[thaumasiotes]

I was bothered by the fact that the English poem doesn't scan correctly.

This prompted me to look up the ode, and I can't figure out the Latin meter. Does anyone know?

https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext...

[amelung]

Metrum Alcaicum:

  dul.cet.de.co:.rest.|pro:.pa.tri.a:.mo.ri:
  mor.set.fu.ga:.cem.|per.se.qui.tur.vi.rum
  nec.par.ci.tin.bel.li:s.iu.ven.tae
  po:pli.ti.bus.ti.mi.do:.que.ter.go

(Not sure about the first syllable of "poplitibus": muta cum liquida and long "o"?)

Reading it like in school (with qualitative stress marking the quantitative meter), that would be:

  dulcét decórest | pró patriá morí
  morsét fugácem | pérsequitúr virúm
  nec párcit ínbellís iuvéntae
  póplitibús timidóque térgo.

Thanks for the link!

[thaumasiotes]

> Not sure about the first syllable of "poplitibus"

Lewis and Short doesn't mark that o short or long. This also occurred with vexo, which I assumed was because the first syllable of anything starting with vex- is necessarily long (because the 'x' is two non-liquid consonants).

In the case of poples, 'l' is a liquid and a short vowel could be revealed by the syllabification po-ples (or po-pli-), but I guess this is never attested? This verse can't answer the question because the syllable is allowed to be long.

[amelung]

> is allowed to be long

or even determined to be long? The descriptions of the Alcaic strophe I found specify the first syllables of the first three verses as anceps but the first syllable of the fourth as long. Skimming the other odes in the third book, I havenʼt found another example where that would be doubtful. Maybe the hiatus candidates Trōica in 3:3, Pīeriō in 3:4, but fīet in a Sapphic strophe of 3:14 is certainly long.

But how is it long:

- probably not by position, because of muta cum liquida after the vowel. (An example for V.pl instead of Vp.l is capta virum puerosque ploret in 3:3.)

- the vowel length seems to be unclear, as indicated by Lewis / Short. I thought the etymology might help, but Walde / Hofmann tell that the etymology is unknown – and that a certain Muller Ait. W. 351 (?) is wrong to argue for a long o because it is clearly attested as short in verses by Accius and Lucretius.

So I am puzzled.

[thaumasiotes]

Thanks!

Minor note: I was taught that forms of esse are weak enough that they lose their vowel to elision, so it would be de.co:.rust.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prodelision

This seems like it would never matter for esse or est, but I guess it could preserve a long vowel in a case like -V: es V-.

[amelung]

Yes, de.co:.rust. Thanks for reminding me, I never knew or had completely forgotten.