I collected the words that caught my eye from Ernout—Meillet that do not fit the dactylic hexametre. I do not claim to be exhaustive. This topic has interested me for some time already; even ανφφ has shown some interest. In part the poetic style is formed by the confines of the metre, as should be apparent from some of the words. I’ve added some short notes. Cursive for hexametrible, bold face for unhexametrible words.
abiēs (gen. abiĕtis) has consonantal i, though this may well reflect its actual pronunciation (cf. tenuis?) Acchĕrūns ametrical as creticus, but Ăchĕrūns works āĕrĕm is difficult, wherefore poets use the Greek accusative āĕră (cf. Italian aria!) balteus, balteum are the only forms of this word that fit dactylic hexametre caerulus is difficult, caeruleus much easier to use metrically călămĭtās is a common word but banned from dactylic hexametre due to its form cernere in the sense ‘to see’ is (mainly?) poetic, and may replace the possibly difficult uĭdēre circŭlŭs is at the very least difficult, why gyrus [yː] is quite common with poets contāgiō is good Latin, but poets use contāgium, which is considered less correct cŭpĭdĭtās is much preferred by prose writers, but poets use cŭpīdō dextĕrī and other of its cretic forms are forbidden, but this is easily solved with dextrī etc. diffĕrentia, coined by Cicero (from διάφορα), doesn’t work, but Lucretius has diffĕrĭtās fēmĭnīnus is impossible fraudium and fraudum (< fraus) appear to be equally common genitive plurals, but dactylic poets use only fraudum gaudĭum doesn’t fit in front of a consonant, but gaudĭă is an easy solution glŏmĕrĕ (< glomus) is tribrach, and Lucretius solves this with metrical lengthening glōmĕrĕ īlĭcō ametrical impĕrāre doesn’t work, but impĕrĭtāre does impĕrātor is unfit; an old, longer form indŭpĕrātor is found in Ennius and Lucretius impĕtus has some difficult word forms for dactylic hexametre; impes (gen. impĕtis) is its artificial doublet, used especially in the ablative impĕtĕ ingrĕdī is ametrical innătābĭlĭs doesn’t fit innŏcēns ametrical ĭnŏpĕ is a tribrach, but ĭnŏpī is good Italus, Italia have Ī metri gratia, as they simply are inomittable words Lĕmŭrĭă is ametric, wherefore the lengthened ū in Lemūria lībĕrī creticus mărĭă and some other forms don’t fit, whereto aequor comes in handy EDIT: to be erased or at least put into double parentheses, check below mascŭlīnus is formed on the model of femininus nēmō some of the forms are impossible nūtrīxū metri gratia; Romance languages require that Latin actually had nŭtrīx obice apud Vergilium Ouidium is a dactyl oblīuĭō ametric, but oblīuĭum (and pl. oblīuĭă) is apt pestĭlentia is impossible; apud Lucretium we have pestĭlĭtās rĕcĭdĭmus and some other forms are ametric; reccĭdō with its doubled c may be formed by poets rĕlĭgĭō has three short syllables; poetic rellĭgĭō has thus doubled l rĕlĭquĭae has also three short syllables, why poetic rellĭquĭae has doubled l septentrĭō is unfit sībĭlus is masculine; its plural is regularly sībĭlī, but poets understandably use the neutre sībĭlă instead sĭlĭcĕ is tribrach and doesn’t work, but sĭlĭcī is obviously fine tĕnŭĕ, tĕnŭĭă don’t fit per se, but with consonantal u they do tĕtrĭcĭtās has too many adjacent short syllables tŭĕŏr is at the very least problematic, but an old doublet tŭŏr comes in handy here (intuor, optuĕre, contuī apud poetas) uĕhĕrĕ can be ametric, but uectāre is useful (attested since the imperial times) uĕnĕrĭus ametric uĕtĕrĕ (< uetus) doesn’t work, but easily solved with uĕtĕrī uirgĭnālĭs is out of the question; uirgĭnĕus formed by the poets is its replacement uŏcābulum very difficult to fit in; uŏcāmen is possibly created by the poets for substitute
Though surely we must distinguish between fully ametrical words like cupiditas and others that would need the verse to accomodate them. maria is one such example (“maria omnia circum”), or ilico. There is also, and you mentioned this concerning a number of words, a tendency to relegate certain words to prose or poetic register. On that topic I especially liked your reference to calamitas.
Reliquiae. LS lists the first syllable as anceps, and then hammers in to refer to the relliquiae which you mentioned. Vergil has the long e. (reliquias Danaum atque immitis Achilis)
Thanks, SW. You’re right, in plural it must be very rare, as only the elided litter’ (< litterae) in front of a short vowel with only one consonant following is admissible. In singular it’s easier, with the same restriction in addition to the dactylic nominative. Interestingly, Vergil and Lucretius don’t apparently use it even once, whereas Ovid has it 80+ times!
Valid critique, ανφφ. Some of the words I listed are only restricted in their use, not ametrical. As you say, maria has to be elided into mari’, followed by a long vowel or a short one in a closed syllable. It may still show some tendency in choosing vocabulary, as aequor will be easier, aequora being a dactyl in itself. (One can ask oneself, though, where would you actually need the plural at all of the word “sea”.) Vergil has maria I think only twice, in what you quoted (A. 1,524) and in A. 6,351 “— — maria aspera iuro”. Mare and maris abound; mari is rarer yet clearly more densely used than maria. Further, we see a slight tendency to use 3rd declension sg. ablatives in -ī rather than -ĕ.
Maybe that’s just LS’s way to mark the doubled l? Georges too mentions the doubled l, though somewhat vaguely: “bei Dichtern zur Verlängerung des e auch relliquiae geschrieben” (with reference to Lachmann’s Lucretius). Long e or maybe doubled l in Vergil? Can we make the difference? ThlL is about ⅔ through the lemma reddo at the moment, so we’ll have to wait maybe 3—4 years until they get to reliquiae! (Or visit Munich.)
Long e or maybe doubled l in Vergil? Can we make the difference? ThlL is about ⅔ through the lemma reddo at the moment, so we’ll have to wait maybe 3—4 years until they get to reliquiae! (Or visit Munich.)
Fair point. I’m not even sure critical editions would help us in this, as this would fall in what Richard Tarrant’s fine little book would call “Positive apparatus”. How would one go to figure that one out? Anyway re- as a rule has short e.
This is what the digital edition of LS has: “rē^lĭquĭae (in the poets, also rellĭqu-; cf. religio init.)”, which seems to allow for the three forms, long re-, short re-, and rel-.
Concerning Munich, I’ll write you down for the Textkit Field Trip.
Not to nitpick too much, but Vergil has maria at least 3 times in book 1, as quoted above (which is actually 1.32) also at 1.58 (maria ac terras) and the 1.524 you mention (maria omnia vecti). You are right to point out that it is elided each time though.
Thanks, Ronolio. I didn’t check any complete Vergil concordance (I’m not actually familiar with them), whence my rookie mistake. Still I should think (now less assuredly, though!) that the percentage is roughly the same, i.e. maria even elided is much rarer than mare, maris and mari.
Maybe it was a mistake to include those difficult yet manageable words in the list.
EDIT. I think I’ve been completely misled about maria. It’s not particularly rare. Perseus search gives 15 hits within Aeneid. Maris gives only 10, mare 19 (the poetic aequora 36, aequor 20 times). Apologies everyone.
Greek epic poets had the same. The important word for “immortal” linguistically should be “ăthănătos”, but Homer always scans it as “āthănătos”. And my sympathies go to a Greek poet who had to write an elegaic couplet about a man named Ăristŏgeitōn; he could get it in only as “Ăristŏ- / geitōn” split hyphenated between the hexameter and the pentameter. And the Batrachomyomachia shows the poet having to contort the text to get the word “karkĭnoi” (=crabs) into a usable case.
Scorpio is unhexametrable, but scorpius can fit in the nominative if followed by a vowel. I think Ovid uses the Greek form scorpios, and this gives him an accusative scorpion, which doesn’t elide.
For some reason, astronomers have chosen to use Scorpius but astrologers use Scorpio, and the astrologers include much of Ophiuchus in Scorpio. Astrologers don’t recognize that the ecliptic passes through Ophiuchus. “What’s your sign?” “Oh, I’m an Ophiuchus.”