# Do long vowels always indicate stressed syllables?



## Michael Zwingli

Hello, again.

This is a question which it has occurred to me to ask many times, but I have not until now. I have wondered whether long vowels within a Latin word always provide the stressed syllable of the word. That is to say, if one sees a word having one "macronized" vowel (yes, like the Bard, I will make up words as the occasion demands), is the syllable of said word containing that vowel necessarily the stressed syllable thereof? For instance, I would tend to place the stress within the (subjunctive) verb _floreat_ upon the _-e-_, even though the -_o- _is the long vowel of the word (having the macron over it). If I am wrong in this, please disabuse me of my folly...

Spero,
Mike


----------



## bearded

Hello
The old rule is as follows:  To determine the position of the stress in a Latin word, what counts is only the length of the vowel in the penultimate syllable. If the penultimate syllable is long, it is also stressed; if it's short, the stress is on the preceding syllable (the 'antepenultimate'). The stress never falls on the last syllable (therefore, in a disyllabic word, the stress is on the first syllable in any case).
Examples:
_civitatem _(accusative): the a is long and therefore stressed
_civitas _(nominative): the i in 'vi' is short, therefore the stress is on 'ci'
_floreat _(subjunctive): the e is short, therefore 'flo' is stressed.
The length or shortness of syllables other than the penultimate do not count at all to the effect of the stress.
Most good dictionaries show whether the penultimate syllable is long or short.
It must be noted that a vowel followed by more than one consonant is regarded as long: e.g. in _addictus _you don't need to wonder whether the i is long or short: as far as the stress is concerned, the i is long (and stressed) anyway because it is followed by 2 consonants.
I hope that my explanation is understandable.


----------



## Scholiast

salvete  sodales!

Far be it from me to challenge my learned and bearded friend here, but it seems important to point out that the (natural) length of a _vowel_ has nothing to do with the length (in verse or metrical prosody of, for example, prose _clausulae_) of a _syllable_. In the given example _addictus_, -_i-_ remains a short vowel, but for metrical purposes the syllable -_dic-_ is reckoned as long by virtue of the doubled consonant _-ct-_.

Σ


----------



## bearded

Scholiast, our eminent Latinist, is of course right.  When he says '_'for metrical purposes_ the syllable 'dic' is reckoned as long'' I'm sure he means also it is reckoned as long for determining the stress position in the word (which is the questioner's concern).  I'm aware I didn't express myself accurately enough.


----------



## Scholiast

salvete de novo


bearded said:


> which is the questioner's concern


Yes, in my previous response I did not address this, sorry.
My (unscientific) impression and instinct is that irrespective of vowel- or syllable- lengths, dissyllabic words will carry the stress on the first, thus e.g. _fórī_, _fórō_, _aédēs_, _témplum_, or the ablative _témplō_.
Also, prefixed prepositions will not normally alter the natural stress, so _ad-díctus_, _praepónere_, _deféndo._
Trisyllabic or longer words will usually throw the stress onto a long vowel if one is available, thus _certámen_, but _régimen_ where the _-i- _ remains short.
Tetrasyllabic words (as in modern Italian) will usually carry one major, and one minor, stress, thus e.g. _cóntempláre_, where _cón-_ is less weighted than _-áre_ at the end.
I hope this clarifies a little.
Σ


----------



## Snodv

Note that this is responsible for the stress differences in something as simple as a verb conjugation:  The disyllabic _amo, amas, amat,_ and _amant_ get the stress on the first syllable, but trisyllabic _amamus_ and _amatis_ on the second syllable.  In a way, though, they are the same:  syllables are counted from the end of a word, not the beginning, so _all_ of these are accented on the penult.  Historically this has carried through to the Spanish "stem-changing" verbs, e.g.:  puedo, puedes, puede, and pueden, but podemos and podeis. [Still haven't figured out how to apply the accent mark to that last word].


----------



## bearded

Scholiast said:


> I hope this clarifies a little.


It clarifies a lot - and at the same time it confirms what I had written in a somewhat summarized way.  Thank you, Scholiast.


----------

