Talk:Alcaic stanza
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there. |
No merge with Anacreontics[edit]
I don't see why the page on the Alcaic stanza should be merged with the page on Anacreontics. They're two different meters. Jack (talk) 10:32, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, the proposal makes no sense, and I'll remove the merge templates. Wareh (talk) 20:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Use in English?[edit]
I'm confused by the mention of adaptations to French (weakly metric, unstressed!) and English (stressed unmetric!) towards the end of the Latin variant description. All I can see in the English sample given is that it has the right number of syllables; I couldn't myself argue that it has the indicated stresses or caesurae (for all these might matter). 142.151.171.122 (talk) 20:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Dubious translation[edit]
The rather poor translation "Prior to this, 'twas | irreligious to waste" etc., which doesn't sound the least bit like an Alcaic stanza, and doesn't help the reader to understand the rhythm, seems to me out of place. I propose to delete it. Kanjuzi (talk) 19:00, 4 February 2024 (UTC)