In 2015, as in 2014, there were two panels on verse theory at the annual convention of the Association for Slavic, East European and Eurasian Studies (ASEEES), which was held in Philadelphia. The following remarks are devoted to those two sessions. It should also be noted, however, that during the several days of the conference several hundred panels were held and more than 1000 individual papers were read, dealing with all fields related to the study of Central Europe, Russia, and Eurasia. Among those panels were several individual papers that touched on aspects of verse theory, particularly at a session dealing with the poetics of translation. On the whole, then, there was a greater level of interest paid to poetics in 2015 than at most other ASEEES conferences over the past decade. The first of the panels that focused on verse theory, “Russian Poetry: Forms and Functions”, began with a paper by Michael Wachtel, of Princeton University, on “The Problem with Hypermetrical Stress.” He noted at the outset that scholars have for the most part not accounted for hypermetrical stress in their statistical analysis of verse, even though they recognize that it can have a significant impact on the rhythm. He then provided several examples of poems in which hypermetrical stress either creates variation in the rhythm or complicates the perception of meter, citing instances in works by Khodasevich, Tsvetaeva (who, as many have observed, makes extensive use of hypermetrical stress) and Gippius. For instance, in the case of Tsvetaeva’s «Читатели газет» hypermetrical stress plays an important role in imparting variety to the poem’s otherwise insistent iambic trimeter rhythm. Special attention was paid to «Что есть грех?» by Gippius. The iambic rhythm that characterizes the poem as a whole does not become clear until the third stanza; indeed, thanks to omission of stress on the second, sixth and eighth syllables along with the presence of hypermetrical stress on the first syllable, the first line (“Грех – маломыслие и малодеянье”) is more readily perceived as dactylic tetrameter with omitted stress on the third ictus. Line 5 has exactly the same stressing as line 1, while the remaining six lines in the first two stanzas are stressed only on the

中文翻译：

---

2015年ASEEES公约（2015年11月，美国费城）的验证

与2014年一样，2015年，在费城举行的斯拉夫，东欧和欧亚研究协会（ASEEES）年度大会上，有两个关于诗歌理论的小组讨论。下面的评论专门针对这两个会议。但是，还应该指出的是，在会议的几天中，举行了数百个小组讨论，阅读了1000多篇论文，涉及与中欧，俄罗斯和欧亚大陆研究有关的所有领域。在这些小组讨论中，有几篇单独的论文涉及诗歌理论方面，尤其是在有关翻译诗学的会议上。总体而言，与过去十年中大多数其他ASEEES会议相比，2015年对诗学的关注度更高。专注于诗歌理论的第一个小组，“俄罗斯诗歌：形式和功能”始于普林斯顿大学的迈克尔•瓦克特尔（Michael Wachtel）的一篇论文，题为“超压应力问题”。他从一开始就指出，学者们在对诗歌的统计分析中大部分都没有考虑到过高的压力，尽管他们意识到这可能会对节奏产生重大影响。然后，他列举了几首诗歌的例子，其中过分强调会导致节奏变化或使计量器的感觉复杂化，并引用了Khodasevich，Tsvetaeva（许多人都观察到，充分利用了过分强调）和Gippius的作品实例。例如，在茨维塔耶娃（Tsvetaeva）的《итателигазет》中，超音调压力在赋予诗歌原本坚持不变的歧义三分音符节奏方面起着重要作用。特别注意了«Чтоестьгрех？» 由Gippius撰写。直到第三节，才能够清楚地体现出诗歌的整体韵律。实际上，由于省略了第二，第六和第八个音节的重音，并且在第一个音节上存在超测音应力，因此第一行（“Грех–маломыслиеималодеянье”）更容易被认为是指形四面体，而省略了重音第三次发作。第5行的压力与第1行的压力完全相同，而前两个节中的其余六行仅在 第六个音节和第八个音节以及第一个音节，第一行（“Грех–маломыслиеималодеянье”）上存在超音高压力时，更容易被认为是四齿形四分音符，而第三个音节上没有应力。第5行的压力与第1行的压力完全相同，而前两个节中的其余六行仅在 第六个音节和第八个音节以及第一个音节，第一行（“Грех–маломыслиеималодеянье”）上存在超音高压力时，更容易被认为是四齿形四分音符，而第三个音节上没有应力。第5行的压力与第1行的压力完全相同，而前两个节中的其余六行仅在