ON ENGLISH VERSIFICATION. No. II. IN contemplating the wide extended field of English Versification, the poet may perceive a multitude of objects for his attention, but not a single spot for experiment. What remains at the present day to be done, in this respect, is to make observations on the experiments of former poets; which they have exhibited in sufficient number. For instance, it was an experiment long ago made, to form our verses upon a principle of alliteration, without rhime, or stated measures, like these lines in the Vision of Piers Plowman: In a Summer Season when hot was the Sun, I Shope me into Shrubs as I a Sheep were; In Habit as a Hermit unHoly of works. This experiment was afterwards renewed with a variation, which was to put the lines in rhime; as thus, In December, when the Days Draw to be short, And November, when the Nights wax As I Past by a Place Privily at a Port, Poetry, V. 2. B. 2. 3. The structure of verse upon this principle of alliteration is not originally English: neither is the manner of using alliteration the same with that which is so called in modern Fetry: not such as Pope condemns an exemplifies, by apt alliteration's artful aid, as will be shown hereafter. It was another celebrated experiment to frame our modern verse according to the ancient Greek and Latin measures; so that we had English hexameters and pentameters, together with Alcaic and Sapphic odes. In this experiment were concerned some of high name in literature; Sir Philip Sidney, Spenser, and his friend Gabriel Harvey, were among them; but it did not succeed, and was soon dropt: nor is there any reason to think that it will ever obtain a footing among us, though it has been revived in our age by more than one writer. FED. 1823. Again, other experiments were made in an early period, as to the length of lines which English poetry would bear, and poems were written in verses of fourteen syllables each. This species of verse still exists in our poetry under a different form. Other entire poems were composed in twelve-syllable verses; a practice which never extended far; yet the line of twelve syllables (the Alexandrine) is still used singly with good effect, and often with great beauty. Spenser wrote one of his Eclogues (the second) in lines of nine syllables, after this measure: Ah, for pity! will rank winter's rage These bitter blasts never 'gin to asswage? which Webbe (Discourse of Poetry, p. 58), calls, a rough and clown 66 ish manner of verse.' It does not appear to have been ever adopted, except by some few writers when they were to put words to music. More promising and more successful were some of those experiments which have been made to combine our English verses in different ways; from whence arises that boundless variety of stanzas, regular and irregular, which constitute the heterogeneous body of our lyric poetry, odes, madrigals, sonnets, &c. But the most successful experiment was that which set our principal species of verse, viz. the heroic of ten syllables, free from rhime. This has been followed by similar attempts on other kinds of verse, but not with a similar result; except in the heroic verse, rhime is most agreeable to the national taste. Many likewise are the experiments which our poets have made in the matter of rhimes; in the composition of rhimes themselves as well as in their arrangement. They tried the effect of identical rhimes, which are allowed in French and Italian pcetry, and were formerly admitted into ours. They changed the true pronunciation of a syllable, and warped it from its proper sound, to make a rhime. They made polysyllables N rhime to each other, as, charity, misery; disfigured, established, &c. In the arrangement of their rhimes, they sometimes set them close to gether, and sometimes at the distance of many lines asunder: sometimes they accumulated three lines, or more, together, having the same rhime, and sometimes they distributed the same rhime through the greatest part of a long stanza. In the whole compass, therefore, of English versification, there does not appear to be any room left for discovery. Former poets have explored every source of novelty, and have diversified our language by every contrivance which inventive genius could suggest. The result of their experiments is for the poet of the present day. All their store lies before him, where he may choose and reject according to his judgment; and his only care, in this part of his work, will be to polish and improve what he may think fit to adopt. As the province of criticism is humbler than that of poetry, so likewise the critic descends to minuter objects of inquiry than are usually deemed necessary for the poet to regard. For the poet it may be thought sufficient to know that certain modes of versification are agreeable to the taste, and others disgusting; that such and such rhimes and measures are approved of, and such again not allowed; but it is the business of the critic to examine more nearly, and unfold the causes why these things are some of them pleasing and others not. For this purpose he must analyze his subject, and observe the smallest parts which enter into the composition of a verse. This is a labour which, though the writer of verses may be unwilling to engage in himself, yet he may not be averse to attend to the investigation, when it is made by another for his service; because he may by those means acquire some information, which will be useful to him in the pursuit of his art, and which will neither be difficult to comprehend, nor burdensome to remember. SECTION I. Of the Elementary Parts of Verse. The simplest elements of verse are letters-of letters are formed syllables-of syllables feet-of feet a verse. As verses are made for pronunciation, their effect on the ear is not to be neglected: and to produce a good effect, the smallest parts which enter into their composition must be considered, viz. the letters, as whether they be rough or smooth to the sense, and of easy or difficult combination for the utterance. And here we come to a part of the subject, to which our English alphabet bears so close a relation, that some of its defects and strange anomalies require to be noticed. The account given of the first letter is, that it has three distinct sounds, which are heard in Hal (a nicname), Hale (healthy), and Hall (a large room).* Now a certain and determinate vowel sound is formed by the organs of speech, when in a determinate position; and a change of that position changes the vowel as well as the sound; there being no difference between one vowel and another, but what is made by such a change. To pronounce the letter a in the different words given above, three different positions of the organs of speech are necessary; and therefore, though it is written by the same character, and called by the same name, it is in reality three different vowels. But vowel sounds admit of a difference, without changing the vowel, in respect of what is termed quantity; that is, the time taken up in their pronunciation; and as this time may be more or less, they are all, except one, divisible into long and short, after the manner which will presently be shown. And in this another great defect of our alphabet will appear. The difference of quantity in our vowels is not marked, in writing, uniformly, nor by any rule or set of rules; it is entirely irregular. The difference between our short In this point the Latin written alphabet was more defective than our own, if we give credit to Priscian; for he says, in his first book, that every Latin vowel character had many different sounds. Other anomalies of the alphabet are not less remarkable: such are these among the consonants. 1. A single written character stands for more than one elementary sound, as, j, in judge, &c. 2. A single elementary sound is represented by a double character, as in the words sing, shall, this; where ng, sh, and th, stand each for simple sounds. There áre consonants, again, and among thems and th, which do not always stand for the same sound; for example, hiss, his; thin, thine. These observations are introduced to remind the writer of verse, that the rules of English prosody and rhime are not applicable to the language as it appears in writing, but as it is heard in pronunciation. Our language, so considered, is not inferior to the best. Its elementary sounds, both in variety and number, are adequate to all our occasions. The consonants, according to some grammarians, are nineteen; according to others, twenty-one. To the vowels already mentioned are to be added five dipthongs, as uttered in these words, vine, tune, aye,† joy, cow. And beside these, that great variety of vowel-sounds produced by the elements w ory, when prefixed to a vowel or a dipthong, as, ell, yell; ire, wire; all, wall, yawl; which are computed to be nineteen at least. All these elements have their distinguishing qualities, of smooth, rough, soft, strong, close, open, clear, obscure, and others; by which they give a corresponding character to the sound of a verse. There is also, in many cases, a great agreement between them and the thing signified; as is shown by Dr. Wallis, in his grammar, at much length; though indeed he has extended his principle too far, and some of his examples are merely fanciful. § It is not easy to give an evident instance of the short o, without having the same letter long in the same word, as, notorious. "The short sound of this vowel (says Mitford, Harmony in Language, p. 28, 2d ed.) never occurs in a syllable strongly offered to the ear." + Grammarians have remarked, that the dipthong ai is not used, except only in the word aye. The reason is, that our tongue has been much corrupted by polite and courtly speakers, who have debased the original and true pronunciation of many terms, which were too broad, or too clownish, in their opinion. The words, maintain, road, and door (from the Greek Supa), arc examples of this sort. A similar corruption has happened in other languages, as the French l'eau (water) is pronounced by the provincials as two syllables, l'e-au; for which they are ridiculed by the polite, who pronounce it like our Vowel o. The comparison between the English tongue and others, in the note subjoined, will, perhaps, entertain the reader. It is taken from Steel's Prosodia Rationalis, p. 168; but the information would have been more satisfactory, if some authority for the assertions had been given. In English the proportion of monosyllables to polysyllables is more than as five to two: in French, something less than as three to two; but in Italian, which, having more vowels, has less occasion for monosyllables, their proportion to polysyllables is not quite three to four, or one and a half to two. The superior melody of one language over another will be nearly in proportion as one exceeds the other in the number of (vowels or) vocal sounds. The number of vocal and consonantal sounds in Italian are nearly equal, or fifty-four consonants to fifty-three vowels; in Latin, five consonants to four vowels; in French, supposing the orthography not as written, but as sounded in pronunciation, the consonantal to the vocal sounds are as four to three; and in English, in the like manner, the proportions are as three to two. Therefore, in this view, the French has an advantage over the English in proportion of nine to eight; but this is overbalanced by the English advantage in its monosyllables, which it has more than the French, in the proportion of five to three, or ten to six." § See extracts from Wallis in Dr. Johnson's grammar ;-see also Sheridan, Art of Reading, p. 76, 77. No single element, in a man's native tongue, is of difficult pronunciation to him whose organs of speech are naturally perfect: in a foreign language there may be such, as the Welsh gutturals, and the French u, to an Englishman. But there are various combinations, either difficult to utter, or unpleasant to hear;* and others again of an opposite character; with all of which it is useful for every writer to be acquainted: and therefore, some of the ancients, Dionysius of Halicarnassus in particular, have entered into this subject very minutely, as will be shown when we treat of syllables in the next section. Let it not be thought degrading to any composer of English verse to attend to the power and effect of these elementary sounds, since Bacon has recommended an inquiry into the nature of language, for purposes of the same kind: nor accounted it beneath him to record in his works, that we cannot pronounce the letter t after m, without inserting p, as a circumstance worthy of notice. Ex. empty, Hampton.+ SECTION II. Of Syllables. By a syllable, is usually meant as much of a word as is uttered by the help of one vowel, or one articulation; and in this sense it is employed throughout the present work. Syllables, in respect to roughness, smoothness, and the like, have the same qualities as the letters that compose them, of which an account was given in the last section; there are likewise other qualities of syllables to be regarded; which are, tone, accent, and quantity. By tone (to speak of it in this place) is meant the sound of a syllable, considered as high or low; not as long or short, for that belongs to quantity. It is not the same with accent, but wholly distinct from it: nor is a high tone always joined with the accented syllable: in Scottish pronunciation it is just the contrary. In English speech, also, the last syllable of a question, though unaccent-. ed, will have the higher tone: for example, "he is going to London.— To London? aye, to-morrow. Tomorrow?" In each of these questions the English custom of speaking will admit the last syllable to be raised above the preceding accented one, as much as the difference of the fourth from the key-note in the scale of music. But it is unnecessary to pursue this topic farther; for tone is no constituent part of a verse. By accent, is to be understood the force of the voice used in uttering a syllable; not a higher or lower sound (the acute and grave of the Greeks and Romans)." It is more usual with us (says Mitford) to speak of syllables merely as accented, or unaccented; that is, as being marked by a peculiar stress of the voice, or not being so marked." (Harmony of Language, p. 30, 1st edition.) This is a just and accurate account. * The maker of verse, who has command of his language, will not feel himself much cramped by these combinations; some few there may be which are unmanageable: such is that made by the second person singular of the past time, in verbs, ending with a double consonant: as, touch, touchedst. This was the incompressible throng of consonants which Pope once found in his way, and which he could no better avoid than by trespassing with unwarrantable licence upon grammar, O thou my voice inspire, Who touch'd Isaiah's, &c.-Pope's Messiah. † A similar case of insertion is remarked by Tucker on Vocal Sounds, p. 17, viz. the short u between some of the vowels (and particularly the dipthong i) and r, as fire, dire, pronounced fiur, diur. The reader may like to know what other authors say of the accent. “The English accent is a difference between loud and soft.”—Monboddo's Origin and Progress of Language, vol. ii. p. 299. Steele, the author of Prosodia Rationalis, corresponded with Lord Monboddo upon the subject of his Lordship's book; and he says, " He very justly explained the true sense of the term accent, and yet, from too much complaisance to a vulgar error, uses it in a sense contrary to his own definition."-Prosodia Rationalis, p. 19. "By accent, is meant a certain stress of the voicé upon a particular letter of a syllable, which distinguishes it from the rest, and at the same time distinguishes the syllable itself to which it belongs, from the others which compose the word."-Sheridan's Art of Reading, p. 104. But Dr. Johnson considers accent and quantity to be all one; for he says (treating of The accent may be placed on short or long syllables indifferently; for instance, on the short, as, begin, téller: on the long, as, between, taílor. Sometimes it is used on the short syllable, and the long syllable is left unaccented, as, désert, discúss. With accent, as it has been here described, emphasis has a near connection. Emphasis has been defined thus: "a certain grandeur, whereby some letter, syllable, word, or sentence, is rendered more remarkable than the rest, by a more vigorous • pronunciation, and a longer stay upon it." (Holder's Elements of Speech.) From this account it appears, that what emphasis imparts to any syllable is either accent or quantity, but has no concern with prosody, or the structure of a verse, otherwise than as possessing those qualities. By the term quantity, when applied to syllables, is signified the time requisite to pronounce them; as was said before of the vowels: which time being more or less, from that circumstance syllables are denominated long or short. This division into two classes has been deemed sufficient for all the purposes of prosody; though it is certain, that in neither class are the syllables all equal among themselves, as will appear when we have stated what is allowed to constitute a short or a long syllable. 1st. A short vowel when alone, or when no consonant follows it, is taken for a short syllable, as the articles, a, the. 2d. A short vowel, when followed by a single consonant, is a short syllable, as, man, pen: or by the same consonant doubled, as, manner, lable, though followed by two consonants, if the first was a mute, and the second a liquid. The cause is founded in nature; and therefore holds with us: it is that such a combination of consonants is more rea dily pronounced than others are. A syllable is long, 1st, when it contains a long vowel, or a dipthong, as, see, go, loud, joy. 2d. When it consists of a short vowel followed by two different consonants, if they be not a mute and a liquid; as, into, number. Such a syllable is called long by position. The ancients, by whose authority we are guided in this arrangement of syllables, allowed a short vowel, before a mute and liquid, to make the syllable either short or long: in that point therefore they fixed the boundary between them. The reason why such a syllable might be accounted short, was because the mute and liquid could be pronounced more readily than two other consonants in their place. It follows then that the same vowel before two other consonants would make a syllable that took more time in the utterance; which, of course, must be ranked together with the long. When it is recollected, that every letter is formed by a particular position of the organs of speech, and each different letter by a different position, it is certain that some time is employed in passing from one to another. Dionysius of Halicarnassus has shown this at more length, in his Treatise on Composition, (i. e. on the choice and order of words in a sentence). He has taken some lines from Pindar, for examples of a harsh composition, produced by the meeting of certain consonants; as n before p, th, 1, and others, where he observes that these letters, being sounded by different organs of speech, and in different parts of the mouth, there must be such a change in passing from the first to the second, as necessarily occupies some portion of time, greater than other combinations require.t prosody), "Pronunciation is just, when each letter has its proper sound, and when every syllable has its proper accent, or, which in English versification is the same, its proper quantity."-Grammar of the English Tongue. * On the quantity of syllables Mitford has written at length, and very satisfactorily, in his Inquiry into the Principles of Harmony in Language, sect. 3, second edition. + See Dion. Hal. Tepi sv. ov. sect. 22. |