Re: Language Change
|From:||Patrick Dunn <tb0pwd1@...>|
|Date:||Friday, January 7, 2000, 8:18|
On Thu, 6 Jan 2000 raccoon@ELKNET.NET wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of Patrick Dunn
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 4, 2000 11:54 PM
> > To: CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
> > Subject: Re: language change
> > On Tue, 4 Jan 2000, Nik Taylor wrote:
> > > > This, paradoxically, can de-emphasize the importance of rhyme
> > >
> > > I don't see why that would be a paradox - poetry involves things that
> > > aren't part of prose. If rhymes occur all the time, it would lose its
> > > significance.
> > *nods* I meant that it seems, at first glance, somewhat of a paradox.
> > But of course it stands to reason (and that, btw, is I believe the
> > textbook explanation of forms like the sestina -- when many words end in
> > -o or -e, it's not very impressive to rhyme them). :)
> Hmm. Maybe I don't know the textbook definition of rhyme, but it seems odd
> to me to
> say all words ending in -o, etc., rhyme, at least when the -o is unstressed.
> E.g., <postino> and <andiamo> would never strike me as rhyming.
postino and andiamo are "female rhymes." Meaning the final syllable
rhymes but not the stressed syllble.
root and soot are "male rhymes," meaning both the final syllable and the
stressed syllbles rhyme.
These are fuzzy definitions, btw. I've seen other versions of this. But
I find this definition of "female" and "male" rhyme infinitely more
useful than the others that I've seen.