RANDI C ELDEVIK wrote: > It's a bit hard for me to believe that the -cqu- combination would have > been considered difficult to pronounce, when that very combination is what > resulted when prefixes such as "ad" were added to words beginning with > qu-. For example, ad + quiescere = acquiescere. That kind of > assimilation was done for greater ease in pronunciation. Evidently > "sicque" was avoided by classical poets, but it can't have been because of > difficulty of pronunciation.
I think this must be right. And we should remember that even "dysphony" has its place. throughout this discussion a line from the Georgics has been ringing (or clanging) in my ears: et quid quaeque ferat regio et quid quaeque recuset (1.53) No -cqu- here, but -d qu- twice, and an insistent alliteration of a very percussive sound. I consider it one of the hardest lines in Vergil to read aloud (it's almost a tongue-twister), and I find it difficult to believe that his Roman readers didn't consider it harsh-sounding. Why did he do it? One possible reason: he wants to recall the rugged, repetitive prosody of Lucretius, and may even be combining a pair of Lucretian lines into one: et quid quaeque queant per foedera naturai quid porro nequeant sancitum quandoquidem exstat (drn 1.586-7) To bring in the other thread on jokes, I can't help but think that Vergil enjoyed writing this outrageous line and expected to raise a smile among readers who were on to his game. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- To leave the Mantovano mailing list at any time, do NOT hit reply. Instead, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message "unsubscribe mantovano" in the body (omitting the quotation marks). You can also unsubscribe at http://virgil.org/mantovano/mantovano.htm#unsub
