Alicia, thanks for the lucid explanation. I believe the problem is a matter of semantics. You are calling all three examples loose iambics, which I see as a function of accentual-syllabic meter rather than of accentual meter. Tim, on the other hand, is calling them accentual because the syllable count varies:
Quote:
|
Carol, in accentual syllabic dimeter, every line would have four syllables, as in my lttle poem To A Trout.
|
I understand that substitution, even fairly heavy or "loose" substitution, is normal in longer iambic lines, so here is my question: Does the fact that these poems are in dimeter mean that they may have little or no substitution in order to be classified accentual-syllabic because as the number of feet decreases, the ratio of substitution to regular feet goes up past what is a reasonable ratio? In other words, if a line has only two feet, one substitution per line would put the percentage of substitution at a whopping 50%, whereas one substitution in a line of IP would be only 20%.
I'm belaboring this point because we mix the terms so much, though it makes little difference to the rhythm of the poem whether we call it accentual or accentual-syllabic.
Carol