Use the following persistent identifier: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:hul.ebook:CHS_BlankenborgR.Rhythm_without_Beat.2014.
4. Audible Punctuation in Prosody
4.1 From Phonological to Phonetic Clues for Phrasing
4.2 Phonetic Clues
In accordance with the assumption that the properties of Greek conform to the expectations of general linguistics and psychology, Devine and Stephens state that ‘the position taken in this work is that verse is “merely the language itself, running in its natural grooves”.’ They further assume that ‘the rhythms of Greek verse are simply more highly constrained versions of rhythms already existing in Greek speech.’ The rhythm of Greek speech is then analysed (101) as a temporal pattern comparable to stress feet:
Devine and Stephens note that phonology abstracts away from physically existing distinctions. They point out that the ‘purely metrical’ approach rationalises the timing of audible segmentation of language: 
For Devine and Stephens, mora count is a matter of looking at the phonological syllable structure. The count rationalises differences in syllable weight, as it is determined by differences in the duration of syllables’ rime structure. Devine and Stephens are keen, however, to stress the importance of the syllable’s phonetic realisation: 
Despite the ancient distinction between rhythmics and metrics Devine and Stephens (51) stress the modern metrists’ position that assumes a categorisation of quantities, rather than the direct, sensory perception of quantitative relationships, as in music:
The phonetic realisation of syllables reflects their submoraic duration: infracategoric differences in syllable duration, motivated by segmentation, so that there may be different “heavy” and “light” syllables. Such differences are not strictly phonologically motivated—let alone demonstrable. What is demonstrable is that the patterning of various “weights”, that differ in the way they are analysed phonologically, produces a very regular realisation of rhythmic alternation in verse. Verse seems to be very restrictive about the usefulness of specific weights for the patterning, especially in the last part of the line. The usefulness of specific syllable weights for the patterning depends on the modification of the actual performance duration of syllables, and hence on the modification by speech production. Devine and Stephens show that the phonetic realisation of syllables in speech reflects their rhythmical intensity. Often, phonetic realisation in speech, especially in other than slow speech, mirrors significant submoraic adjustment.
4.3 Submoraic Adjustment as a Clue for Phrasing
Devine and Stephens follow Dionysius of Halicarnassus when he explicitly recognises the systematic metrical relevance of the two categories of syllable weight and the phonetic reality of multiple durations arising from the differences between syllables in the way they are segmentally structured, and from the position the syllables occupy in the various word shapes. Devine and Stephens list the scholars who have sought to compute syllable weight like Aristides Quintilianus did, and those who explained the metrical restrictions like bridges as due to submoraic differences. Following Wifstrand 1933, they emphasise the nonresolution of the longum in the hexameter. Differences in submoraic duration led Ruijgh 1987 to the identification of six different syllable quantities, West 1970 to seven different quantities, and others even up to twenty. Without fixing the exact number of syllable quantities Devine and Stephens note that:
In relation to phonology, phonetics is some sort of submoraic adjustment. In their 1994 study, Devine and Stephens deal with a number of phonological phenomena in metrical surface structure as examples of submoraic adjustment: brevis in longo, phrase-final lengthening, light syllable prolongation on the anceps, heavy syllable subordination on the arsis, heavy syllable prolongation on the thesis, hiatus, shortening, prodelision, elision, and crasis. Of these, all phenomena pointing at vocalic coalescence (shortening, prodelision, elision, and crasis) as well as light syllable prolongation and heavy syllable subordination, are treated as indicators of phonological synizesis, just like phonological synaphy. The others are seen as demarcative. Brevis in longo, final lengthening, heavy syllable prolongation on the thesis, and hiatus are all treated in relation with prepausal location. Where brevis in longo is dealt with at the phonological boundary  , and hence as a phonological clue, final lengthening, heavy syllable prolongation on the thesis, and hiatus are valued as phonetic indicators of audible termination.
4.3.1 Final lengthening, heavy syllable prolongation on the thesis, hiatus
They note that additional lengthening may be considered as an indicator of termination of a domain:
Additional lengthening is not by itself a correlate of pause, as it is not independent of stress. ‘Final lengthening and lengthening under stress have results tending in the same direction’ but are produced by different mechanisms. Informally,
Additional lengthening provides the speech producer with time to think and plan, but may also show the characteristics of human motor activity:
In general, the larger or higher ranked the domain, the greater the final lengthening: 
Discussing final lengthening in relation to metrical bridges, their observation concerning the hexameter underlines the possible equasion of final lengthening and demarcation: 
Devine and Stephens identify both the minor and the major phonological phrase in ancient Greek. One of the phonetic aspects in the identification of phonological phrases is final lengthening: 
Applying general linguistic data to ancient Greek, they identify demarcation of the minor phonological phrase on the basis of metrical evidence: 
Devine and Stephens continue by listing the metrical evidence for the strictness of syllabic structure preceding the, in principle, phonological boundaries. When dealing with the major phonological phrase, they start from the concept of pause, and from there include the aspect of final lengthening: 
After listing some examples they continue:
In conclusion, Devine and Stephens identify the boundaries of the phonological phrase with the aid of phonetic clues like final lengthening. They do not postulate that final lengthening is as such always a marker for breathing or nonbreathing pause. On the contrary, they make quite clear that final lengthening is evident both in phonology (as maintaining the phrase-internal foot structure of the prosodic domain) and in phonetics (as an indication for audible termination).
Finally, Devine and Stephens discuss the issue of hiatus in relation to audible termination. They underline the syntactic constraints on hiatus between verses and within the verse. Their findings lead them to the conclusion that hiatus, though it is generally avoided in verse, is less unacceptable at weak word junctures in fixed phrases and appositive groups where the syllable organisation most resembled that found word internally (where hiatus is not uncommon). As elision excludes hiatus, slow rates of speech constrain elision (resulting in hiatus) in the minor phrase. In the major phrase, high rates of speech constrain hiatus, as rapid rates of speech may eliminate pause. In prose, major-phrase internal hiatus involving elidable vowels may be seen as orthographic hiatus, not necessarily as phonetic. To what extent this assumption is applicable to verse, however, is not clear. It is equally unclear whether hiatus serves as a prima facie indicator of termination: 
This is as far as Devine and Stephens go in the identification of phonetic clues for phrasing. In their view, audible pause may well result from submoraic adjustment, but submoraic adjustment is not immediately an indication for audible pause. Their examples of submoraic adjustment possibly indicating audible termination in Greek have been dealt with by other scholars. Hiatus in Homer has been discussed by many (among others Monro 1891:355–356; Parry 1971:191; Lejeune 1972:225–231; West 1982:39; Van Raalte 1986:93; Hoekstra 1989:9; Bakker 1988), whose findings are not questioned by the treatment of hiatus by Devine and Stephens  . Final lengthening as a marker of “completion”, however, has been discussed by Ruijgh 1987 in a way that deviates considerably from their conclusions. Another article by Ruijgh (1989) deals with a phenomenon that may be compared to heavy syllable prolongation on the thesis. Though not fully comparable to the treatment of the same issue by Devine and Stephens, Ruijgh’s discussion does contain various observations relevant for the value of final lengthening as a phonetic marker of termination in dactylic poetry.
Dionysius,  discussing the audible differences in tempo in Odyssey 11.593–598, points out that Odyssey 11.598 has a mere seven heavy syllables and that they are not τέλειοι. If the μακρὰ τελεία is the superheavy syllable, Dionysius could have pointed at verse-final -δής. If the μακρὰ ἄλογος is the heavy segment due to “position” as Aujac and Lebel defend, Dionysius would not have claimed that the line consisted of δάκτυλοι καὶ οὗτοί γε παραδεδιωγμένας ἔχοντες τὰς ἀλόγους ‘dactyls, and those with irrational syllables that are hurried along’: the line contains only two heavy segments due to “position” (-δον-, -λίν-).  On the other hand, if μακρὰ τελεία is the word-final heavy syllable, as Ruijgh argues, why doesn’t Dionysius take the verse-final syllable -δής into account? Ruijgh quotes Dionysius (20/93.13 U-R) πλὴν ἐπὶ τῆς τελευτῆς ‘with the exception of the positions at verse end’ and makes the quotation explains why Dionysius does not mention the verse-final syllable in this context: ‘En disant que les SL (syllabes finales) de λ 598 ne sont pas τέλειοι, Denys (20/92.19 U-R) oublie d’ajouter ‘abstraction faite, bien entendu, de la SF du vers’, restriction qu’il ajoute bien plus bas (20/93.13 U-R)’ .  Despite Ruijgh’s attempt to reconstruct Dionysius’s flaw of memory, the quotation from 20 (93.13 U-R) refers solely to the presence of dactyls in the line, not to the absence of τέλειοι.
4.3.3 Prolongation of the thesis in syncopated feet
Dionysius always chooses his examples of the different ῥυθμοί according to these principles. Ruijgh  points out that anapaestic dimeters ought to be analysed κατὰ διποδίαν. The medial pause, a dieresis κατὰ διποδίαν, he says, facilitates the marching rhythm by equalising the durations of the two half-verses;  the possibility for equalising lies in the prolongation of the prepausal heavy element on the thesis.  In march anapaests, the exact time-value of phonetic word-final syllables depends on the amount of LFS required to maintain the rhythmical march-beat. Such application of LFS seems to be incompatible with the LFS resulting from, or rather indicating, a strong phonetic disruption. In anapaestic systems, for example in comedy, this failing relation LFS – phonetic disruption can be seen. The anapaestic system itself leads to πνῖγος “suffocation”, only to be released by a catalectic dimeter—in other words: by LFS and a phonetic disruption.
Similar examples can be given for all phonetic ῥυθμοί ending in a word-final heavy syllable mapped on the thesis (iamb, molossus, choriamb) within the hexameter.  Word-final lengthening of words ending on the thesis results in a word-final monosyllabic foot (T[A]). Within the dactylic line the word-final monosyllabic foot is the thesis of a full foot (TA). Depending on the amount of additional lengthening, rising word end may exaggerate the separation from the arsis in the same metrical foot. My conclusion, in addition to Ruijgh’s conclusions, is that a μακρὰ τελεία is characteristic for the thesis of the hexameter’s foot, leaving the word-final heavy syllable on the verse-final arsis “immeasurable”.
4.4 Audible Pause
4.4.1 Phonological pausa and pause
Daitz analysis is in many respects relevant for the study of pause in the Homeric epic. Not because of his conclusion, as his identification of pause leans on the phonological approach (and hence on pausa), his argumentation is largely built on a specific interpretation of seemingly randomly chosen fragments from Latin authors, and his consideration for phonetics is at best “shown when wished for”. What makes it relevant is the consideration for coherent phonological phrasing as a hindrance for audible pause, the questioning of ancient written punctuation to identify audible pause, the “disappearance of recognisable meter” as the result of “rhetorical” colometry,  and, most important of all, raising the issue of ‘to pause or not to pause’.
4.4.2 Phonological restriction on audible pause
τὸν.δαὖ.τεπ.ρο.σέ.ει.πε.συ.βώ.τη.σὄρ.χα.μο.σαν.δρῶν. (phonological segmentation)
I argued that the prosodic “cutting up” of the line can hardly be called “syllabification” as its clusters of “syllables” do not correspond with morphological lexemes, that is, with the intelligible and separable units of meaning (words and affixes). The orthographical syllables, a further subdivision of lexemes in single units of articulatory prominence,  do not signify metrical quantity either. The units of quantity are clusters of phonemes, groupings of sounds that have certain significance regardless of morphology.  When dealing with metrical text, I explained that it is better to leave the general terminology “syllable” behind and refer to the units of prosodic cutting up as “segments”. Prosodic “syllabification” is best referred to as “segmentation”.
(δῦ ← δὲ)(χιτῶν᾿)(ἕλε ← δὲ)(σκῆπτρον)(παχύ)(βῆ ← δὲ)(θύραζε)
(ὡς ← δ᾿)(ὅτ᾿)(ἂν → ἀίξηι)(νόος)(ἀνέρος)(ὅς ← τ᾿)(ἐπὶ → πολλὴν)
νηί τε καὶ ἑτάροις αὐτὸς δ᾿ εἴ πέρ κεν ἀλύξηις
(εἰ ← δέ)(κε → σίνηαι)(τότε ← τοι)  (τεκμαίρομ᾿)(ὄλεθρον)
(νηί ← τε)(καὶ → ἑτάροις)(αὐτὸς ← δ᾿)(εἴ ← πέρ)(κεν → ἀλύξηις)
(πρίν ← γ᾿)(ὅτε ← δή)(με → σὸς → υἱὸς)(ἀπὸ → μεγάροιο)(κάλεσσε)
Consonantal synaphy and vowel coalescence (together labelled sandhi), and phonological clisis evidence the coherent phonological phrase. Absence of both sandhi and phonological clisis indicates the possible audible pause.
What happens at the caesura in these four examples is described by Devine and Stephens as onset to coda shift, the right to left movement of a consonant over the boundary between words:  ἔ.να.ρα ← β.ρο.τό.εν.τα. Such sandhi causes positions of frequent word end to be straddled by means of a consonantal coda as the closure of the segment. Thus the segment at the caesura features a rime of vocalic nucleus + segment-final coda. In segmentation the shift may also be in opposite direction: from coda to onset.  In that case the consonantal coda is not the closure of the segment’s rime but the onset of the next. The segment counts as light and the consonantal coda is attached to the first segment of the subsequent word as (part of the) onset. This shift may cause segmentation to straddle, for example, the trochaic word end in the hexameter’s third foot. Realisation of an audible pause following the third trochee would lead to a prepausal closed (= heavy) syllable in the third foot in the following examples:
In this example, however, orthography obscures what really happens at the trochaic word end.  The movable nu at the caesura suggests a prosodic coda (as part of the syllable’s rime), but that is metrically impossible: the syllable -σιν is heavy and impossible at this metrical position. Meter proves that the shift leads to segmentation σι.να and hence to the segment .σῐ. There is no possibility for an audible pause. Is the avoidance of hiatus so important then that the third foot caesura is being straddled? Allowing hiatus in the arsis would not have been a real problem. Within word groups that are semantically tied together, orthographic hiatus is common at the trochaic caesura and often, even phonetically, not explained as hiatus but as sandhi  due to the influence of a consonantal sound that has disappeared in writing:
The combination of movable nu and an audible pause at word end (so that the nu is prepausal) can only be found when the word-final syllable occupies a position that is metrically “long”. The foot’s thesis is the preferred localisation  (with or without a subsequent pause):
Thus movable nu provides clues, and in case of metrically “short” segments, evidence for the coherence within phonological phrases, sometimes resulting in “dimming” of metrical cola. On the thesis, the movable nu can be the consonantal coda and allow for a subsequent pause. It may still be a coda without a subsequent pause, or not a coda at all. The application of movable nu at the two different third-foot caesurae (position 5 and position 5½) shows that inclusion of the orthographic coda into the rime of the segment cannot be as easily accounted for on the arsis as on the thesis.
αἰὲν ἔχ᾿ ἡνίοχος θεράπων
4.4.3 Metrical restrictions on audible pause
4.5 Audible Pause in Homeric Prosody
As mentioned earlier, word end in a marked heavy syllable brings out a different metrical pattern: that of the anapaest. Word end in a marked heavy syllable gives the thesis the chance to “equalise” its duration to the preceding arsis (ἕ̆ν᾿ ἀ̆εῑρᾰμέ̆νη̄ ἑ̆κά̆βη̄). At the same time, any additional word-final lengthening exaggerates the separation of the orphaned monosyllabic thesis (T[A]) from the following arsis that belongs to the same metrical foot (TA). On the level of the word, and of the phrase, the orphaned thesis is heard as the thesis attached to the preceding arsis in the rhythmical synaphy of the dactylic line in a rhythmical word that by itself seems to be rising. The metrical shift is a prosodic reality, that of metarrhythmisis (τὰ μέτρα μεταρρυθμίζεσθαι): the shift from one metrical pattern (dactyl) to another (anapaest). It is, I argued, in fact a change of “direction”: the orphaned thesis becomes attached to the preceding arsis, thus suggesting a change in foot-structure. ‘P’ stands for the possibility of phonetic demarcation:
[T A ][T A][T/P A][T/P A] [T A ][T A] “dactylic rhythm”
[T ][A T][A T/P][A T/P][A T] [ A T][T/P] “metarrhythmisised”
Word end in a light syllable will also carry “extra duration” (διάστασις). Extra duration as submoriac adjustment of light word-final syllables is mapped onto the arsis and hence more severely restricted. Ruijgh  suggests that LFS of a light syllable may result in approximately half the additional lengthening compared to LFS of a heavy syllable. Restricted demarcative final lengthening signals the branching of “smaller phrases”; it depends on the rate of speech whether these “smaller phrases” are processed as separate phrases, or as parts of larger-scale phonological phrases. 
Non-restricted phonetic disruption on the thesis stems from the phonetic word-final syllables containing a long vowel or a diphthong, or the word-final superheavy syllable (‘:’ indicates the pause): 
I will refer to the word-final lengthening whose “demarcative strength” in prosody depends on the rate of speech, as the secondary pause. As said, it may or it may not be exploited to suggest a “smaller phrase” within the larger-scale phonological phrase. To the ear, the difference between the primary and the secondary pause may also have been the difference between the breathing and the nonbreathing pause, as this difference would be influenced by rate of speech: at higher rates of speech, the rhythmical disruption caused by pauses decreases at the expense of the number of breathing pauses. I cannot say whether the secondary pause is only a phonetic disruption due to the submoriac adjustment of final lengthening or a breathing pause as well. For that reason I will not make any distinction between the secondary pause as phonetic disruption and as audible pause: in both cases I will treat the phonetic disruption as submoraic adjustment of the word-final syllable, not as a measurable “pause” (or “silence”) as a separate audible phenomenon. 
Realisation of the prepausal segment as word-final syllable means that the shortened word-final syllable (ss) is excluded, just like the elided syllable (es), and the resyllabified segment (rs):
Mapping of a syllable on the arsis, as part of a double-light or as a single heavy syllable, only facilitates a secondary pause. The disruption may be audible, but with only minimal word-final lengthening (and not enough additional lengthening to take a breath) at normal rate of speech. Elision frustrates a rhythmical pause on its own right branch; elision of an enclitic, with its prosodic ties to both the preceding and the subsequent constituent, frustrates a rhythmical pause altogether.
4.6 Audible Punctuation in Homer
4.6.1 Pause is a choice
4.6.2 στίχος λαγαρός
θείομεν :2 ἂν δ᾿ αὐτὴν Χρυσηίδα καλλιπάρηιον
Combined with a pause at the preceding verse end, the first foot dieresis features an extended imperative in, for example, Iliad 1.32 (ἀλλ᾿ ἴθι ‘but come on’) and Iliad 1.37 (κλῦθί μευ ‘please listen to me’). Alternatively, it may single out the transition to, or the completion of, a vocative as in Iliad 1.334 (χαίρετε κήρυκες ‘welcome, heralds’) and (bisyllabic) Iliad 1.39 Σμινθεῦ. The trisyllabic phonetic word is the easiest adaptation to the requirement of the undisturbed flow of dactyls throughout the verse. Realisation of the first foot dieresis as, at most, a secondary pause  is confirmed by the frequency of elision, for example Iliad 1.335 (ἆσσον ἴτ᾿ ‘come closer’) and well-known ὧς ἔφατ᾿ ‘thus he/she spoke’.
4.6.3 Wernicke’s law reconsidered
The (now) spondaic ῥυθμός could have been placed elsewhere, with word end mapped on the thesis. The same applies to the spondaic ῥυθμός followed by hiatus:
Spondaic word end in Odyssey 16.350, Odyssey 20.388, and Odyssey 21.400 is a deliberate avoidance of a μακρὰ τελεία, the “perfect” heavy element on the thesis that indicates a strong audible pause. In other feet of the hexameter, especially in the fourth, the same may occur: the deliberate creation of spondaic word end as the result of “unnecessary” localisation of a rhythmical word type that may as well be localised so as to avoid spondaic word end. It is possible, after all, to avoid it. Examples from the Iliad’s first book are:
The localisation of bacchic word shapes, or words ending in bacchic meter (⏑ | – – |)  similarly leads to word end in a μακρὰ ἄλογος, mapped on the foot’s arsis. Under Wernicke’s law such word end may be possible before the bucolic dieresis, a rather frequently occuring localisation pattern. Consider the following instances in the Iliad’s first book:
Iliad 1.44 βῆ δὲ κατ᾿ Οὐλύμποιο καρήνων χωόμενος κῆρ
Iliad 1.71 καὶ νήεσσ᾿ ἡγήσατ᾿ Ἀχαιῶν Ἴλιον εἴσω
Iliad 1.89 σοὶ κοίληις παρὰ νηυσὶ βαρείας χεῖρας ἐποίσει
Iliad 1.91 ὃς νῦν πολλὸν ἄριστος Ἀχαιῶν εὔχεται εἶναι
Iliad 1.121 τὸν δ᾿ ἠμείβετ᾿ ἔπειτα ποδάρκης δῖος Ἀχιλλεύς
Iliad 1.159 τιμὴν ἀρνύμενοι Μενελάωι σοί τε κυνῶπα
Iliad 1.244 χωόμενος ὅ τ᾿ ἄριστον Ἀχαιῶν οὐδὲν ἔτισας
Iliad 1.278 ἀντιβίην ἐπεὶ οὔ ποθ᾿ ὁμοίης ἔμμορε τιμῆς
Iliad 1.371 ἦλθε θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας Ἀχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων
Iliad 1.384 πάντηι ἀνὰ στρατὸν εὐρὺν Ἀχαιῶν ἄμμι δὲ μάντις
Iliad 1.412 ἣν ἄτην ὅ τ᾿ ἄριστον Ἀχαιῶν οὐδὲν ἔτισε
Iliad 1.430 τήν ῥα βίηι ἀέκοντος ἀπηύρων αὐτὰρ Ὀδυσσεύς
Iliad 1.551 (cf. 568) τὸν δ᾿ ἠμείβετ᾿ ἔπειτα βοῶπις πότνια Ἥρη
Iliad 1.567 ἆσσον ἰόνθ᾿ ὅτε κέν τοι ἀάπτους χεῖρας ἐφείω
Iliad 1.571 τοῖσιν δ᾿ Ἥφαιστος κλυτοτέχνης ἦρχ᾿ ἀγορεύειν
Of these examples, one is not in accordance with the special feature that is the most important condition for word end under Wernicke’s law: the length of the vocalic nucleus. Generally, the heavy segment mapped on the hexameter’s fourth arsis contains a long vowel or diphthong so that the word-final syllables take bacchic shape before the word juncture. The formula βοῶπις πότνια Ἥρη (14 times in the Iliad, never in the Odyssey) contains a spondaic word end due to a consonantal coda (“position”) instead of the natural length of vowels. That the only exception is found in a noun-epithet formula bears some significance: I think it points at the possibility that spondaic word end under the conditions of Wernicke’s law is itself a licence with regard to an older allowance concerning spondaic word end due “to position”. Of course, one formulaic example is insufficient proof.
4.6.4 Options at verse end
[T A ][ T A][T]:[A T][A T][A T][T]
[T] [ A T ][A T ]:[ A T][ A T][A T][T]
A catalectic verse-final dactyl, as if the verse would end in a trochee,  is as improbable as phonetic disruption at position 5½:
Prepausal mapping of a heavy syllable on the fourth arsis under Wernicke’s law equally requires phrasal metarrhythmisis to anapaests.
ὄρνις ἐν μεγάροισι κακὸς πέλε᾿ οὐδέ με πείσεις
ἕξω ἐγώ τὸ δέ οἱ κλέος ἔσσεται :8 ὅσσον ἐμοί περ
Dactylic prepausal word end does allow for LFS without serious disruption to the flow of dactyls, if the additional final lengthening would be minimal. Qualification as secondary pause gives rise, however, to an important consequence for the analysis of the verse-final foot. In order to mark a primary pause, the verse-final metrical colon (whatever the position it starts from) should undergo phrasal metarrhythmisis to anapaests. Brevis in longo, applied, as it commonly is, to indicate metrical indifference at verse end,  will not do to grant the verse end demarcative value as a primary pause. As metrical anceps element, the verse-final arsis may be indicative of a strong metrical boundary,  but as it offers choice in realisation, it also offers choice when it comes to its demarcative value. Without metarrhythmisis, its realisation is not so much prosodically neutral, but reminiscent of what Devine and Stephens call the “subordinated” segment: a segment whose rhythmical prominence is kept in accordance with its position within the proportion of the metrical foot. Devine and Stephens  use the terminology “subordination” to describe adjustments to heavy syllables to retain the unidirectional structure for stress feet in a phrase. Contiguous stresses, suggesting a sequence of theses, are replaced by a thesis-arsis stress foot structure by defooting a stress foot that is preceded and followed by a thesis. The defooted heavy syllable is consequently refooted and mapped onto arsis ([T][T][T] → [TA][T] or [T][AT]). Devine and Stephens note that
Having accepted that the durational ratio of arsis and thesis resembles A ≤ T, I find their terminology “subordination” very useful, outside the reconstruction of “stress feet”, to describe the restriction on prepausal mapping of heavy segments onto arsis to retain the unidirectional podic structure.  Like the heavy segment on position 8, the verse-final anceps element offers the choice comparable to the heavy κυκλικός-element in both the dactyl and the anapaest.  Like phrasal metarrhythmisis, realisation of the verse-final element as a subordinated syllable is an example of phonetic adjustment: this time frustrating the realisation of a prepausal syllable. As non-prepausal, the verse-final metrical anceps requires no more than maintenance of the dactylic γένος ἴσον foot with its foot-internal proportion and realisation of the verse-final element as a metrically indifferent arsis. The thesis, as the first element of the sixth foot, must be the only marked element: only then can be avoided that the verse-final element is mapped as a prepausal syllable. Evidence pointing at the correctness of this observation can be found in the general avoidance of lexical monosyllables on the verse-final element of the hexameter. As the sixth foot anceps allows for a choice among options, there is no reason to assume, as Ruijgh does,  that the sixth foot ends in a μακρὰ τελεία. Attractive as his assumption may seem from the metrical point of view, phrasal metarrhythmisis (to anapaests) cannot automatically be taken for granted. Within the line, phrasal metarrhythmisis is evidenced by “spondaic word” end in a superheavy syllable, that is, by an “overlong” segment without the possibility of synaphy or ambisyllabism, with the exception of [long vowel + ς]. The parallelism between the allowance for such word end under Wernicke’s law and the law’s raison d’être, the verse end, proves that caution is equally required when considering the possible realisation of position 12 as a μακρὰ τελεία. It may very well be possible (phrasal metarrhythmisis to anapaests; orphaned verse-final thesis [T]), but the metrical and phonological considerations presented so far are not sufficient to consider the verse-final syllable as other than a συλλαβὴ ἄλογος.
It functions as a means of segmental synaphy; not as a coda (resulting in a prepausal heavy syllable), but as a mere onset (expanding the phonological phrase forward to ἐμοι-). The word-final light syllable preceding the secondary pause may be additionally lengthened into a βραχεῖα ἄλογος, but prepausal word-final lengthening cannot turn it into a συλλαβὴ μακρά. The appearance of movable nu at the trochaic caesura points in the same direction:
Movable nu is metrically harmless, phonologically useful, and phonetically non-disturbing. In epigraphical evidence,  the trochaic caesura figures as a secondary pause despite punctuation:
ϟου[φαγόρας μ᾿ ἀνέθη]κεν : Διὸς γλαυϟώπιδι ϟούρηι (from Athens)
At word end on the thesis, brevis in longo may occur, and the licence is extended to word end on a thesis that is not prepausal. Brevis in longo does not appear in the arsis preceding verse-internal dieresis. If I combine the observations concerning syllable duration and weight before various positions of word end in, or following, the arsis, I can reasonably postulate that brevis in longo is restricted to the completion of blunt rhythm, and hence not, I argue, a feature of the rhythm at verse end, unless metarrhythmisised on the level of the phrase. Only when metarrhythmisised may a verse-final heavy syllable function as a metrical thesis and be equal to the μακρὰ τελεία. Usually, however, it is ἄλογος. Dionysius’s comment on the hexameter-example Odyssey 11.598, however puzzling, at least endorses this conclusion:
The verse-final long syllable -δής in the example indeed counts as a μακρὰ ἄλογος: Dionysius does not “forget” to count it among the “perfect” long elements. He rightly does not consider it a “perfect” long element, as, in my terms, this verse end qualifies as a secondary pause.
Πείρως οὖτα δὲ δουρὶ παρ᾿ ὀμφαλόν ἐκ δ᾿ ἄρα πᾶσαι
χύντο χαμαὶ χολάδες τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψε
Several postpositives are elided. Most are on the arsis. Some of them are both elided and on the arsis. Their demarcating effect as phonetic-word final is limited, or in case of elision, absent: due to the elision, they may even no longer be appositive.  The only postpositives localised before a possibly stronger pause are περ and δὲ (in Iliad 4.526). Most of the time, the “demarcative character” of the postpositives is nearly or completely frustrated. And even in the case of περ and δὲ (in Iliad 4.526) there are more arguments in favour of additional lengthening than there are to come to a conclusion about a rhythmical pause: both particles do not make a “perfect” heavy syllable.
4.7 Audibly Patterning Homeric Syntax
4.7.1 Audible variation
Apparently, verse end as rhythmical disturbance is not the ideal point of transition from a minor-phrase pragmatic constituent to the start of the grammatical clause. Not surprisingly, the bucolic dieresis proves equally unfit. If the start of the new grammatical clause is postponed until the start of the new hexameter (for example for formulaic reasons), the verse end rather facilitates the extension of a minor-phrase transitional constituent into αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα or ἔνθα ἔπειτα, despite the prosodic artificiality.
This is not a random order. As I showed above, the verse end does not automatically claim “prosodic neutrality” despite the metrical indifference. The verse-final syllable is not unavoidably prepausal-heavy,  but spondaic word end at verse end is only under conditions similar to those of Wernicke’s law at position 8. Dimming of the metrical irregularity at verse end is optional despite the unavoidable word end. Word end, and phonetic word end, is nearly always found in the third foot as well. Due to this strong tendency, a main third foot caesura is in general only denied to verses containing a word that bridges at least the entire third foot:
In my opinion,  however, it is illogical to deny the possibility of rhythmical “dimming” to verses with elision at the caesura within the third foot:
The punctuation of many modern texts of the Iliad and the Odyssey bears witness to the strength with which grammatically structuring text-elements suggest an alternative, and much more varying pattern.  In my view, position 3 is not a subsidiary pause in Iliad 11.289:
The line features a third foot caesura, but does not feature a third foot pause. Consider the realisation of, respectively, position 7, 8, and 9 in the following examples:
What these examples (and many more can be added) have in common is that the phonetic realisation of the verse, as does the syntactical structure, suggests a pattern that disregards the prosodic guidance of the two ἡμιστίχια of the hexameter. The force with which phonological boundaries, other than the third foot caesura and verse end, determine the shape and internal organisation of the phrases (at the cost of the importance of the third caesura and verse end) is mirrored by the grammatical structure of the hexameter or parts of the hexameter. The patterning of the grammatical clause and the various transitional and preparatory extra-clausal constituents results in a non-stichic variety of phrases.
4.7.2 Patterning the grammatical clause
ὄπτ᾿ ἐν χερσὶν ἑλών] τά ῥά οἱ [γέρα πάρθεσαν αὐτῶι]
[οἱ δ᾿ ἐπ᾿ ὀνείαθ᾿ ἑτοῖμα προκείμενα χεῖρας ἴαλλον]
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ [πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο]
δὴ τότε Τηλέμαχος [προσεφώνεε Νέστορος υἱόν
ἄγχι σχὼν κεφαλήν] ἵνα μὴ [πευθοίαθ᾿ οἱ ἄλλοι]
The descending start of the first grammatical clause of this passage is due to discourse shift (the completion of direct speech: ‘thus he spoke’). Note the straddling of verse end between lines 65–66, and the repeated disregard for the third foot caesura as a strong pause. Thirdly, it is remarkable that the two clauses with blunt ending are both built around a participle as their verbal nucleus (ρῆμα): ἐν χερσὶν ἑλών ‘taking in his hands’ and ἄγχι σχὼν κεφαλήν ‘and he brought his head close to him’. If we count the participle as the nucleus of a separate clause, the wide rhythmical variation in this passage results in only two grammatical “clauses” that correspond with a ἡμιστίχιον on the level of meter: προσεφώνεε Νέστορος υἱόν ‘addressed Nestor’s son’ and ἄγχι σχὼν κεφαλήν ‘and he brought his head close to him’. Only in these two half-verses, 69b and 70a, the grammatical “clause” coincides with the metrical colon, and hence with the widely accepted “rhythmical” colon. In the remaining verses and parts of verses, we find larger and shorter phrases that are invariably started from, and completed at, positions of frequent word end. The phrases formed by grammatical clauses are themselves built from a nuclear predication and satellites that are regularly confined to the metrical configurations available between positions of frequent word end. In other words, the phonological major phrases are built from metrically demarcated minor phrases. Thus, in oral composition, the metrical building blocks of the clause retain their long-existing minor-phrase shape, without necessarily resulting in repetitive audible boundaries. It is exactly this “mismatch between prosodic domain and corresponding metrical domain”  that proves the phonetic determination of the grammatical clause—and the great prosodic freedom with which it can be internally organised and externally demarcated.
4.7.3 Clause, colon, phrase
οὐλομένην] , [ἣ μυρί᾿ , Ἀχαιοῖς , ἄλγε᾿ ἔθηκεν] ,
[πολλὰς δ᾿ , ἰφθίμους , ψυχὰς , Ἄϊδι , προΐαψεν ,
ήρώων] , αὐτοὺς δὲ , [έλώρια , τεῦχε κύνεσσιν ,
5 οἰωνοῖσι τε πᾶσι] , [Διὸς δ᾿ , ἐτελείετο βουλή] ,
ἐξ οὗ δὴ , [τὰ πρῶτα , διαστήτην , ἐρίσαντε] ,
Ἀτρείδης τε ἄναξ , ἀνδρῶν , καὶ δῖος Ἀχιλλεύς ,
[τίς τάρ σφωε θεῶν , ἔριδι , ξυνέηκε μάχεσθαι] ,
[Λητοῦς καὶ Διὸς υἱός] , ὁ γὰρ , [βασιλῆϊ χολωθεὶς , or (] , [)
10 νοῦσον ἀνὰ στρατὸν ὦρσε , κακὴν] , [ὀλέκοντο δὲ] λαοί (or: λαοί]?)
οὔνεκα , [τὸν Χρύσην , ἠτίμασεν , ἀρητῆρα] ,
Ἀτρείδης , ὁ γὰρ [ἦλθε , θοὰς , ἐπὶ νῆας Ἀχαιῶν , or (] , [)
λυσόμενός τε θύγατρα , or (] , [) φέρων τ᾿ , ἀπερείσι᾿ ἄποινα , or (] , [)
στέμμα τ᾿ ἔχων , ἐν χερσὶν , ἑκηβόλου , Ἀπόλλωνος ,
15 χρυσέωι ἀνὰ σκήπτρωι] , καὶ [λίσσετο , πάντας Ἀχαιούς] ,
Ἀτρείδα δὲ [μάλιστα , δύω , κοσμήτορε λαῶν] ,
Metrical-phonetic analysis show the predominance of ascendant words and word groups between positions with frequent word end (indicated as ,), as well as the wide variety of phrase-shapes between the strong (indicated as ˚) and mild (indicated as ˙) phonetic disruptions in Iliad 1.1–16:
– ⏑ ⏑ – ˚, – – ⏑ , ⏑ – – , – ⏑ ⏑ – – ˚,
– – , – – – , – – , ⏑ ⏑ – , ⏑ ⏑ – – ,
– – – ˚, – – ⏑ ˙, ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ , – ⏑ ⏑ – – ,
5 – – – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ˙, ⏑ – , ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – – ˚,
– – – ˙, – – ⏑ , ⏑ – – – , ⏑ ⏑ – – ˙,
– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – , – – , – – ⏑ ⏑ – – ˚,
– – – ⏑ ⏑ – , ⏑ ⏑ – , ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – – ˙,
– – – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ˙, ⏑ – ˚ , ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – – (˚),
10 – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ , ⏑ – ˚, ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ (˙) – – ˚,
– ⏑ ⏑ ˙, – – – , – – ⏑ ⏑ , – – – – ˙,
– ⏑ ⏑ – ˚, ⏑ ⏑ (˙) – ⏑ , ⏑ – , ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – – ˚,
– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ˙, ⏑ – , ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – – ˙,
– ⏑ ⏑ – , – – ⏑ , ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ , – – – – ,
15 – ⏑ ⏑ – – – ˚, – – ⏑ ⏑ , – ⏑ ⏑ – – ˚,
– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ˚ ⏑ – ⏑ , ⏑ – , – – ⏑ ⏑ – – ˙,
4.7.4 Patterning extra-clausal constituents
Iliad 1.13 ὁ γάρ is an example of an extra-clausal constituent starting from a primary and ending in a secondary pause. Alternatively, the sequence of pauses is reversed (Iliad 1.9 ὁ γάρ). When starting from a primary pause, demarcation on the right may be further obscured due to a postpositive ending of the phonetic word at an uncommon metrical position (Iliad 1.13 ὁ γάρ4 [dieresis after the second foot]). Vocatives regularly start from an unmarked position, and end in a position that allows considerable additional lengthening.  The phonological shape of the extra-clausal constituent is that of the minor phonological phrase, itself part of a larger scale major phrase. Its participation in the syntax of the major phrase may as well be concluded from the frequent rhythmical reorganisation due to the elision of the constituent-final syllable of δέ or ἄρα:
νηὶ πάρα πρυμνῆι] [τῶι δ᾿ ἀσπάσιος γένετ᾿ ἐλθῶν
And him he found busy putting the beautiful armour around his shoulders | near the ship’s deck; for him his arrival was most welcome
4.7.5 Audible enjambment
The second features similar enjambment  verse internally:
Again, I would like to stress that enjambment is possible considering the phonetic realisation, not that it is unavoidable. Nor do I claim that possible enjambment at such positions lends emphasis to either the word preceding, or the word following the phonological realisation. I do not know what exactly the poetic effect of such enjambment might have been, I merely analyse the possibility for an audible pause that disturbs the grammatically coherent unit. There is, nonetheless, one specific aspect that I do want to point out: both at verse end, and verse internally, instances of “true” enjambment possibly disturbing clausal grammar are rare, especially in the Iliad. 
|Perfect heavy after metarrhythmisis||16%||16%|
|“Brevis in longo”*||21%||20%|
Table 6: various rhythmical line endings.
* The alternative would be to describe this possibility as “perfect heavy < light syllable after metarrhythmisis”, taking metarrhythmisis for granted. Metrically, there is no distinction between the two ways to end the line. It is exactly the metrical resemblance that obscures the choice of pause: the anceps allows for secondary pause, metarrhythmisis for primary pause. In case of “brevis in longo” there is no a priori reason to assume metarrhythmisis, apart from the notion that brevis in longo, strictly speaking, is limited to the thesis.
|Clause end*||“Enjambment”||Other**||Clause end*||“Enjambment”||Other**|
Table 6: Demarcation due to the primary rhythmical pause as percentage of total number of primary pauses.
* Including the right branch demarcation of the predicatively used participle.
** The right branch demarcation of a transitional constituent or a cluster of transitional constituents.