[log in to unmask] wrote:
> In a message dated 9/5/2007 5:31:51 AM Central Daylight Time, 
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>>>Okay, if "illud" and "negat" are normally stressed on the final syllable,
>>>then I concede your point.
>>Uhm, that's not his point.  Ray admitted in his last message that such
>>is not the case ("OK - it's not the stress of Latin prose").
> I know, but that's as far as I'm conceding the point.

Conceding what point? I do find these bald laconic statements difficult 
to understand at times. For example, consider the statement in your 
email of 4th September:
"But the last line of the Latin scans all wrong for that melody."

You state that as an unqualified truth - but it is demonstrably 
*untrue.* But to counter what you say is so very often difficult because 
of your apparent unwillingness to explain yourself.

*HOW* are you scanning the last line? Are you doing it according to the 
Classical Greek & Latin system of _quantitative_ verse, or are are you 
scanning it according to some non-Classical method of accentual verse 
(stress & unstressed syllables)? If the latter, it certainly needs 
explanation, as an examination of medieval & renaissance actual Latin 
verse will reveal. There simply is no one 'correct' method. French 
writers, for example, will treat things differently from English 
writers, cf.
et MAriA MagDAleNE
et JAcoBI et SAloME
(From Jean Tisserand's "O filii et filiae")

The Latin version of "For he's a jolly good fellow" appeared at the back 
of a text book design to teach _Classical_ Latin. The UK English "And so 
say all of us" contains three accentual iambics. The Latin "Num quis 
illud negat", if scanned quantitatively (i.e. in the _Classical_ manner) 
will be found to consist of three quantitative iambics in which, as was 
common in lyric meters, the last iambic must have its first syllable 
light, whereas the first syllable in the other iambics may be heavy or 
light. The beat falls on the second syllable of the iambic which must, 
of course, be heavy. Thus the Latin, as I see it, is a perfect 
_quantitative_ match for the UK English _accentual_ rhythm.

I fail to see how this match between quantitative and accentual rhythms 
can possibly be said to be "all wrong for that melody."

I just do not understand the point you are making - nor do I see any 
point in continuing this sub-thread in the Latin help thread.

[log in to unmask]
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.