

8.0

6.0

13.0

On weak positions of trochaic tetrameter

Positions

Av.

2

4

6

8

Longfellow

2.0

9.0

2.5

6.5

5.0

(p.306)

Table 6. Word boundary rhythm of the English iambic and trochaic tetrameter

Iambic tetrameter

Word boundary after position

Trochaic tetrameter

Word boundary after position

2m

3f

4m/d

5f/h

6m/d

7f/h

1m

2f

3m/d

4f/h

5m/d

6f/h

Form I

Form I

Model

58

42

58

42

58

42

Model

60

40

58

42

60

40

Tennyson

62

38

66

34

59

41

Longfellow

77

23

58

42

70

30

Browning

64

36

70

30

70

30

Form II

Form II

Model

55

45

58

42

Model

41

59

44

56

Tennyson

70

30

58

42

Longfellow

58

42

67

33

Browning

60

40

69

31

Form III

Form III

Model

27

54

16

3

56

44

Model

29

55

16

56

44

Tennyson

22

75

3

0

45

55

Longfellow

33

55

12

68

32

Browning

17

63

20

0

63

37

Form IV

Form IV

Model

59

41

25

53

18

4

Model

71

29

35

45

20

Tennyson

61

39

23

68

8

1

Longfellow

73

27

34

51

15

Browning

65

35

33

53

13

1

Form VI

Form VI

Model

22

53

22

3

Model

26

52

19

3

Tennyson

24

64

10

2

Longfellow

26

61

9

4

Browning

31

53

15

1

Endings: m = masculine; f = feminine; d = dactylic; h = hyperdactylic.

(p.307)

Table 7. Medieval Latin decapentesy liable (8f+7d)

Stressed syllables

Examples

Model A

Actual Verse

First hemistich

(i) 1, 3, 5, 7

Gaecis visum, claudis gressum

5.1

13.8

3, 5, 7

Alexander, urbis Romae

5.8

11.5

1, 5, 7

Accipe, Germane sanete

9.1

74

1, 3, 7

Foro lato specioso

10.1

32.2

3, 7

Linteamina levitae

11.6

23.1

1, 7

Firmiter aedificata

1.8

2.0

5, 7

Gonjugationis nomen

1.5

0.3

(ii) 2, 5, 7

Aurora cum primo nocte

11.8

2.3

2, 7

Secundus Dimitrianus

9.4

1.8

2, 4, 7

Qui trinus deus et unus

11.3

1.9

4, 7

Praecipitatum in mare

4.7

0.1

1, 4, 7

Dextera praepotens Dei

17.8

3.6

Second hemistich

(i) 9, 11, 13

Ghriste nate Domini

15.3

22.8

11, 13

sublevare oculos

17.0

30.5

9, 13

sanguinis proluvio

28.4

26.4

13

non praetereundum est

0.6

10, 13

illustris nobilitas

39.3

19.7

((i)) stresses on odd syllables only;

((ii)) stress on one or more even syllables.

Table 8. The rhythm of stresses in Latin decapentesylUtbles

Syllabic Positions

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

10

11

12

13

Model A

44

33

33

33

33

100

44

39

32

100

Model Β

31

33

67

2

43

100

30

32

68

100

Model C

70

80

62

100

77

62

100

Actual verse

92

10

81

6

35

100

50

20

53

100

(p.308)

Table 9. Italian and Spanish hendecasyllables

Stressed syllables

Model A

Examples

Ital.

Span.

2, 4, 6, 8, 10

L’amor che muove il sol e l’altre stelle

0.46

0.45

1, 4, 6, 8, 10

Mosse da prima quelle cose belle

0.39

0.45

4, 6, 8, 10

Che non lasciò giammai persona viva

0.72

0.84

2, 4, 6, 10

Vedrai gli antichi spiriti dolenti

2.16

2.45

1, 4, 6, 10

Questa mi porse tanto di gravezza

1.77

1.42

4, 6, 10

Che la verace via abbandonai

3.34

3.28

2, 4, 8, 10

Si volge all’aqua perigliosa e guata

2.35

3.41

1, 4, 8, 10

Faccian le bestie Fiesolane strame

1.44

1.48

4, 8, 10

Mi ritrovai per una selva oscura

3.14

3.22

2, 4, 7, 10

Ripresi via per la piaggia deserta

4.19

3.80

1, 4, 7, 10

Tanto è amara che poco più morte

2.62

2.70

4, 7, 10

Ma sapienza ed a more e virtute

5.75

6.18

2, 4,  10

Per quell’Iddio, che tu non conoscesti

1.11

0.90

1, 4,  10

Tanto vogli’io che vi sia manifesto

0.52

0.45

1, 3, 6, 8, 10

Questa selva selvaggia ed aspra e forte

0.33

0.32

3, 6, 8, 10

Una lonza leggiera e presta molto

1.96

2.12

2, 6, 8, 10

Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita

1.50

1.29

1, 6, 8, 10

Questi le caccerà per ogni villa

0.46

0.51

1, 3, 6, 10

Canto l’arme pietose e’l capitano

1.90

1.35

3, 6, 10

Ch’io perdei la speranza dell’altezza

8.57

8.82

2, 6, 10

La vista, che m’apparve, d’un leone

4.25

3.48

1, 6, 10

Surgono innumerabili faville

1.57

1.93

(p.309)

Table 10 The rhythm of stresses in Italian and Iberian hendecasyllables

Syllabic Positions

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Italian verse

Model A

20

38

30

29

31

28

25

27

100

Model B

22

32

30

59

I

58

29

25

100

Model C

22

31

38

46

1

77

5

34

100

Model D

26

51

65

63

44

100

Dante

23

46

17

69

2

65

23

50

4

100

Petrarch

22

40

25

66

5

65

14

68

4

100

Tasso

29

40

23

63

2

69

12

66

2

100

Parini

25

33

39

44

2

76

18

64

1

100

Alfieri

33

44

15

86

12

57

12

83

5

100

Manzoni

33

30

27

70

1

56

12

73

3

100

Carducci

35

34

30

60

3

72

17

56

1

100

D’Annunzio

22

34

33

50

1

79

9

33

1

100

Ibenan verse

Model A

20

36

35

31

26

29

38

28

100

Model Β

21

31

25

61

57

25

34

100

Model C

21

31

33

48

75

46

100

Model D

16

50

75

59

62

100

Garcilaso

16

50

16

56

1

83

7

35

1

100

Camões

18

50

27

49

1

96

2

34

100

Darió

20

40

29

49

50

8

36

2

100

(p.310)

Table 11. Spanish octosyllables and French heptasyllables

Stressed syllables

Spanish

French

Examples

Model

Folk

17th c

18th c

19th c

Model

Hugo

1, 7

Hijo de la renegada

2

2

1

1

1

2

1

2, 7

Ayúdeme Jesucristo

15

9

9

9

11

14

11

3, 7

Abenámar, Abenámar

15

22

25

19

28

28

25

4, 7

A su palacio de Burgos

15

11

16

12

10

22

17

5, 7

Por el Zacatín arriba

3

2

5

4

3

14

6

1, 3, 7

Presos, presos, caballeros

3

7

3

4

5

1

5

1, 4, 7

Desta manera hablara

7

9

9

9

7

2

6

1, 5, 7

Cércanlo de todas partes

4

2

3

3

2

1

2

2, 3, 7

Corrió todas las Asturias

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

2, 4, 7

De siete reyes cristianos

10

14

11

15

11

5

8

2, 5, 7

La barba crecida y cana

10

11

11

13

8

3

6

3, 4, 7

AJaén, dice, señores

3

2

1

2

1

2

3

3, 5, 7

A sus pies cayera muerto

5

6

5

9

10

4

6

1, 3, 5, 7

Rey don Sancho, rey don Sancho

7

2

1

1

2

1

1

Others

4

Total lines

1000

850

800

800

732

(p.311)

Table 12. Spanish octosyllables and French heptasyllables: Correlation between rhythmical variants

Trochee

Dactyl

Mixed

Spanish

Model

36

22

42

Folk romances

43

19

38

Seventeenth century

41

25

35

Eighteenth century

40

22

38

Nineteenth century

49

17

34

French

Model

49

25

26

Hugo

45

23

32

Table 13. The rhythm of stresses in Spanish octosyllables and French heptasy Hables

Material

Syllabic Position

Number of lines

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Spanish

Model

23

37

34

34

29

100

Folk romances

(odd lines)

23

36

42

34

25

100

500

(even lines)

22

33

42

36

22

100

500

Seventeenth century

17

32

35

37

25

100

850

Eighteenth century

18

37

35

38

30

100

800

Nineteenth century

17

32

47

29

25

100

830

French

Model

7

26

39

32

19

3

100

Hugo

15

24

40

33

21

3

100

709

(p.312)

Table 14. Stressing of Hemistich Types in French Dodecasylhbks (Alexandnnes)

Stressed syllables

Model

Du Bellay

Racine

Chénier

Baudelaire

Average

Examples

A

B

A

B

A

B

A

B

A

B

A

B

6

Immédiatement

12

9

12

11

6

4

4

4

6

4

7

6

1, 6

Laissent piteusement

3

3

2

2

2

2

3

1

3

2

3

2

2, 6

Il joue avec le vent

26

27

21

22

23

19

23

23

21

26

22

22

3, 6

Hypocrite lecteur

33

35

38

37

33

46

34

44

34

40

35

42

4, 6

Ce voyageur ailé

14

15

19

20

17

18

14

18

15

16

17

l8

5, 6

Comme dans un beau songe

2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1, 3, 6

Pauvre grande beauté

1

1

1

1

2

2

3

2

3

1

2

1

1, 4, 6

Sale, inutile et laid

1

1

1

0

2

2

4

1

3

2

2

I

2, 4, 6

Machine aveugle et sourde

4

4

4

5

9

4

9

4

7

4

7

4

1, 2, 6

Non, non, d’un ennemi

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1, 5, 6

Pâles, les sourcils peints

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

2, 3, 6

Descend, fleuve invisible

1

I

I

I

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

I

2, 5, 6

Tantôt sonnera l’heure

1

I

0

0

I

0

I

0

2

I

1

0

3, 4, 6

Dont la chair lisse et ferme

I

I

0

0

I

0

2

2

3

I

I

I

3, 5, 6

Michel-Ange, lieu vague

I

I

0

0

0

0

0

1

I

0

0

4, 5, 6

Par ces deux grands yeux noirs

0

0

0

0

Number of lines

1000

600

1000

600

3200

(p.313)

Table 15. Correlation of rhythmical variations in hemistichs of French alexandrines

Hemistich A

Hemistich B

Iamb.

Anap.

Mixed

Iamb.

Anap.

Mixed

Model

45

35

20

48

37

15

Du Bellay

44

40

16

47

38

15

Racine

52

35

13

43

47

10

Chénier

51

38

11

45

47

8

Baudelaire

45

38

14

48

42

10

Average

49

38

l3

46

44

10

Feminine endings

49

36

15

45

46

9

Masculine endings

49

40

11

47

42

11

Table 16. Rhythm of stressing of French alexandries

Syllable

No. of lines

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Model

6

30

38

21

4

100

6

32

39

22

3

100

Du Bellay

4

26

41

23

1

100

3

28

39

25

1

100

1000

Racine

7

35

39

29

3

100

6

25

49

24

2

100

600

Chénier

10

35

42

29

1

100

5

27

50

24

0

100

1000

Baudelaire

9

32

43

28

3

100

5

33

45

22

2

100

600

Average

8

32

41

27

2

100

5

28

46

24

11

100

3200