Talk:Sprung rhythm

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Poetry Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Does this page need a more clearly explained example of sprung rhythm? I know it well (Hopkins is an old favorite of mine) but I suspect that simply supplying a technical description and a poem may not be enough. Any thoughts? Jwrosenzweig 00:51, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The article says 'feet in which the first syllable is stressed' - but this isn't the case with the poem it's talking about, unless I'm being very dense. Just in case I *am*, I haven't changed it, but if you're more confident than me, go sort it out? The Literary Encyclopaedia backs up the 'first syllable of the foot is stressed' point, although the Norton Anthology of English Literature doesn't mention it. It seems that the author is putting unstressed first syllables *outside* of feet - is this common practice?

Cheers --Oolong 09:11, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The proposed scansion in the example only makes sense if you assume the first syllable is the stressed one; subsequent syllables are de-emphasized, relatively speaking. If I can use CAPS for syllabic emphasis, things might be a little clearer:

GLOry BE to GOD for DAPpled THINGS for SKIES of COUple-COLour as a BRINded COW

I don't understand what you mean by unemphasized syllables being outside of feet; a foot in sprung rhythm is made up of a stressed first syllable followed by an indeterminate number of unstressed syllables, which number can be zero. In that way the rhythm sort of sucks up all de-emphasized syllables as it goes. Does that make sense? Perhaps a truly exceptional poem can help: the first line of Hopkins's untitled kingfisher poem follows:

As kingfishers catch fire, dragonflies draw flame;

In this line, Hopkins breaks his own rule, because it's difficult to imagine he wants "As" to be an emphasized word (particularly if there are emphases on both "draw" and "flame", which is indicated in some editions). I remember a prof of mine comparing this exception to a pickup note at the beginning of a piece of music. So, to use the notation from the article itself (and assuming the emphasis on the two last words in the line is correct), you'd scan the line as follows:

As|kingfishers|catch fire,|dragonflies|draw|flame;

with the fifth foot remaining unclosed to catch the de-emphasized "As" which starts the second line.

If you think it's clearer, I can certainly change the formatting of the feet in the article to the CAPS style (as KINGfishers CATCH fire, DRAgonflies DRAW FLAME), or we can introduce bolds (As kingfishers catch fire, dragonflies draw flame;)...let me know what you're thinking.

Mark

I'm thinking we do need both a somewhat clearer explanation as well as a more emphatic markup. Instead of bold though, how about either italic or that markup we use for showing pronunciation (just the emphasis parts)? GPa Hill (talk) 00:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, now that I think of it, what about audio? Is a reading of that first and second line an appropriate use of a short audio clip? GPa Hill (talk) 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bold would be clearer, audio would be superb.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 17:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]