Sri Aurobindo
Letters on Poetry and Art
SABCL - Volume 27
Part 2. On His Own and Others’ Poetry
Section 3. Practical Guidance for Aspiring Writers
Remarks on English Pronunciation
Monosyllables and Dissyllables [4]
I am sincerely sorry for mistaking you on an important
point. But before my argumentative wooden-headedness gives up the ghost under
your sledge-hammer it is bursting to cry a Themistoclean “Strike, but hear”.
Please try to understand my misunderstanding. What you wrote was: “‘Treason’, of
course, is pronounced ‘trez’n’, but that does not make it a monosyllable in
scansion because there is in these words a very perceptible slurred vowel sound
in pronunciation which I represent by the ’ — in ‘poison’ also.” I think it must
have been the word “scansion” which led me astray — as if you had meant that
these words were non-monosyllabic in poetry only. But am I really misjudging
Chambers as well as the Fowlers when I draw the logical inference that, since a
dictionary is no dictionary if it does not follow a coherent system and since
these people absolutely omit to make any distinction between the indicated
scansion of “prism”, “realm”, “rhythm” etc., and that of “treason” and “poison”,
they definitely mean us to take all these words as monosyllables? If Chambers
who writes “vizhun” but “trezn” and “poizn” just
as he writes “relm” and “rithm”, intends us to understand that there is some
difference between the scansions of the latter pairs he, in my opinion,
completely de-dictionaries his work by so illogical an expectation. He and the
Fowlers may not say in cold blood and so many set words that “treason” and
“poison” are monosyllables but it is their design, in most freezing blood and
more eloquently than words can express, that they fall into the same category as
“realm” and “rhythm”. Else, what could have prevented them from inventing some
such sign as your ’ to mark the dissimilarity? My sin was to have loved logic
not wisely but too well where logicality had been obstreperously announced in
flaring capitals on the title page and throughout the whole book by a fixed
system of spelling and pronunciation. My Othello-like extremity of love plunged
me into abysmal errors, but oh the Iagoistic “motiveless malignity” of
lexicographers!
It seemed to me impossible that even the reckless
Fowler — reckless in the excess of his learning — should be so audacious as to
announce that this large class of words accepted as dissyllables from the
beginning of (English) time were really monosyllables. After all the
lexicographers do not set out to give the number of syllables in a word.
Pronunciation is a different matter. “Realm” cannot be a dissyllable unless you
violently make it so, because “l” is a liquid like “r” and you cannot make a
dissyllable of words like “charm”, unless you Scotchify the English language and
make it “char’r’r’m” or vulgarise it and make it “charrum” — and even
“char’r’r’m” is after all a monosyllable. “Prism”, the “ism” in “Socialism”,
“pessimism”, “rhythm” can be made dissyllabic, but by convention (convention has
much to do with these things) the “ism”, “rhythm” are treated as a single
syllable, because of the etymology. But there is absolutely no reason to bring
in this convention with “treason”, “poison”, “garden” or “maiden” (coming from
French trahison, poison and some O.E. equivalent of the German Garten,
Mädchen). The dictionaries give the same mark of pronunciation for “thm”,
“sm” and the “den” (dn) of maiden and son (sn) of treason because they are
practically the same. The French pronounce “rhythme” = “reethm”
(I use the English sound indications) without anything to help them out in
passing from “th” to “m”, but the English tongue can’t do that, there is a very
perceptible quarter vowel sound or one-eighth vowel sound between “th” and “m” —
if it were not so the plural “rhythms” would be unpronounceable. I remember in
my French class at St. Paul’s our teacher (a Frenchman) insisted on our
pronouncing ordre in the French way — in his mouth “orrdrr”; I was the
only one who succeeded, the others all made it auder, orrder,
audrer, or some such variation. There is the same difference of habit with
words like “rhythm”, and yet conventionally the French treatment is accepted so
far as to impose rhythm as a monosyllable. Realm on the other hand is pronounced
truly as a monosyllable without the help of any fraction of a vowel.
30 September 1934