Iambic pentameter: how do you use words with 'secondary stressed' syllables?
I'm trying to create textbook-perfect iambic pentameter.
I may be wrong in my assumption of there being such a thing as a 'secondary stressed syllable', but in the word 'poetry', the rhythm of it seems to be this: STRESSED, unstressed, secondary stressed. Right? PO-uh-Tri.
And with the word 'politician', it's: secondary stressed, unstressed, STRESSED, unstressed. Po-luh-TISH-uhn.
Since iambic pentameter is a strict unstressed/STRESSED, how can you use words like poetry and politician (and stay within the rules)?
I'll give the example that's stumping me:
Here's two variations of a line:
- In poetry, it's true, it can be changed,
- It's true, in poetry, it can be changed,
See how the second one doesn't sound acceptable (the 'try' in poetry just sounds wrongly placed)? But the first does? Is the first one definitely ok, or are both breaking rules?
The fact there's a difference between the two (if one right and one wrong) makes me also think: is there a conglomerate 'overall' stress pattern/arch that can apply within a line? It seems the second syllable (the first stressed syllable) can work as the PEAK stress of the phrase, after which the rest declines from that. Maybe it just depends on the sentence, and how you make it clear, using punctuation if effective, and by context of the words themselves themselves, for how it is to be read.
So if I'm right in all my judgements so far, how can I know how to use a word like 'poetry' in iambic pentameter, with its problematic little third syllable?
Thanks. :)
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/7722. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
3 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
At its strictest, iambic pentameter is just as rigid as you've described. "Poetry" is a dactyl (X-/-/), not an iamb (/-X), hence it shouldn't fit anywhere in an iamb-only sequence. Likewise, by the "strictest" definition, each word has a single primary stress, making the use of many polysyllabic words impossible by definition.
That said, "stress" seems to be loosely enough defined that you can allow yourself to go with a verse that "feels" as though it gets the metre right. Shakespeare's most famous sonnet, the eternal paragon of iambic pentameter, begins:
Shall I / com PARE/ thee TO / a SUM / mer’s DAY?
Thou ART / more LOVE / ly AND / more TEM / per ATE
...and what's "temperate" if not a dactyl with secondary stress on the last syllable?
To my ears, both your "poetry" lines sound fine. I understand your concern, since the middle iamb does seem to naturally get a little extra stress. But I can easily read or recite it very naturally, without sounding "off." Again, look at Shakespeare - if you deliberately stress all the "stressed" syllables, he sounds off, too ("Shall I compare thee TO a summ-er day?"). But if you read it "straight," then the iambic meter is firmly felt.
0 comment threads
Cheat. Drop some letters/syllables.
It's true, in po'try, it cannae be changed
(Feels like "can" needs another unstressed after it, doesn't it?)
0 comment threads
I should warn that I'm actually not really qualified to answer this question since I neither know too much about a poetry nor am I even a native English speaker. However I'm answering anyway because I've made an observation which might adequately explain why the first version sounds fine and the second doesn't.
Looking at your first version,
In poetry, it's true, it can be changed,
I notice there to be a second rhythm on top of the "stressed-unstressed" pattern: The stressed syllables alternate between "strongly stressed" and "lightly stressed". Let me make it explicit by making the strongly stressed syllables bold and the slightly stressed ones italics:
"In po-e-try it's true, it can be changed"
As you see, "secondary stressed" syllable of "poetry" ends up in a lightly stressed slot.
Now for your second version:
It's true, in poetry, it can be changed,
Adding the very same pattern here results in
"It's true, in po-e-try, it can be changed"
As you see, now the "secondary stressed" syllable goes into a strongly stressed slot. And I think that is what makes it sound wrong.
Addition:
Looking at the Shakespeare lines quoted by Standback, they also seem to follow an alternating pattern of strongly/lightly stressed syllables, except they start with the lightly stressed one:
Shall I com-pare thee to a sum-mer's day?
Thou art more love-ly and more tem-per-ate
Note how, again, the "secondary stressed" syllable of "temperate" goes to a lightly stressed one.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads