After twenty years of published analyses on rap lyrics and flow, a divide between music-oriented and literature-oriented writing remains. It is only slightly hyperbolic to suggest that the former analyzes rap music as music without text while the la er analyzes it as text without music. This article begins bridging that divide by relating details of Kendrick Lamar’s rhythmic delivery to the meaning of his lyrics, focusing on the second verse of “Momma” from To Pimp a Bu erfly (2015). In particular, I present methods for measuring and visualizing the alignment of syllable onsets (i.e., the flow) with events in the accompanying instrumental streams (i.e., the beat). Subsequently, in examining three lines of the verse, I document an analogy between flow-beat alignment and topics of vitality, moral rightness, and knowledge in the lyrics. In demonstrating one way in which rhythmic delivery can affirm the expressive meaning of lyrics, I hope to provide tools that enable hip hop scholars interested in rhythm, rhyme, and meaning to sometimes talk to each other rather than past each other. Volume 25, Number 1, May 2019 Copyright © 2019 Society for Music Theory 1. Revisiting text-music relationships in rap delivery through “speech-rhythmic” vs. “music-rhythmic” flow [1.1] In his 2008 article in Music Theory Online, Kyle Adams notes that existing methods for analyzing texted (classical) music are inapt for rap music. In most of the classical repertoire, a composer sets a preexisting text to music, and this invites analysts to investigate how the meaning of that preexisting text maps onto the meaning of the newly composed music. In rap music, according to Adams, the composition of the music (i.e., “the beat,” created by a deejay or producer) often precedes the composition of the text (i.e., “the flow,” created by an emcee), thereby undermining the mapping of meaning from music to text. Furthermore, Adams cites several examples of rapped lyrics whose meaning is unclear, undermining any a empt to connect their meaning to the meaning of the music: Without passing judgment, one can say that the literal meaning of [the lyrics of A Tribe Called Quest’s “Scenario”] is difficult to discern. Though obviously intended to be humorous, this verse has neither an overarching theme, nor an identifiable plot, nor a systematic and consistent use of imagery. (2008, [4]) Since, in his view, the music often precedes the text, and since the text’s meaning may be “difficult to discern,” Adams suggests that the analyst ought to look at how the rhythm of the rapping voice responds to aspects of the instrumental streams, not how that rhythm interacts with the meaning of the text. Other scholars have provided more nuance to the process of rap composition as an iterative collaboration between an emcee and a producer, one in which the musical content of a track both suggests aspects of the rapper’s flow and responds to it (Williams 2009, [4]; Manabe 2009, 309).(1) But even if the process is more complex than Adams recognizes, his critique of the traditional approach to text/music relations stands: that approach could be applied to rap music appropriately if and only if the text of the lyrics precedes all the features of the music (including the features of the rapper’s voice). This seems unlikely in most cases. [1.2] Adams goes on to demonstrate many rich correspondences between the rhythm of the voice and the rhythm of the text. Subsequently, his call to examine such correspondences has been productive, as evidenced by Oliver Kautny (2015), Nathaniel Condit-Schul (2016), and Ohriner (2016). While I applaud this scholarship, I wish to return in this article to the question Adams set aside: how can the rhythm of the rapping voice support the meaning of rapped lyrics? I address this question not because conventional modes of analysis designed for classical music ought to find application in rap music. Instead, I believe that avoiding the relationship between flow’s rhythm and its text accentuates the divisions between music-oriented and literature-oriented hip hop scholarship. It is only slightly hyperbolic to suggest that the former analyzes rap music as music without text while the la er analyzes it as text without music. [1.3] Although one could examine many features of the rhythm of the rapping voice and relate them to the content of the lyrics, I will focus on the juxtaposition between spans of rapping whose rhythm is speech-like versus those whose rhythm is music-like. I make this distinction primarily by measuring the non-alignment between syllables or rapping and the metric grid of the instrumental streams through techniques introduced in the next section. By “speech-rhythmic” versus “musicrhythmic” flow, I draw on extensive discourse in rap music, among artists, fans, and critics, arguing that syllables of rapping should conform to a metric framework characterized by 16 positions within each measure. I’ll call this framework a “cardinality-16 metric space.” In pedagogical texts on rap, aspiring emcees are instructed to place syllables within this framework. For example, Paul Edwards (2009, 63) states that “unlike the rhythm of a poem, a song’s flow has to be in time with the music—the rhythm of the lyrics must fit with the basic rhythm of the music.” Later, he is even more explicit: This is a very important point to note: a stressed syllable must be said at the same time as each of the four beats in a bar . . . Stressing a syllable on each of the four beats gives the lyrics the same underlying rhythmic pulse as the music and keeps them in rhythm. (71–2; emphases original) [1.4] The emcee stic.man (2005, 32) of Dead Presidents similarly instructs aspiring rappers to absorb the metric grid of the beat before writing lyrics, stating that “when you don’t have the beat first, you are not writing to a known speed or pa ern. This means your choice of words . . . may not fit the beat that you end up choosing for your song.” In the Ice-T documentary Something from Nothing: The Art of Rap, the influential emcee Rakim goes so far as to draw a graph of the metric space in which to compose lyrics: I start off with 16 dots on a paper, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam. My thing was, if four bars was this long, . . . I see like a graph in between them four bars, and within that, I could place so many words and so many syllables . . . and I can take it to the point where there’s no other words you could put in that four bars. (2012, 20:36) [1.5] Rakim’s assertion that no other words would fit is telling: while he is, of course, capable of pronouncing words faster than those of the cardinality-16 space, he considers doing so stylistically inappropriate. There are recognized exceptions to this metric organization, including “triplet flow” that places 12 or 24 syllables in a bar, now commonly associated with rap music originating in Atlanta. But unless a flow consistently features triplets, it is assumed that the artist is a empting to place onsets within a cardinality-16 metric space. And because rap songs maintain tempo, these onsets will arrive at a discrete and steady pace. This is the meaning of “flowing to a beat.” In contrast, the rhythm of speech does not demand or support a metric framework of equally spaced durations. For many years, phoneticians such as Kenneth Pike (1945) and David Abercrombie (1967) asserted that the durations between syllables or groups of syllables were “more or less equal,” but subsequent decades of research have shown the rhythm of speech to be fundamentally non-isochronous.(2) Given the continuous variability of syllable durations in the rhythm of speech and the ideally discrete durations of the rhythm of music, I propose that spans of rapping can be characterized as speech-rhythm or music-rhythmic based on the extent to which they are “quantizable” to a cardinality-16 metric grid. I will measure this “quantizability” in terms of the average distance between a collection of syllables and a cardinality-16 grid.(3) [1.6] In Section 2 of this article, I provide an example of speech-rhythmic vs. music-rhythmic flow and describe how one might establish such a contrast analytically. In Section 3, I draw analogies between the meaning of the lyrics and contrastive flow styles in one verse of rapping, the second verse of Kendrick Lamar’s “Momma” from the 2015 release To Pimp a Bu erfly. Much of the album centers on Lamar’s suspicions that his wealth may be undeserved (“u”), fleeting (“Wesley's Theory”), morally corrupting (“For Sale?”), or alienating (“How Much a Dollar Cost”). “Momma” tries to refute these suspicions by focusing on Lamar's earned skills as an emcee (Verse 1), his fragile expertise (Verse 2), and his connection to ancestors (Verse 3). I will argue that Lamar’s treatment of speech-rhythmic vs. music-rhythmic flows rests on the question of whether mistrust of his success is warranted. Beyond the appropriateness of this particular verse for analysis, Lamar is especially appropriate given his wide-ranging and a ested abilities to use a variety of rhythmic practices.(4) Besides “flowing fast” and “flowing slow,” Lamar, particularly on Bu erfly, flows to beats whose influences range from free jazz to R&B, funk, and hip hop.(5) Furthermore, “Momma” is an especially appropriate track in which to examine contrasts in speechand music-like delivery, as it has underlying instrumental tracks that obscure the placement of the beat. 2. Speech-rhythmic vs. music-rhythmic flow: quantizing “Alright” vs. “Momma” [2.1] To establish this contrast between speech-rhythmic and music-rhythmic flow, consider the delivery of two lines from Bu erfly, one from the beginning of the first verse of “Alright” (0:37–0:41) and another from the middle of the second verse of “Momma” (2:09–2:12). Examples 1 and 2 represent several views of the rhythm of these lines. [NB: Examples and Audio Excerpts share numbers.] Examples 1a and 2a (upper left) show the durations

中文翻译：

---

肯德里克·拉马尔 (Kendrick Lamar) 的《妈妈》第二节中的抒情、节奏和不对齐

经过二十年对说唱歌词和流的分析，以音乐为导向的写作和以文学为导向的写作之间仍然存在分歧。前者将说唱音乐分析为没有文本的音乐，而后者将其分析为没有音乐的文本，这只是略微夸张。本文通过将肯德里克·拉马尔 (Kendrick Lamar) 的节奏传达细节与其歌词的含义联系起来，开始弥合这一分歧，重点关注 To Pimp a Bu erfly (2015) 中“妈妈”的第二节。特别是，我提出了测量和可视化音节开始（即流动）与伴随的乐器流（即节拍）中的事件对齐的方法。随后，在检查这首诗的三行时，我记录了节奏对齐与歌词中的活力、道德正确和知识主题之间的类比。在演示一种节奏传递可以肯定歌词表达意义的方式时，我希望提供一种工具，使对节奏、韵律和意义感兴趣的嘻哈学者有时可以相互交谈，而不是相互忽略。第 25 卷，第 1 期，2019 年 5 月 版权所有 © 2019 Society for Music Theory 1. 通过“语音-节奏”与“音乐-节奏”流重新审视说唱中的文本-音乐关系 [1.1] 在他 2008 年发表在 Music Theory Online 的文章中，凯尔亚当斯指出，现有的分析文本（古典）音乐的方法不适用于说唱音乐。在大多数古典曲目中，作曲家为音乐设置了预先存在的文本，这邀请分析家调查该预先存在的文本的含义如何映射到新创作的音乐的含义上。根据亚当斯的说法，在说唱音乐中，音乐的组成（即，由主持人或制作人创作的“节拍”）通常先于文本的组成（即，由司仪创作的“流程”），从而破坏了从音乐到意义的映射文本。此外，亚当斯还引用了几个意义不明的说唱歌词的例子，破坏了将其意义与音乐意义联系起来的任何空洞：不加判断地，可以说[A Tribe Called Quest的歌词的字面意义情景”] 难以辨别。虽然显然是为了幽默，但这节经文既没有一个总体主题，也没有一个可识别的情节，也没有系统和一致地使用图像。(2008, [4]) 因为，在他看来，音乐往往先于文本，而且文本的含义可能“难以辨别，” Adams 建议分析师应该关注说唱声音的节奏如何对乐器流的各个方面做出反应，而不是这种节奏如何与文本的含义相互作用。其他学者对作为主持人和制作人之间反复合作的说唱作曲过程提供了更多细微差别，其中曲目的音乐内容既暗示了说唱歌手的流程的各个方面，又对其做出了回应（威廉姆斯 2009，[4] ; Manabe 2009, 309).(1) 但即使这个过程比 Adams 承认的更复杂，他对文本/音乐关系的传统方法的批评仍然成立：当且仅当文本歌词先于音乐的所有特征（包括说唱歌手声音的特征）。在大多数情况下，这似乎不太可能。[1. 2] 亚当斯接着证明了声音节奏和文本节奏之间的许多丰富的对应关系。随后，他对检查此类对应关系的呼吁取得了成效，正如 Oliver Kautny（2015 年）、Nathaniel Condit-Schul（2016 年）和 Ohriner（2016 年）所证明的那样。在我为这项奖学金鼓掌的同时，我想在这篇文章中回到亚当斯搁置的问题：说唱声音的节奏如何支持说唱歌词的含义？我提出这个问题并不是因为为古典音乐设计的传统分析模式应该在说唱音乐中找到应用。相反，我认为避免 flow 的节奏与其文本之间的关系会加剧以音乐为导向和以文学为导向的嘻哈学术之间的分歧。前者将说唱音乐分析为没有文本的音乐，而后者将其分析为没有音乐的文本，这只是略微夸张。[1.3] 尽管人们可以检查说唱声音节奏的许多特征并将它们与歌词内容联系起来，但我将重点关注节奏似语音的说唱跨度与节奏似音乐的说唱跨度之间的并置. 我主要通过下一节介绍的技术测量音节或说唱与乐器流的度量网格之间的非对齐来进行区分。通过“语音节奏”与“音乐节奏”流，我借鉴了说唱音乐中艺术家、粉丝和评论家之间的广泛讨论，认为说唱的音节应该符合以每个小节中 16 个位置为特征的度量框架。我将这个框架称为“基数 16 度量空间”。在关于说唱的教学文本中，有抱负的司仪被指示在这个框架内放置音节。例如，Paul Edwards (2009, 63) 指出“与诗歌的节奏不同，歌曲的流动必须与音乐同步——歌词的节奏必须符合音乐的基本节奏。” 后来，他更明确：这是一个非常重要的注意点：一个重读音节必须与一个小节的四个节拍中的每个节拍同时说出来。. . 在四个节拍中的每个节拍上重读一个音节，使歌词具有与音乐相同的基本节奏脉动，并使它们保持节奏。(71–2; 强调原创) [1.4] Dead Presidents 的司仪 stic.man (2005, 32) 同样指导有抱负的说唱歌手在写歌词之前吸收节拍的公制网格，说明“当您没有先拍下节拍时，您就不会以已知的速度或声速进行书写。这意味着你选择的话。. . 可能不适合您最终为歌曲选择的节拍。” 在 Ice-T 的纪录片《Something from Nothing: The Art of Rap》中，有影响力的司仪 Rakim 甚至绘制了一个公制空间的图表来创作歌词：我从纸上的 16 个点开始，bam，bam ，砰，砰，砰。我的事情是，如果四个小节这么长，. . . 我看到它们之间有四个条形图，在其中，我可以放置这么多单词和这么多音节。. . 我可以把它带到在这四个小节中没有其他词可以放入的地步。(2012, 20:36) [1.5] Rakim 断言没有其他词适合说：当然，虽然他是，能够比基数 16 空间更快地发音单词，他认为这样做在文体上是不合适的。这种公制组织有一些公认的例外，包括在酒吧中放置 12 或 24 个音节的“三重流”，现在通常与起源于亚特兰大的说唱音乐相关联。但是，除非流始终以三元组为特征，否则假定艺术家是将起始点放置在基数为 16 的度量空间内的空想。而且因为说唱歌曲保持节奏，所以这些开始将以离散和稳定的速度到达。这就是“按节拍流动”的意思。相比之下，语音节奏不要求或支持等间隔持续时间的度量框架。很多年了，Kenneth Pike (1945) 和 David Abercrombie (1967) 等语音学家断言，音节或音节组之间的持续时间“或多或少相等”，但随后几十年的研究表明，语音的节奏从根本上是非等时的。 (2) 鉴于语音节奏中音节持续时间的连续可变性和音乐节奏的理想离散持续时间，我建议说唱的跨度可以根据它们的程度来表征为语音节奏或音乐节奏。可以“量化”到基数为 16 的度量网格。我将根据音节集合和基数为 16 的网格之间的平均距离来衡量这种“可量化性”。(3) [1.6] 在本文的第 2 节中，我提供了语音节奏与语音节奏的示例。音乐节奏流，并描述如何通过分析建立这种对比。在第 3 节中，我将歌词的含义与 rapping 的一节中对比的流线风格进行类比，即 Kendrick Lamar 2015 年发行的 To Pimp a Bu erfly 中的“妈妈”的第二节。专辑的大部分内容都集中在 Lamar 的怀疑上，即他的财富可能不值得（“u”）、转瞬即逝（“Wesley's Theory”）、道德败坏（“For Sale?”）或疏远（“How much a Dollar Cost”）。“妈妈”试图通过关注 Lamar 作为司仪的技能（第 1 节）、他脆弱的专业知识（第 2 节）以及他与祖先的联系（第 3 节）来驳斥这些怀疑。我会争辩说，拉马尔对语音节奏与音乐节奏流动的处理取决于是否有理由不信任他的成功。除了适合分析这节特定的诗节之外，拉马尔尤其适合使用各种节奏练习的广泛和公认的能力。 (4) 除了“快速流动”和“缓慢流动”之外，拉马尔，特别是在 Bu erfly，流向其影响范围从自由爵士到 R&B、放克和嘻哈的节拍。 (5) 此外，“妈妈”是一首特别合适的曲目，用于检查语音和类似音乐的传递中的对比，因为它具有潜在的器乐使节拍位置变得模糊的曲目。2. 语音节奏与音乐节奏流：量化“好”与“妈妈”[2.1] 为了建立语音节奏和音乐节奏流之间的这种对比，请考虑来自 Bu erfly 的两条线的传递，其中一条来自“好吧”第一节的开头（0:37-0：41）和另一个来自“妈妈”（2：09-2：12）的第二节经文的中间。示例 1 和示例 2 代表了这些线条节奏的几种视图。[注意：示例和音频摘录共享数字。] 示例 1a 和 2a（左上角）显示持续时间