Now, when we wish to ascertain the state of accentuation of forms of words no longer spoken the evidence supplied by the even-beat rhythms is especially valuable. This is so, chiefly because it is much more difficult to make the word-accent agree with the verse-accent in this kind of rhythm, in which it is essential that accented and unaccented syllables should alternate continuously, than in the alliterative line, which allows greater freedom both in the relative position of accented and unaccented syllables and in the numerical proportion between the unaccented and the accented syllables.
In the alliterative line the position of the rhythmic accent depends on the accent of the words which make up the verse. In the even-beat metres on the other hand the regular succession of thesis and arsis is the ruling principle of the versification, on which the rhythmic accent depends, and it is the poet’s task to choose his words according to that requirement. The difficulties to be surmounted in order to bring the word-accent into conformity with the verse-accent will frequently drive the poet using this kind of rhythm to do violence to the accented and, more frequently still, to the unaccented syllables of the word. He will be induced either to contract the unaccented syllables with the accented ones, or to elide the former altogether, or to leave it to the reader to make the word-accent agree with the verse-accent by making use of level stress, or by slurring over syllables, or by admitting disyllabic or even polysyllabic theses in a verse. On the other hand, the poet who writes in the native alliterative long line or in any of its descendants is allowed as a rule to use the words required for his verse in their usual accentuation or syllabic value, or at least in a way approximating very closely to their ordinary treatment in prose. Hence those unaccented syllables which, in even-beat rhythms, are found to be subjected to the same treatment (i.e. to be equally liable to slurring, elision, syncopation, or apocopation, according to the requirements of the verse) must be presumed to have been at least approximately equal in degree of accentual force.
Now when we examine the relation between word-accent and verse-accent in certain poetical works of the first half of the thirteenth century, viz. the Ormulum (which on account of its regularity of rhythm is our best guide), the Pater Noster, the Moral Ode, the Passion, and other poems, we arrive at the following results:—
§ 114. The difference in degree of stress among inflexional endings containing an e (sometimes i or another vowel) which is alleged by some scholars—viz. that such endings (in disyllabic words) have secondary stress when the root-syllable is long, and are wholly unaccented when it is short—has no existence: in both cases the endings are to be regarded as alike unaccented. For we find that in even-beat measures(especially in the Ormulum) these endings, whether attached to a long or to a short root-syllable, are treated precisely alike in the following important respects:—
1. Those inflexional endings which normally occur in the thesis, and which are naturally suited for that position, are found in the arsis only in an extremely small number of instances, which must undoubtedly be imputed to lack of skill on the part of the poet, as e.g. in hallȝhé Orm. 70, nemmnéd ib. 75, whereas this is very frequent in those disyllabic compounds, the second part of which really has a secondary accent, as e.g. larspéll ib. 51, mannkínn ib. 277.
2. It is no less remarkable, however, that such syllables as those last mentioned, which undoubtedly bear a secondary accent, are never used by Orm to form the catalectic end of the septenary verse, evidently because they would in consequence of their specially strong accent annul or at least injure the regular unaccented feminine verse-ending. On the other hand, inflexional endings and unaccented terminations containing an e are generally used for that purpose, as on account of their lightness of sound they do not endanger in any way the feminine ending of the catalectic section of the verse. In any case, inflexional syllables following upon long root-syllables cannot have the same degree of stress, and cannot be used for the same rhythmic functions, as the end-syllables of disyllabic compounds, which undoubtedly bear a secondary accent.
The regular rhythmic employment of the two last-mentioned groups of syllables proves their characteristic difference of stress—the former being wholly unaccented, the latter bearing a secondary accent. Further inquiry into the irregular rhythmic employment of the two similar classes of inflexional endings, those following upon long root-syllables, and those following upon short ones, tends to prove no less precisely that they do not differ in degree of stress, and so that they are both unaccented. For it is easy to show that with regard to syncope, apocope, elision, and slurring they are treated quite in the same way.
Elision of the final -e before a vowel or an h takes place quite in the same way in those inflexional syllables following upon long root-syllables as it does in those less numerous syllables which follow upon short ones, e.g. Annd ȝétt ter tákenn marẹ inóh Orm. 37; Wiþþ állẹ swillc rímẹ alls hér iss sétt ib. 101; For áll þat ǽfrẹ onn érþẹ is néd ib. 121; a wíntrẹ and éc a lóre Moral Ode 1; Wel lóngẹ ic hábbe chíld ibíen ib. 3; Icc háfẹ itt dón forrþí þatt áll Orm. 115, &c. It is the same with apocopation: Forr gluternésse wácneþþ áll Galnésses láþe strénncþe, Annd állẹ þe flǽshess kággerleȝȝc Annd álle fúle lússtess Orm. 11653–6; cf. also: þatt hé wass hófenn úpp to kíng ib. 8450, and wass hófenn úpp to kínge ib. 8370; o fáderr hállf ib. 2269, and o fáderr hállfe 2028, &c.; similarly with syncopation, cf. ȝiff þú seȝȝst tátt ib. 5188, and annd séȝȝest swíllc ib. 1512; þet scúlen bén to déaþe idémd Moral Ode 106; for bétere is án elmésse bifóren ib. 26, &c.; and again with the slurring of syllables following upon long as well as upon short root-syllables, as the following examples occurring in the first acatalectic sections of septenary verse will show sufficiently: Ál þet bétste þét we héfden Moral Ode 51; Gódes wísdom ís wel míchel ib. 213, &c.
Now as a syllable bearing a secondary accent cannot become mute, as an unaccented syllable does, if required, it is evident that those inflexional syllables which follow upon long root-syllables and frequently do become silent cannot bear that secondary accent which has been ascribed to them by several scholars; on the contrary, all syllables subject in the same way to elision, apocope, syncope, and slurring must have the same degree of stress (i.e. they must be alike unaccented) whether preceded by short or by long root-syllables.
Other terminations of disyllabic words which, though not inflexional, consist, like the inflexional endings, of e + consonant, are treated in the same way, e.g. words like fader, moder, finger, heven, sadel, giver, &c. Only those inflexional and derivational endings which are of a somewhat fuller sound, as e.g., -ing, -ling, -ung, -and, -ish, and now and then even the comparative and superlative endings -er, -est, and the suffixes -lic, -lich, -ly, -y, may be looked upon as bearing a secondary accent, as they may be used at will either in the arsis of the verse or lowered to the state of unaccented syllables as the thesis.