The original query on this topic might have been phrased: is the name
pronounced as a trochee or as an iamb? to which I responded that, so far =
as
I could tell, the iambic pronunciation was incorrect in Purcell's time an=
d
should be avoided.
Prof. Brauner's posting seems (I hope I don't sound too pompous) to raise=
a
distinction without a difference -- or with very little difference. That
is, in idiomatic English speech (whether British or American, C17 or C20)=
as I hear it, accenting the first syllable demands something approaching =
a
trochee; the only way I can interpret "PUR-cell" as distinct from "PUR-sl=
"
is as something approaching a spondee (quasi PUR-CELL). But the true
spondee on a single word is a rarity in English. (I say "true spondee"
because when I try to think of examples of the spondee in English, all th=
at
comes to mind is various compounds of two monosyllables.)
Put differently, wouldn't Prof. Brauner's "PUR-sl" be stressed like
"reVERsal", and his "PUR-cell" be stressed like "HARD SELL" or "PING-PONG=
"
or "HIGH HORSE" or the like?
Put differently again, I believe that the second vowel in Purcell's name
must be a "schwa".
On the other hand, if I were to *sing* that Blow ode, I would sing "when
PUR-cell came" because the second syllable is on a not-very-fast
quarter-note, but "with PUR-sl's lays" because the second syllable is on =
a
fairly brisk eighth-note.
Cheers
Eric Van Tassel
101233.342@compuserve.com