07-08-2019, 12:07 PM
Hopkin’s lines - standard example of his sprung rhythm:
3. 1. 2 3. 2. 3. 1. 3. 1. 3. 1. 2. 1. 3. 1
Marga/ret are /you griev/ing || ov/er Gol/dengrove / unleaving?
3-1/2-3/2-3/1-3/1-3/1-2/1-3/1 (feminine ending)
Using the above mentioned scan, all but one of these feet goes from lesser to stronger stress - iambic. So it’s equally accurate to call it sprung, using Hopkins basic meter, or iambic using Steele’s supplementary stress. Basic meter is easy to interpret different ways. 2 iambs equal 1 diiamb, for example. So what’s the difference in calling a line iambic or diiambic? When it comes down to it, metrical scanning is just a way of annotating speech patterns to facilitate discussion Calling it one or the other doesn’t change how it’s spoken. I’ve personally found Steele’s method of scanning more accurate. At least, more useful for my purposes. It provides me with more useful information for designing a line.
Also note how the numbers in those lines jump to 1 quite a bit, between 2s and 3s. You can see the metrical bounce, just as you can hear it when you speak the lines. Want to get rid of the bounce? Rephrase the line so stresses move in a less digital manner: 1-2-3-2-3-4-3-2-3, for example.
3. 1. 2 3. 2. 3. 1. 3. 1. 3. 1. 2. 1. 3. 1
Marga/ret are /you griev/ing || ov/er Gol/dengrove / unleaving?
3-1/2-3/2-3/1-3/1-3/1-2/1-3/1 (feminine ending)
Using the above mentioned scan, all but one of these feet goes from lesser to stronger stress - iambic. So it’s equally accurate to call it sprung, using Hopkins basic meter, or iambic using Steele’s supplementary stress. Basic meter is easy to interpret different ways. 2 iambs equal 1 diiamb, for example. So what’s the difference in calling a line iambic or diiambic? When it comes down to it, metrical scanning is just a way of annotating speech patterns to facilitate discussion Calling it one or the other doesn’t change how it’s spoken. I’ve personally found Steele’s method of scanning more accurate. At least, more useful for my purposes. It provides me with more useful information for designing a line.
Also note how the numbers in those lines jump to 1 quite a bit, between 2s and 3s. You can see the metrical bounce, just as you can hear it when you speak the lines. Want to get rid of the bounce? Rephrase the line so stresses move in a less digital manner: 1-2-3-2-3-4-3-2-3, for example.
There is no escape from metre; there is only mastery. TS Eliot