Now that someone has posted the rhythmic patterns for dances (dance suite, etc.) from Wikipedia I kind of find those examples laughable.
... (isorhythm BTW was not fixed rhythmic patterns, but rhythms pulled from other works,...
Thats not at all what isorhythm is.
...There are certain Dance forms, such as a Sarabande, that has an emphasis on Beat 2, so often has a Rhythm like quarter followed by dotted quarter, followed by 8th, but it's really only the emphasis on 2 that's important. Siciliienes often have a dotted 8th followed by a 16th followed by an 8th in 6/8 meter.
But when we encounter either of those rhythms elsewhere, we don't say "it's a Sicelliene" rhythm or a "Sarabande" rhythm.
What...? "We" certainly do!
A piece doesn't have to be titled a "dance" in order to invoke one...and we're not just talking Baroque Dance Suites either. Large forms (e.g. Opera, and Symphony---especially after about 1800 when composers started to write programatically---) used these elements in their craft. Subtleties such as these are what makes art beautiful and interesting on all levels, basic as well as deep! Knowledge of form is extremely important in interpretation and understanding composers' intents.
"Stock" rhythms (and progressions, and patterns) are more the realm of "folk music" and only when folk forms (such as dances) were emulated in Classical music did those things appear.
Not so...the history of Court Dance is much better documented than that of folk dance. Think "Ballet." These forms may have evolved from folk dances, but are often so far removed from the original that their pedigree is untraceable.
I feel like the OP was looking more for a list of specifics, rather than broader things and as I hopefully implied, Dance forms are about the closest we get. Still, the variety is so great, it sometimes is best to say "emphasis on beat 2" rather than give any specific rhythm.
and Dance forms are used all the time
in "Art Music", and have been since at least the Renaissance. Whats wrong with trying to understand them? This can only benefit a performer.
As I mentioned earlier: even if the piece was not meant to be actually danced, these dance forms, while unfamiliar today, were instantly recognizable
to the audiences of the time. This is one of the ways that composers were able to control the tension of a piece, balancing the unifying elements of a familiar form against whatever else they decided to write.
Of course the OP was looking for specifics which really don't exist, but remember the much-maligned OP seems to be a classical music novice. He/she is also an adult, and presumbably capable of understanding that concepts often have different degrees of specification, from basic to complex. Beginners as well as advanced players can benefit from an awareness of subtleties.
Shall I go on, or do you understand why this is a stupid question?
So, this is definitely NOT a stupid question, and honestly, I feel there is too much of this type of response in this forum. Laugh all you want to amongst your friends in private, but publicly denigrating someone who asks for advice is just plain bad manners, and not at all helpful to the mission of promoting "Art Music." Our poor OP might be uninformed, but they are NOT being malicious; they are simply trying to expand their horizons. I don't necessarily agree with the way they are trying to educate themselves, but at least they are
Hopefully, after reading these responses, the OP will be starting to comprehend the vastness of the subject, and begin doing some serious listening, and some practical work, as Tom Poore and Lawler suggested.
2015 John H. Dick
1994 Larry Breslin ("Deerhead")
1952 Vincente Tatay