TIME IN ENGLISH VERSE RHYTHM

This study treats of the time relations found in English verse rhythm. It states the defects of the current methods of studying the subject and the advantages of psychological experimentation by the aid of graphic records of the voice. Selected examples of English verse are then examined and the various theories of metrists and psychologists on the subject criticized in the light of the experimental results.

INTRODUCTION

No one will contradict the statement that all verse is characterized by rhythm. About poetry there may be some dispute; at any rate highly poetic prose may not be particularly rhythmical and may at the same time be better poetry than some very regular verse. Every theory of rhythm, no matter what its other peculiarities, must be sufficiently broad to include verse. Music and verse are the sources of most of our more affective experiences of rhythm. Not that there are not many other rhythmical experiences in our daily life, indeed the ordinary functions of our organic existence are constantly supplying a stream of sensations which are at once recognized as rhythmical when attention is paid to them. But it is through our ears that we are best able to enjoy perceiving rhythms and with the voice that we produce them oftenest and with the greatest satisfaction. The ordinary organic rhythms go on unperceived for the most part, and the same may be said of such semi-voluntary movements as walking or riding a bicycle. Even heard rhythms are frequently ignored, it is true, but music and still more verse receive a high degree of attention. And even if we learn to disregard music under certain circumstances, when we are occupied in conversation or otherwise preoccupied, the sound of recited verse retains its power to compel our attention.

This is perhaps due to the infrequency with which recited verse is heard under modern conditions; the ancients perhaps paid as little attention to the public reciter as the modern gourmet pays to the orchestra while he dines. However this may be with regard to passive appreciation, it is certain that the act of producing or reproducing music or verse-still better good music or poetry-is keenly enjoyed by most people.

The mere admission, however, that all verse is rhythmical tells very little about the nature of rhythm itself and still less about It is here that all the confusion arises, for without an adequate determination of one or the other term no advance can be made. If rhythm could be defined once for all it would be feasible to apply this definition to verse. On the other hand if verse were once fully analyzed a definition of rhythm could be indirectly derived with some degree of assurance.

In view of the difficulty of defining rhythm independently the other course seems the more hopeful. The task appears simple, and once accomplished there could be no more of the "inaccuracy, confusion, misconception, misrepresentation, mystification, and downright ignorance" of which Poe complains so bitterly in that essay of his which is still the most penetrating analysis we have of English verse. Yet simple as the task seems it has not been accomplished and indeed has scarcely been broached by a long line of students both metrists and psychologists.2

That the net result of all the careful attention devoted to the subject of verse rhythm has been so inconclusive is due in great measure to one fundamental mistake in method-a mistake which has not been recognized till recently, and which is being corrected only slowly. This mistake lies in treating rhythm objectively as an art form rather than as a form of motor expression. By this I do not mean to express a prejudice against all but the so-called "motor theories" of rhythm. And indeed I would by no means slight the study of rhythmic forms as they are perceived. But I do maintain that the study of verse forms would have gotten along much faster, if we had paid more attention to the actual performance of an individual in producing spoken verse, and less to the impression made upon a listener. After all it is the nature of the rhythmic action which counts.

So long as the listener receives a rhythmic impression it is enough. Beyond that his analysis is at best unscientific and at worst positively misleading. He is open to all sorts of peculiar illusions arising from the nature of the material in hand. It is a well known fact that the estimation of intervals of time is extremely difficult under the best of circumstances. It is peculiarly 1 Poe, E. A., "The Rationale of Verse."

For a bibliography of metrists see Gayley and Scott, An Introduction to the Methods and Materials of Literary Criticism," Chap. 7, 1899; Omond, T. S., "English Metrists," 1903. For psychologists see Wallin, J. E. W., Studies from the Yale Psychol. Laboratory, 9, 1901; Stetson, R. H., Psychol. Rev. Mon. Sup., Vol. IV., p. 413, 1903; Triplett and Sanford, Am. Jour. of Psych., 12, 1901; Miner, J. B., Psychol. Rev. Mon. Sup., No. 21, 1903; Minor, J., "Neuhochdeutsch Metrik," 1894.

hard to equate intervals filled with different sensational contentlights and sounds, or sounds of different intensity or quality. But in verse or poetry the conditions are still more difficult, for not only are the intervals to be compared filled with a content which is constantly changing in sensational quality-the endless variety of sounds which make up the words and phrases-but it is also disturbed by the intellectual and emotional content. Verse can not be heard as a mere succession of sounds making up a rhythm. It also conveys ideas and has meaning. And the meaning of it can not fail to interfere with any attempt to form an estimate of the duration or intensity of the mere sounds.

A comparison of the various ideas which various individuals have held will suffice to justify this indictment of conclusions reached by the unaided ear in the analysis of the sounds of verse. And even the most superficial study of the verses which I have analyzed will convince anyone that the time values of words in our verse are far different from what he himself would be led by his ear to expect. Illusions due to the variety of sensational quality of the sounds themselves and graver illusions arising from the fact that verse must have meaning to be verse at all can only be avoided by putting a mechanism in place of the impressionable listener to analyze the sounds. Such mechanisms are available. They are designed to present in the form of a curve or otherwise the actual sounds produced in speaking. Such a record is of course onesided in that it deliberately excludes all the sense content of speech.

But such a one-sided treatment is what scientific procedure demands. To study a phenomenon in its entirety may occasionally yield good results but as a rule analysis must proceed first by exclusion. The problem must be made specific before it can fairly be attacked. Speech or verse rhythms in their true character present a multiplicity of difficulties like the proverbial bundle of arrows. To reduce them all at once is a task far beyond the power of the present writer; this enquiry, therefore, is concerned only with the sounds which reach the ear as one listens to verse which is spoken. No account can be taken, then, of all the wealth of feeling and idea which such sounds express and convey. No matter how much we may regret such a forcible divorce of the sense from the matter no other course is open. Doubtless such a separation may seem to some readers useless as well as arbitrary. And so far as the arts of versification and poetry are concerned it is useless. Poets will continue to write good or bad verse according to their gifts as heretofore; no formulæ can tell them how to practise their art nor even serve as criteria of success or failure for them. But for the psychologist such an arbitrary analysis as I propose

is by no means useless. Rhythm is one of the commonest psychological phenomena. Hardly an act is performed by us either mentally or physically into which rhythm does not enter as one of the obvious factors. Yet we know little of the nature of rhythm. In fact we can scarcely define it coherently. There seems to be about it an element of regularity and a recurrence in time; but wherein the regularity consists we can not definitely say nor can we specify what the conditions are under which recurrence in time takes on the additional characteristics of a rhythm. In verse, however, we have rhythm exemplified-about this there can be no doubt-and there is every indication that an analysis of verse will reveal certain of the essential characteristics of all rhythm. And even if such positive characteristics do not appear the analysis will serve to exclude from further consideration certain features generally attributed to rhythmic phenomena but which are not found in the actual analysis. For in this case as in many others negative results are of positive value. The beginning of definition is in elimination and there are abundant indications that the definition of rhythm will profit by eliminating some of the qualificationsparticularly in regard to regularity of recurrence-which have attached themselves to it.

The fact that careful analysis of verse-admittedly one of the earliest and commonest forms of rhythmic expression-does not reveal certain features claimed to be essential to rhythm will prove that they are not essential. It is thus that the psychologist is justified in mutilating good verse in order, not so much to find out how it is made, but to get rid of false notions about its rhythmic structure and about the necessary conditions of rhythm in general.

It is sometimes claimed that verse rhythm does not reside in the sound of the words of the verse, but in their logical and emotional content. If this were so no justification could be found for analyz ing the sounds apart from their sense. But common observation gives the lie to such an assumption. Verse in an unknown tongue is abundantly rhythmical-sometimes more so than the verse we can understand, so we are even led occasionally to the false inference that foreigners chant or sing-song their verse. Moreover some of our own verse, nursery rimes as well as some very ornate poetry, is practically devoid of meaning, but maintains a strong rhythm. Many other considerations might be brought forward to substantiate the impression that the mere sounds in verse are rhythmical. But the fact is too obvious.

The psychologist is justified in undertaking an analysis of spoken verse rhythms with the reasonable expectation of obtaining from it information about the nature of rhythm in general.

CHAPTER I

METHODS OF STUDYING VERSE RHYTHM

(a) Simple Observation by Ear

The most natural way to study speech sounds is to listen attentively. For that no apparatus is needed and no experimental technique required. The method is still simpler if one listen to one's own voice, for then the ear is aided by the various sensations and feelings which arise in consequence of exercising the vocal organs. But self-observation even when quite satisfactory to the individual is not to be trusted scientifically and can not be accepted when any other method is at hand. Direct observation of other persons' performances is, however, involved in this case with many of the same difficulties of prejudice and preoccupied attention which beset self-observation. It is hard to form a judgment about what we hear spoken, wholly on the basis of what we hear. The observer is very apt to be confused by what he would himself say, or even by what he has said or is at the very time saying under his breath as he listens to a rhythmic utterance.

The scientific objections to what is here called the observational as contrasted with the experimental method can be divided into psychological and mathematical. These objections apply to the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the results respectively. Qualitatively the psychologist should look with suspicion on professed facts of observation which can not be rehearsed, that is, repeated at will. Such an observation is valid, in general, only in so far as it asserts that there was a phenomenon. Analysis and qualitative determination of the phenomenon should not be attempted unless the phenomenon can be recalled and the analysis verified. Taking our own subject-verse rhythm-as an example, the reality of this difficulty is beyond doubt. Let us suppose that I sit listening to the recitation of Kingsley's "Three Fishers." When the

1

That the sensations from the speech organs themselves are not, however, alone sufficient to give a clear impression of rhythm can be discovered by any one who will try to sing or recite verse in the presence of a great roar of sound or better still when there is a strong quick echo. Under such circumstances it is extremely difficult to maintain regular speech rhythms. When, however, the ear is functioning normally there can be no doubt that sensations attending the utterance of the sounds are of great importance in the total rhythmic effect.