@admin

I tried to reply to the comments on https://middangeard.org.uk/aglardh/blog/sindarin-stress-a-muta-cum-liquida-rule (Thanks for notifying me btw), but while Aglardh reports that the comment was submitted successfully, it doesn’t show up on the post, even if I give it a couple of minuets to recompute the server cache. Here is what I tried to answer:

@Atwe

Thanks! (Also thank you for telling me about the other comment? Is there some way to get notified about comments automatically or do I just regularly need to check for comments everywhere?)

@Arnon

"In Imlád|ris it dwélls" is certainly a possible scanning for this line as well, and is in fact how I myself usually read that line. In the paragraph I wrote "In Ím|ladrìs |it dwélls" I repeat the common argument for a muta cum liquida rule made with this line. The reason why people argue for that stress pattern is, that all other verses contain three raises, so the assumption would be that the same holds true for the "Imladris" line. I agree with you that having only two stressed syllables in this verse doesn’t take away from the poem, but didn’t discuss it in the article, because I felt it would be too tangential and I wasn’t sure if "In Imlád|ris it dwélls" is just my own idiosyncratic version of the line, since I couldn’t find it discussed anywhere else. Since you also suggested that alternative stress pattern, I think I’ll add it to the article now.