hey guys, good aftenoon all.I just would to know what’s the difference between Caesura and Diaresis. I know that diaresis is the coincidence of word and foot endings and caesura is the break between words within a metrical foot. But is there some difference concerning the sound ? the break of Diaresis is more weak than of caesura ?
It’s more a matter of structure than of sound. The flow of the meter is continuous from the beginning to the end of each verse. It’s only at verse end that the continuity is interrupted.
And the definitional distinction between diaeresis and caesura is modern, despite its usefulness for descriptive purposes. It’s really better to think in terms of cuts (structural breaks) and bridges (avoidance of word-break) in the shaping of the verse.
Hey Mwh, thanks for your answer. Structure break doesn’t concern syntax ?What do you mean by “a matter of structure” ? Can you give me an exemple ? . “It’s only at verse end that the continuity is interrupted” : I was supposing there is in this verse of Aeneid 11.213 " Jam vero in tectis(break sound), praedivitis urbe Latini" an interruption of flow and hence that it’s mainly a matter of sound.
Well, lucas, as you know, that verse, like all the others, is a dactylic hexameter, and the flow of dactyls continues throughout the verse. It’s the words, their disposition and their syntax, that give the verse both its distinctiveness (including its phonic distinctiveness) and its affinity with all the other verses. In this particular hexameter (iam uero in tectis, praediuitis urbe Latini) the syntax breaks at the main caesura (the editor even marks it with a comma), in common with many other verses. That’s a matter of structure: the verse is structured in that particular way. But there’s no interruption of the meter. In oral delivery a reader may well choose to register the structural-syntactical discontinuity somehow, but not at the expense of the ongoing dactylic meter.
Though this is not what you’re asking about, there’s also accent to consider. Here in the last three feet, not just in the last two as usual, the natural word accent falls on the longum (the first syllable). That’s often a clausular pattern.
The next line, praecipuus fragor et longi pars maxima luctus, is very expressive, especially if you respect the work accents, as I trust you agree. Very fine sound effects there, the disruptively crashing first half succeeded by the long-drawn-out second half. Vergil is uniquely good at this sort of thing.