the language of a large portion of every good poem, even of the most elevated character, must necessarily, except with reference to the metre, in no respect differ from that of good prose,
in order to have good prose, the language can not differ from it. But why restrain one's self to that, when you can have language that differs from prose and still be well structured.
I will here adduce a short composition of Gray, who was at the head of those who, by their reasonings, have attempted to widen the space of separation betwixt Prose and Metrical composition, and was more than any other man curiously elaborate in the structure of his own poetic diction
Here WW is adducing (citing as evidence) that there were others that tried to make a distinction between prose and meter.
It will easily be perceived, that the only part of this Sonnet which is of any value is the lines printed in Italics; it is equally obvious, that, except in the rhyme, and in the use of the single word ’fruitless’ for fruitlessly, which is so far a defect, the language of these lines does in no respect differ from that of prose
WW is essentially saying that the language he is using throughout is not different from prose. And that to any reader that is perusing a lot over the language is not seeing the obvious connection to prose.
have been foolishly repeated by bad Poets, till such feelings of disgust are connected with them as it is scarcely possible by any art of association to overpower
Why is WW throwing so much shade? And what makes him a better poet than others? It seems he is referring to someone he knows and thinks badly of them. Why is he restraining himself? if you're going to throw shade, might as well be a poet that does whatever he wants.
it is relatively short
It seems as though it is shortlived from the outside, but with deeper thought it feels as if it is a long moment that is being experienced.