Letters Concerning Poetical Translations Part 13

Mr. _Pit_,

"Hence _Byrsa_ nam'd: But now ye Strangers, say, Who? Whence you are? And whither lies your way?--

There is no Occasion to make any more Remarks upon these Lines.

Nov. 20. 1736.

_I am_, SIR, _&c._

LETTER VIII.

_SIR,_

It has been said by several Persons, especially by Foreigners, that there is no such thing as Measure or Feet, or long and short Syllables in _English_ Words. This Mistake, I believe, is chiefly owing to _Vossius_, who has advanc'd it in his Treatise _De Poematum Cantu_, &c. As also, that the _French_ Language is more fit for Heroick Verse than the _English_. To examine one or both of these Points will be the Subject of this Letter.

That our Language does not abound with Dactyls and Spondees is very true; but that we have Words enough which are perfect Iambick and Trochaick Feet is very certain, and this naturally makes our Verse Iambick.

_Divine_, _Attend_, _Directs_, are as perfect Iambicks as any _Latin_ Words of two Syllables, and so are most of our Monosyllable Nouns with their Particles.

_The Lord_, _The Man_, _The Rock_. Every one must perceive that in all these Words, the last Syllable strikes the Ear more than the first, or, in other Words, the last is longer than the first, which is all that makes an Iambick _Latin_ Foot.

The following Words, _People_, _Substance_, _Angels_, _Chearful_, and the like, are all Trochaick Feet; for it is easily observ'd, that the first Syllable dwells longer on the Ear than the latter.

I wonder that _Vossius_, who was a Canon of _Windsor_, did not perceive this in the Metre which he could not but often have heard at Church.

"All People that on Earth do dwell Sing to the Lord with chearful Voice.

Suppose these two Lines were alter'd thus,

"All ye People that on Earth dwell, Sing to the Lord with Voice chearful.

Here the natural Sound of the Words _People_ and _Chearful_ is very much alter'd, by their being wrong plac'd; or rather, the Verse is quite destroy'd: But to chuse an Example from _Milton_.

"And if our _Substance_ be _indeed Divine_.--

Let this be alter'd,

"And indeed Divine if be our Substance.--

Is not the Verse quite destroy'd by this Alteration? And does it not appear to be so, because _Indeed_ and _Divine_, which are Iambick Feet, are plac'd as if they were Trochaick, and _Substance_, which is a Trochaick Foot, is plac'd as if it were an Iambick? But I might have omitted the altering of this Line of _Milton_'s, if I had thought of one in _Cowley's Davideis_, which is as barbarous as it is possible for the Wit of Man to make a Verse.

"To Divine n.o.be directs then his Flight.

_Lib. 3. v. 3._

_n.o.be_, Mr. _Cowley_ says in his Notes, he puts instead of _n.o.b_, because that Word seem'd to him to be _unheroical_. But that is not what I am chiefly to take notice of. _Divine_ and _Directs_ are both Iambicks, but Mr. _Cowley_ has made them both Trochaicks, which makes this Line so terrible to the Ear.

It is plain that _Vossius_, who came into _England_ when he was pretty much advanc'd in Years, and in all probability convers'd chiefly in _Latin_ or _French_, knew nothing at all of the p.r.o.nunciation of _English_ Words. We have as certainly Feet or Numbers in our Language, as in the _Latin_; and indeed the _Latin_ seems to me to be rather more arbitrary in this respect than the _English_. What Reason can be given why _ma_ in _ma.n.u.s_ is short, and _ma_ in _manes_ long? Why is _a_ in _amens_ long, and _a_ in _amans_ short, and the like of other Words too numerous to relate?

That all _English_ Verses are _Iambick_, appears most plainly by considering Monosyllable Lines. For Example:

"Arms and the Man I sing, who forc'd by Fate.

Here _Arms_, _the_, _I_, _who_, _by_, appear to be shorter in their Sound than _and_, _man_, _sing_, _forc'd_, _fate_.

Again,

"Breathe soft or loud, and wave your Tops, ye Pines.

In this Line the same Difference is perceiv'd between _breathe_, _or_, _your_, _ye_; and _soft_, _loud_, _wave_, _tops_, _pines_.

Whence it is evident that these Lines are perfectly Iambick.

The Particle _and_, as well as some other Monosyllables, may be said to be common, like many Words in _Latin_; they submit themselves to be alter'd by the Voice in reading, and may be p.r.o.nounced either long or short: But this is not so in other Words. And here it may be proper to observe, that _Milton_ has a very artful Way of varying his Numbers, by putting a Trochaick Foot at the Beginning of a Verse; and the Reason why he could do it, is, that the Verse is not enough form'd in that place for the Ear to perceive the Want of the proper Measure. The Examples of this kind are very numerous: I will mention but two.

"_Angels_, for ye behold him, and with Song.

And again,

"_Fountains_, and ye that warble as ye flow.

Nov. 27. 1736.

_I am_, SIR, _&c._

LETTER IX.

_SIR,_

To reply to the Opinion that _Vossius_ has given in favour of _French_ Verse compared with _English_, I would observe in the first Place that what the _French_ call Heroick Verse, is the very worst Sort of Verse that can be contriv'd. If the Excellence of Verse consists chiefly in varying the Pause, as I have shewn it does in the _Latin_, and could do the same in the _Greek_ and other Languages; what must be thought of that Sort of Versification in which the Pause is most strictly preserv'd in the same Place in every Line, be it for 10 or 20 thousand together, especially in Verses of 12 Syllables? Perhaps an _Englishman_ may not be a very proper Person to make this Objection to _French_ Verse: I will therefore produce the Opinion of several of their own Writers.

_Ronsard_, in the Preface to his _Franciade_, owns that their _Alexandrine_ Lines have too much prattle (_ils ont trop de caquet_) and that it is a Fault in their Poetry that one Line does not run into another, and therefore he wrote his _Franciade_ in Verses of ten Syllables, and broke the Measure. The Author of the History of _French_ Poetry confesses, that the constant Pause in their Lines makes the Poetry tedious; and the judicious and learned Translator of _Quintilian_ says directly, that it is owing to the continual Sameness of Numbers that their Verse cannot please long. In reality, it is a kind of Stanza, and ought to be so writ.

_Jeune & vaillant Heros Dont la haute sagesse N'est point le fruit tardif D'une lente vieillesse._

Not to insist upon the _Prattle_ (as _Ronsard_ calls it) of these two celebrated Lines; for what does _Vaillant_ add to _Heros_, or _haute_ to _sagesse_, and what is the Difference between _tardif_ and _lente_?

I say to let this pa.s.s, the eternal Repet.i.tion of the same Pause is the Reverse of Harmony: Three Feet and three Feet for thousands of Lines together, make exactly the same Musick as the ting, tong, tang of the same Number of Bells in a Country-Church. We had this wretched sort of Metre amongst us formerly, and _Chaucer_ is justly stil'd the Father of _English_ Verse, because he was the first that ever wrote in rhym'd Couplets of ten Syllables each Line. He found, by his Judgment, and the Delicacy of his Ear, that Lines of eight Syllables, such as _Gower_ his Cotemporary wrote in, were too short, and the twelve Syllable-Lines too long. He pitch'd upon the other Sort just mentioned, and that is now found, by the Experience of so many Ages, to be the most majestick and most harmonious kind of Verse. Just the same Obligation the _Romans_ had to _Ennius_: He first introduc'd the Hexameter Line, and therefore is properly called the Father of their Poetry; and it is judiciously said, that if they had never had _Ennius_, perhaps they had never had _Virgil_. If the _French_ had taken _Ronsard_'s Advice instead of following _Malherbe_, perhaps they might, and indeed they certainly would have arriv'd at a better Art of Versification than we see now amongst them: But they have miss'd their Way; tho' had it happen'd otherwise, they could never have equall'd the _English_ in Poetry, because their Language is not capable of it, for two Reasons which I shall mention, and many others that I could add to them.

_1st_, Their Words do not sound so fully as ours, of which these Nouns are Examples, _G.o.d_, _Dieu_. _Man_, _L'Homme_. In both the _English_ Words every Letter is perceiv'd by the Ear. In the _French_ the first Word is of a very confused Sound, and the latter dies away in the _e_ mute. So _Angels_, _Ange_. _Head_, _Tete_. And innumerable others. And in Verbs, _to love_, _to hate_, _Aimer_, _Hayir_. In the _English_ the Sound is clear and strong. In _French_ the last Letter is dropp'd, and the Words don't dwell upon the Ear like the _English_.

_2d_, They have too many Particles: To shew how much more their Verse is inc.u.mber'd by them than the _English_, I will give you an Example from a Pa.s.sage in _Milton_.