|
"Now of versifying there are two sorts,
the one ancient, the other modern. (1) The
ancient marked the quantity of each syllable, and
according to that framed his verse; (2) the modern observing only number, with some regard of the accent,
the chief life of it stands in that like sounding of the words, which we call
rime. Whether of these be
the more excellent would bear many speeches; the ancient no doubt more fit
for music, both words and tune observing quantity; and more fit lively to
express divers passions, by the low or lofty sound of the well-weighed
syllable. The latter likewise with his rime strikes a certain music to the
ear; and, in fine, since it doth delight, though by another way, it obtains
the same purpose; there being in either, sweetness, and wanting in neither,
majesty. Truly the English, before any
other vulgar language I know, is fit for both sorts. For, for the
ancient, the Italian is so full of
vowels that it must ever be cumbered with elisions; the Dutch so, of the other side, with consonants, that they cannot
yield the sweet sliding fit for a verse. The French in his whole language hath not one word that hath his
accent in the last syllable saving two, called antepenultima, and little more
hath the Spanish; and therefore
very gracelessly may they use dactyls. The English is subject to none of
these defects. Now for rime, 54 though we do
not observe quantity, yet we observe the accent very precisely, which other
languages either cannot do, or will not do so absolutely. That cæsura, or
breathing-place in the midst of the verse, neither Italian nor Spanish have,
the French and we never almost fail of."
|
