We previously had a question asking Were all of Shakespeare's plays fully in iambic pentameter?, but of course, it wasn't just Shakespeare who used iambic pentameter; it became the prevalent metre in English poetry and drama around the middle of the sixteenth century.

In French poetry and verse drama, the French alexandrine was the dominant metre from the 17th through the 19th century.

Is there any linguistic or other verifiable reason for this difference in preferred metre? Note: I don't believe it has anything to do with heartbeat.

  • 2
    There are really two parts to this question: iambic and pentameter. To answer the first, nobody can write iambic verse in French; the language simply does not allow it. To speculate about the second, there is lots of English poetry with 8, 10, and 14 syllables per line, and all of these work fine. And in French, the decasyllable was apparently dominant before the alexandrine supplanted it. The fact that the two languages eventually settled on 10 versus 12 syllables may have been just chance.
    – Peter Shor
    Commented Jan 10, 2018 at 23:18
  • 1
    @PeterShor I think you have the starting point of an answer, especially if you can expand on why "nobody can write iambic verse in French", i.e. differences between the natural rhythm of English and French.
    – Tsundoku
    Commented Jan 11, 2018 at 14:17

4 Answers 4


There are two parts to this question: why does English use iambic meter while French doesn't, and why does English have 10 syllables in each line of iambic pentameter, while French has 12 syllables per line in an alexandrine. To answer the second question first, it may be pure chance that French settled on 12 syllables per line, while English settled on 10. There are lots of English poems in iambic meter with 8, 10, or 14 syllables per line, and they all work fine. And the dominant meter in French was the decasyllable before it was displaced by the alexandrine in the 17th century.

The reason that French doesn't use iambic meters is because it's very difficult to write iambic poetry in French.

Before I can explain any further, I need to say something about stress patterns in English and French and some of the rules that govern alexandrines.

In English, every word (except function words like and, in, the has some accented syllable, and poetry has to accommodate these. You can emphasize words by using stress, but these emphases fall on top of the phonemic stress patterns already present within the words. In French, there is no stress pattern associated with the words; the stress accents are associated with phrases, and always fall on the last syllable of every phrase. (Except for mute e's, which are never accented. Most of these mute e's are pronounced in songs and poems, but only a relatively small fraction are pronounced in usual speech.) So if a word is pronounced alone, its last syllable always has an accent, but if it's in the middle of a phrase, it probably won't.

The alexandrine has 12 or 13 syllables in every line, depending on whether they end with a mute e (which today are generally not pronounced at the end of a line of poetry, so effectively each line has 12 syllables today). The lines are divided into two halves (hemistiches) of 6 syllables each. There is always an accent on the 6th and 12th syllables of each line, and there usually is one other accented syllable in each hemistich. To give an example, from Baudelaire's Chant d'automne (Autumn Song), the first two lines are:

Bientôt nous plongerons // dans les froides ténèbres;
Adieu, vive clar // de nos étés trop courts!

Shortly we will plummet // into the cold darkness;
Farewell, vivid brilliance // of our summers too short!

Here I've tried to give a fairly literal translation (keeping six syllables per hemistich) and I've bolded the accented syllables in French. Note that no syllables are accented in the French word vive (vivid). This is because if you have an adjective-noun combination in that order in French, you don't need to accent any syllables in the adjective (you can see from this that French will have fewer accented syllables than English, making writing iambic meters much harder).

For an entirely English illustration, here is Roy Campbell's translation of the first four lines into iambic pentameter, followed by my translation of the first foru lines into an English version of the French alexandrine.

Soon into frozen shades, like leaves, we'll tumble.
Adieu, short summer's blaze, that shone to mock.
I hear already the funereal rumble
Of logs, as on the paving-stones they shock.

We will soon be engulfed // by the cold and the dark.
Dear summer, fare thee well! // Your visit was too short.
I can already hear // the funereal shocks
Of firewood as it falls // on the stones of the court.

Note that the second line would be iambic hexameter if you put stress on the words fare and was. But you wouldn't if it was a French alexandrine. When reading alexandrine poetry, there is a strong tendency to parse it so exactly two syllables are stressed in each hemastich (although this isn't always possible). Similarly, when reading iambic poetry, there is a strong tendency to put some stress on every other syllable, even those (like the and on in the example above) that wouldn't be stressed ordinarily. And again, this isn't always possible.

So to get a line of iambic verse in French, it needs to consist entirely of two-syllable phrases. This is quite a bit shorter than French phrases usually are. Lines of iambic hexameter are rare in French poetry. The penultimate line of part I of the above poem, Chant d'automne is one. I believe Baudelaire quite deliberately wrote it as iambic hexameter, and I suspect it took some effort his part:

Pour qui? — C'était hier l'é; voici l'automne!

For whom? — It was yesterday summer; look: here's autumn!

Edit: I've had a few more thoughts about why alexandrines came to be dominant in French poetry. French poetic meters are generally composed from parts with an even number of syllables, almost always 4, 6, and 8. Decasyllables are generally broken into 4+6 syllables, while alexandrines are broken into 6+6. Thus, in some sense, alexandrines are more symmetric, and this may be more pleasing. (Although maybe I'm wrong about this, since decasyllables were more dominant for several centuries, although alexandrines were also used during this period.)

And why doesn't iambic hexameter occur very often in English? My conjecture (which could be completely misguided) is that iambic hexameter has long enough lines that you need to divide them into halves. If you divide all the lines into three feet + three feet, it's too regular, and sounds boring. Whereas if you divide some into three + three feet, and some into two + four and four + two, it's too irregular.


I'm adding my own answer to complement Peter Shor's.

In an interview, the Shakespeare scholar Kenneth Muir talks, among other things, about his translations of Racine and Corneille. When asked how he translated the alexandrines, Muir responds that he translated them into pentamers:

I decided that alexandrines would not be taken by an English audience, that rhymed verse is suspect and has been ever since Dryden's day, really. And I think that blank verse [is the thing where] most people are at home in.

When asked, "Have you ever thought (...), when you were translating from French tragedy ... Did you get anywhere near seeing why the alexandrine became as it were the "natural" form of expression in French verse, whereas only a ten-syllable line is the national expression in English? What is it to do with the nature of the languages?" Muir responds:

Muir: Oh, it's, I think, for example, the way you stress E's ...

Gardner: E's, that lengthens out the line ...

Muir: Yes, and it's also the whole scansion of a French alexandrine; it's quite different.

Philip Gardner (one of the interviewers) points out that there are occasions when French verse comes very close to English, e.g. some of the poems in Théophile Gautier's Émaux et Camées. Apparently, in some of the poems, the stresses fall exactly where you would expect them in English octosyllabic lines.

Although this is interesting, it lacks some detail and precision.

  • An important difference between English and French is that English is a language with stress-timed rhythm, while French has syllable-timed rhythm.
  • Another relevant feature of French is that word stress is always on the last voice vowel, while word stress in English varies.
  • Thomas Pavel also points out that the

silent vowels (voyelles muettes) (...) were audible in classical French versification, which defined the verse by the number of syllables it contained, the silent ones included.

  • Pavel also states that "according to many specialists in prosody, it [the classical French alexandrine] didn’t require a definite metrical pattern."
  • However, this does not mean that no metric pattern can be detected by attentive readers or listeners.

When Richard Jones compared four English translations of Racine's Phèdre—by Richard Wilbur, R.C. Knight, Robert Lowell and Margaret Rawlings—he found that they all used pentameters. This corresponds with what Kenneth Muir said.

Whereas French counts the number of syllables per line, English counts the number of feet per line. Gretchen McCulloch points out in her article "The Language of Poetry" that the importance of stressed syllables in English is illustrated by limericks. In a limerick, the number of stressed syllables per line is 3, 3, 2, 2, 3, respectively, but the number of syllables can vary.

The above does not imply that English verse drama couldn't use anything else than iambic pentameter or that French verse drama couldn't use anything else then alexandrines, but it shows that the both languages' "affordances" (Gretchen McCulloch's term) make the opposite less likely.

  • Strictly speaking, Shakespeare's iambic pentameter doesn't really define a strict metrical pattern, either. A large fraction of his lines have a trochaic or similar substitution somewhere in them.
    – Peter Shor
    Commented Jan 17, 2018 at 13:20
  • @PeterShor Having "trochaic substitution somewhere" does not imply that the basic pattern isn't iambic pentameter. That basic pattern is there.
    – Tsundoku
    Commented Jan 17, 2018 at 13:24
  • There's a basic pattern to French alexandrines, as well: stresses on the 6th and 12th syllables of each line, that coincide with the ends of phrases. This differs from iambic pentameter in that it doesn't specify the position of every single stress. The Pavel article seems to downplay the importance of this pattern in creating a rhythm, I think because he's trying to promote Robert Marteau's blank alexandrines, that don't have the stresses on the 6th syllables. But his article, without actually saying anything technically wrong, conveys the wrong impression. (Continued.)
    – Peter Shor
    Commented Jan 24, 2018 at 13:19
  • You say "this does not mean that no metric pattern can be detected by attentive readers or listeners." In fact, I suspect you have to be a very attentive listener to hear the rhythmic pattern in Marteau's blank alexandrines. But in classical alexandrine verse, for somebody (me) who has only a moderate knowledge of French, the meter is roughly as apparent as it is in iambic pentameter.
    – Peter Shor
    Commented Jan 24, 2018 at 13:19

The traditional distinction between syllabic (French) and metrical (English) verse is misleading.

French has long and short vowels (long and short syllables) just like any other language.

English poetry, on the other hand, is "accented" (tricky term here) by long syllables or so-called "stresses" just like French, Italian, Latin and Greek verse. If you don't believe me, try reciting English verse out loud like a well-trained Shakespearean actor using only variations of long and short syllables. The long syllables sound "accented" or "stressed." Ordinary language stresses a syllable by lengthening the vowel. Variations of pitch or volume sound weird in verse. They are used solely for emphasis and for signaling a question. Stressing a line of poetry by pitch or volume is a beginner's mistake.

To see the fundamentally iambic rhythm of the French alexandrine, compare it to Dante's iambic terza rima.

As the French language developed, the original Italian-like vowel endings became more and more subdued (e muet). In a progression of French iambs, the e muet is often nearly elided.

This gave modern French poets the resources to modulate the iambic line in ways that sound somewhat different from an Italian or an English iambic.

But the rhythm is still fundamentally iambic.

The reason this is hard to see is because the long and short syllables of the words in a line of poetry never correspond exactly to the underlying metrical schema. This is not accidental. A poet's chief effect lies in the teasing convergence and divergence between the actual long and short syllables of the words he uses and the underlying metrical schema. See Vladimir Nabokov's Notes On Prosody for excellent insight into this effect, which he called "scudding."

When looked at in this way, it is easy to see that Baudelaire's "Bientôt nous plongerons dans les froides ténèbres" corresponds to (and diverges pleasingly from) an underlying iambic rhythm. The rhythm of a French alexandrine sounds uncannily like a twelve-syllable iambic trimeter in Aeschylus or Sophocles. But the strong mid-line break of the French hexameter (wrongly called a caesura) makes it better suited to the epigrammatic short poems of Baudelaire or Verlaine than to great dramatic verse.

The basic rhythm of human speech is iambic, marked out by syllable length. Prose is iambic as a result. Iambic meter characterizes almost all great dramatic verse (compare Shakespeare's Hamlet or Sophocles Antigone). All other poetic rhythms (like Homer's great dactylic hexameters) are elaborations of an underlying iambic rhythm.

  • 1
    It was very interesting to read this answer. Could you add some examples of either rhythm and verse types, and maybe some additional further reading? Commented Dec 28, 2019 at 16:58
  • I'm studying classics with a background in philosophy. The nature of Greek prosody is kind of a hot issue right now, based on Nietzsche's early philology lectures on the rhythm of Greek poetry. See (“Nietzsche’s Radical Philology,” James I. Porter, Nietzsche as a Scholar of Antiquity, edited by Anthony K. Jensen and Helmut Heit, Bloomsbury Academic, 2014, Chapter 2, part 2, “On rhythm and meter, 1870-1871.” Commented Dec 28, 2019 at 20:06
  • The Greek grammarians invented a terminology and notation for describing Greek prosody. Accent is Greek tonos, prosoidia is "what is added to song." This terminology has created endless controversy and ambiguity. (Prosody is hard).The upshot is that Greeks like Aristotle (in Sophistical Refutations) probably used used the term prosoidia ("accent marks") to denote syllables accented by a long vowel. And this is an excellent way of understanding the speech patterns and poetry of not just the Greeks and Romans, but English, German, French, Spanish, and italian speakers.Accent: hard to hear right Commented Dec 28, 2019 at 20:32
  • Nabokov's Notes on Prosody are included in his translation and commentary on Pushkin's Eugene Onegin. Commented Dec 28, 2019 at 20:38
  • 1
    If you say that the "natural meter" of poetry is iambic, and that any poetry that deviates is still iambic, but just exhibits "scudding", you've put forth a proposition that is impossible to disprove. But just listen to any limerick ... it's wrong, even in English (let alone French).
    – Peter Shor
    Commented Jan 16, 2020 at 2:03

Analyse the rhythm of any line of blank verse in Shakespeare. Almost none of his lines—accent them however you please—conform exactly to the underlying iambic metrical schema when spoken naturally. But they still sound melodious and regular. Are you saying that none of these lines of verse is really iambic? That would be ridiculous. Blank verse is iambic pentameter.

Seeing the divergence between spoken language and its underlying metrical structure is the first step in understanding poetry. Think how monotonous poetry (or ordinary language) would sound if it had a mechanical rhythm. Go back to Baudelaire and observe the endless inventiveness in the rhythm of his lines. (French "syllabic" verse is beautifully metrical, like Greek or Latin, or Italian, or English.)

Because of this essential feature of language (i.e., divergence, which is not quite the same as "scudding"; scudding only applies to iambic verse in English and maybe Russian) ordinary speech can be "parsed" into any underlying metrical schema you please. The boundaries of language are open-ended, and the permutations of meter are endless. Rhythm is not mechanical, but infinite, like an organism. Quantity (unlike bare "accent") is infinitely divisible.

Thus there is no way to "prove" that iambic meter is the underlying meter of natural language. Go ahead and pick a meter. But I doubt you speak limerick.

  • (PS: Even "There once was a man from Nantucket" diverges pleasingly from its underlying metrical schema if you pronounce it naturally. Natural language is "set to its own music." Natural language is native poetry.) Commented Jan 17, 2020 at 4:42
  • "The upshot is that Greeks like Aristotle (in Sophistical Refutations) probably used the term prosoidia ("accent marks") to denote syllables accented by a long vowel," Stephen Hoffman, Dec.28. More precisely: Greek accent marks (wrongly thought to denote pitch) lengthen a long or a short vowel in a word pronounced in isolation. Such variations affect prosody and distinguish different dialects. Accent marks were a late grammatical invention added to manuscripts solely as a guide for the pronunciation of Attic Greek by foreign speakers. Commented Jan 17, 2020 at 6:05
  • 2
    Is this a separate answer from your previous one? You always have the possibility of editing your previous answer, if you want to add more to it. Also, since you've created two separate accounts, you can merge them giving you easier access to your own previous answer.
    – Rand al'Thor
    Commented Jan 17, 2020 at 9:06
  • 2
    You're putting words into my mouth. I didn't say anything about the natural rhythm of English, Greek, or Shakespearean blank verse not being iambic. What I said was that the natural rhythm of limericks is not iambic (and neither is the natural rhythm of French alexandrine poetry).
    – Peter Shor
    Commented Jan 17, 2020 at 13:54

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.