This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Poetry High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

The source might be accurately cited, but there seems to be some confusion about ratios: "the iambic (where the ratio of arsis to thesis was 1:2), the dactylic (where it was 2:2) and the paeonic (where it was 3:2).[3]" For example, in an iamb, there is one stressed/arsis and one unstressed/thesis. This is a ratio of 1:1, not 1:2. In an anapest (e.g.) yes 1:2. Perhaps what is meant is 1 arsis per foot of two syllables? 1 arsis:2 syllables? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.157.110.195 ( talk) 14:38, 17 November 2017 (UTC) reply

ioio'm a little unclear as to why this article focuses on quantitative meter, especially as it's written in English - there are few successful examples of quantitative meter in English poetry. This article should focus on stresses and not on syllable length.

The article seems quite clear about the distinction:

A foot is described by the character and number of syllables it contains: in English, feet are named for the combination of accented and unaccented syllables; in other languages such as Latin and Greek, the duration of the syllable (long or short) is measured.

Then, before the list of feet:

The following lists describe the feet in terms of vowel length (as in classical languages). Translated into syllable stresses (as in English poetry), long becomes accented and short becomes unaccented. For example, an iamb, which is short-long in classical meter, becomes unstressed-stressed, as in the English word "betray."

So the article seems to clearly say that in English we use stress/unstress as patterns. Whether the lists are in long-short or stressed-unstressed is basically arbitrary. I think long/short takes precedence here because meter is more often studied in depth in study of classical languages. Tom

I understand that. But the fact that it chooses to describe the feet foremostly in quantitative terms with only a note regarding these terms in accentual-syllabic verse suggests that the quantitative description is the more important of the two. It certainly is, if you are writing in a Romance language or studying classical poetry; it is of secondary importance if you are writing in English or studying English poetry. I think an accurate list of accentual-syllabic feet should be included, though I see the importance of describing quantitative feet as well. Perhaps there should be an additional section on accentual-syllabic (or English) feet; this section would only need to describe the iamb, trochee, anapest, dactyl, pyrrhus and spondee, as the remaining classical feet don't really translate well into English. Prestonmarkstone 14:46, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply

I just want to express my appreciation of this line:

In verse, many meters use a foot ...

rowley ( talk) 17:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC) reply

Broken. Maria Sieglinda von Nudeldorf ( talk) 11:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC) reply

The link Comprehensive list of feet and colas up to 12 syllables long. Wasdichsoveraenderthat ( talk) 11:28, 21 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Admittedly my eyesight isn't what it once was but nevertheless I found it near-impossible to distinguish between the macron and the breve in the examples in this article. In fact, to make sure I had it right, I had to zoom in on the screen - and I never need to do that. I don't know if this is a problem across other pages in Wikipedia relating to meter / scansion but I would suggest that making the macron quite obviously longer than the breve would go a long way to improving clarity. David T Tokyo ( talk) 05:48, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply

I fixed it by using color. -- 70.49.171.225 ( talk) 06:20, 28 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I noticed that many (if not all) of the metrical symbols used were graphics, not text. Why not stick to U+23d1–23d9? Further, to the best of my knowledge, the ndash is recommended for long feet. CannedMan ( talk) 15:52, 30 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Perhaps a few examples would be helpful from people who know this topic, to help complete amateurs (like myself) understand, because the description is not clear for someone not experienced with poetry. Wasdichsoveraenderthat ( talk) 11:26, 21 May 2014 (UTC) reply

These poetic conventions are definitely part of Sanskrit prosody as well. It is even called a 'pada' which is clearly a cognate with the greek/latin term. The meter is so consistent in Vedic poetry that these rules on this page are often used to uncover copyist errors in old manuscripts. I'd imagine metered poetry is fairly ancient in Persian traditions as well. Does anyone have the expertise to include non-greek/latin PIE languages and their use of the metrical foot? Iṣṭa Devatā ( talk) 20:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC) reply

At the bottom of the first table, "Metrical feet and accents", is the cross-reference "See main article for tetrasyllables" but there's no link on it. 108.16.118.229 ( talk) 01:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Most of the different types of metrical feet have their own stub article (e.g., Bacchius, Pyrrhic, and Cretic - obviously some articles are longer than others, but even the longer ones are still on the shorter side compared to the typical article). In an effort to consolidate these various stubs (insert whatever the appropriate Wikipedia editing philosophy is here), perhaps the entire text of each stub article can be subsumed under this article. Alternatively, consider a "List of Metrical Feet" article with the entire text of each stub article placed in there. Jafonte01 ( talk) 14:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC) reply