[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza - Afterword

[mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk]

   By the way, the video of the coronation (thanks, Monica) was a bit
   startling.  I would not have been surprised had the new Queen turned
   tail and fled in terror, what with all that shouting at her set to 
some
   truly scary music.

   RA

Are you referring to Parry's "I was glad"? It is a standard piece in 
the Anglican repertoire performed on every ceremonial occasion.
Monica
 __

   From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu <lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu> on 
behalf
   of Ron Andrico <praelu...@hotmail.com>
   Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 12:25 PM
   To: Mumin Lute
   Cc: Lute Society of America
   Subject: [LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

  Hello Tomoko:
  You initiated an interesting discussion, but I'm not certain 
you've
  actually gotten an answer to your original question, which
  (paraphrased) had to do with how one should pronounce the Latin 
bits
   in
  the three-part song cycle in Dowland's _Second Booke of Songs or
   Ayres_
  (1600). The cycle, numbers VI-VIII in the book, begins with 
"Tymes
  eldest sonne, olde age the heyre of ease", the second part 
beginning
   "
  Then sit thee downe and say thy Nunc demittis".  Your question
  asked how to pronounce "Vivat Eliza", which is in the third song 
in
   the
  cycle.  The text of this section is:
  When others sings Venite exultemus
  Stand by and turne to Noli emulari,
  For quare fremuerunt vse oremus
  Viuat Eliza, for an aue mari,
  And teach those swains that liues about thy cell,
  To say Amen when thou dost pray so well.
  The first clue lies in the spelling of text, associated with the
  constantly-retiring Sir Henry Lee.  Apart from the antique
   substitution
  of letter "u" for "v", the spellings are sometimes different from
   the
  accepted normal Latin spellings.  Another clue is the rhyme 
scheme,
   and
  "Ave Maria" must rhyme with "emulari", meaning that you must drop
   the
  final "a" of Maria.
  There is absolutely no reason to doubt the pronunciation used by
   David
  Thomas in the circa 1980 recording by the Consort of Musicke.  
There
  have been no recent breakthroughs in establishing a more 
"authentic"
  pronunciation of English Latin from 1600, other than the 
(specious)
  application of French vowel sounds used by choirs in singing 
Byrd.
  There is very little substance to justify this approach applied
  wholesale.
  For those who may be serious about authentic Tudor pronunciation 
(of
   a
  single dialect), an  important and currently overlooked source is
   the
  autobiography of Thomas Whythorne (1528–1595).  Whythorne 
wrote in
   what
  he called a "new orthografye", spelling words as they sounded.
   Oxford
  University Press published both the original and an edition
   translated
  into more modern English.  Apart from Wythorne's very interesting
  observations on the life of a musician in Tudor England, his work 
is
   a
  valuable resource for those who want to understand "authentic"
  pronunciation.
  A final word: When denizens of the British Isles pronounce 
foreign
  words as they may be incorporated into a sentence (or song), the
   words
  often sound very different from the expected original language.  
And
  Americans just make everything sound American.
  RA

__
  From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu <lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu> on
   behalf
  of Mumin Lute <lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com>
  Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 10:44 AM
  To: David van Ooijen
  Cc: Lute Society of America
  Subject: [LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza
 Dear David san
 I didn't think of HIP, but am glad that the topic moved on to 
it
   and
  to
 know the latest perspective of experts' ... :-) I know Robert
  Spencer's
 opinion on singing early modern English which I am not trying 
to
 question at the moment.
 I should have asked 'received pronunciation' (?) of Laten in
  Anglican
 church of today..
  I am not sure about "Eliza" in latin. "Vivat" is to be
   pronounced
  like
 vee-vat as far as I know... ( other Latin phrases appear in 
the
   song
 didn't sound that English-like in the Rooley's recording.)
 Tomoko
 2017/04/24 0:48 "David van Ooijen" <[1]davidvanooijen@gmail.
com>:
  HIP 2.0 (?!)
  Wa chotto hen desu, yo!
  ***
  David van Ooijen
  [1][2]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
  [2][3]www.davidvanooijen.nl
 

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[lutenist.mumin.koide gmail]

> I think Eliza will be pronounced in English, regardless of the
>   singer's hipness
Given the context that "Eliza" should be valued over "Maria"..., it probably 
be.. :D 

>"Ave Maria" must rhyme with "emulari", meaning that you must drop the
>   final "a" of Maria.

Yes, I had to drop it...! I misread it, being distracted by the intention of 
the line .. (sing out "Eliza" instead of catholic "Maria".. )
Thank you for thorough explanation!

> At the queen's coronation the acclamation sung by the boys of Westminster 
> School as she arrived at the Abbey was "Vivat regina Elizabetha" pronounced 
> vyvat regyna as I recall.

Thank you! so it was. I found the recording of the coronation:
https://youtu.be/aGLN1kREJ2Q?t=3m8s

> book that was published a few years ago by Indiana University Press entitled 
> 'Singing Early Music'.

Thank you all again for very informative answers!

Tomoko

-Original Message-
From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of 
mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 10:31 PM
To: lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
Cc: LutList <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza



   I should have asked 'received pronunciation' (?) of Laten in Anglican
   church of today..

There is no received pronunciation of Latin in the Anglican Church of today.  
Latin is not the language normally used in the Anglican church today. Nor was 
it in the Elizabethan era. If it is used it is entirely a matter for whoever is 
conducting the service to decide how it is pronounced. 

At the queen's coronation the acclamation sung by the boys of Westminster 
School as she arrived at the Abbey was "Vivat regina Elizabetha" pronounced 
vyvat regyna as I recall.

Monica (paid up Anglican)

 

I am not sure about "Eliza" in latin. "Vivat" is to be pronounced like
   vee-vat as far as I know... ( other Latin phrases appear in the song
   didn't sound that English-like in the Rooley's recording.)
   Tomoko
   2017/04/24 0:48 "David van Ooijen" <[1]davidvanooi...@gmail.com>:

HIP 2.0 (?!)
Wa chotto hen desu, yo!
***
David van Ooijen
[1][2]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
[2][3]www.davidvanooijen.nl
***
On 23 April 2017 at 17:44, Jerzy Zak <[3][4]jurek...@gmail.com>
 wrote:
  Dear Tomoko,
  Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the left,
 choose
  a language you think it is in, and press the little speaker
  underneath. Then keep changing languages until you think it
 rhymes
  best with âAve MarÃa'. Stupid but works ;)
  Jerzy
  â
  > On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
  <[4][5]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:
  >
  > Dear lute-list,
  >
  > Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza"
 in
  Dowland's composition
  > to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
  >
  > I thought it could be " viÃvà ¦t ("Vivat" read in
 ecclesiastical
  Latin?) and " ÃiÃzÃ" (with this pronunciation it rhymes with
 "Ave
  Maria" ) though many sang it " vaà ªvà ¦t Ãlà ¬Ã ªzà " for 
which
 I
  couldn't find any reason...
  >
  > Tomoko
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > To get on or off this list see list information at
  > [5][6]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

--
 References
1. mailto:[7]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
2.  [8]http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
3. mailto:[9]jurek...@gmail.com
4. mailto:[10]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
5.  [11]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   2017/04/24 0:48 "David van Ooijen" <[12]davidvanooi...@gmail.com>:

HIP 2.0 (?!)
Wa chotto hen desu, yo!

  ***
  David van Ooijen
  [1][13]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
  [2][14]www.davidvanooijen.nl
  ***

  On 23 April 2017 at 17:44, Jerzy Zak <[3][15]jurek...@gmail.com>
   wrote:
Dear Tomoko,
Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the left,
   choose
a language you think it is in, and press the little speaker
underneath. Then keep changing languages until you think it rhymes

  best with âAve MarÃa'. Stupid but works ;)
  Jerzy
  â

> On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail

<[4]

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk]

   I should have asked 'received pronunciation' (?) of Laten in 
Anglican
   church of today..

There is no received pronunciation of Latin in the Anglican Church of 
today.  Latin is not the language normally used in the Anglican church 
today. Nor was it in the Elizabethan era. If it is used it is entirely 
a matter for whoever is conducting the service to decide how it is 
pronounced. 

At the queen's coronation the acclamation sung by the boys of 
Westminster School as she arrived at the Abbey was "Vivat regina 
Elizabetha" pronounced vyvat regyna as I recall.

Monica (paid up Anglican)

 

I am not sure about "Eliza" in latin. "Vivat" is to be pronounced 
like
   vee-vat as far as I know... ( other Latin phrases appear in the song
   didn't sound that English-like in the Rooley's recording.)
   Tomoko
   2017/04/24 0:48 "David van Ooijen" <[1]davidvanooi...@gmail.com>:

HIP 2.0 (?!)
Wa chotto hen desu, yo!
***
David van Ooijen
[1][2]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
[2][3]www.davidvanooijen.nl
***
On 23 April 2017 at 17:44, Jerzy Zak <[3][4]jurek...@gmail.com>
 wrote:
  Dear Tomoko,
  Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the left,
 choose
  a language you think it is in, and press the little speaker
  underneath. Then keep changing languages until you think it
 rhymes
  best with âAve MarÃa'. Stupid but works ;)
  Jerzy
  â
  > On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
  <[4][5]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:
  >
  > Dear lute-list,
  >
  > Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza"
 in
  Dowland's composition
  > to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
  >
  > I thought it could be " viÃvà ¦t ("Vivat" read in
 ecclesiastical
  Latin?) and " ÃiÃzÃ" (with this pronunciation it rhymes 
with
 "Ave
  Maria" ) though many sang it " vaà ªvà ¦t Ãlà ¬Ã ªzÃ
" for which
 I
  couldn't find any reason...
  >
  > Tomoko
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > To get on or off this list see list information at
  > [5][6]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

--
 References
1. mailto:[7]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
2.  [8]http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
3. mailto:[9]jurek...@gmail.com
4. mailto:[10]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
5.  [11]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   2017/04/24 0:48 "David van Ooijen" <[12]davidvanooi...@gmail.com>:

HIP 2.0 (?!)
Wa chotto hen desu, yo!

  ***
  David van Ooijen
  [1][13]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
  [2][14]www.davidvanooijen.nl
  ***

  On 23 April 2017 at 17:44, Jerzy Zak <[3][15]jurek...@gmail.com>
   wrote:
Dear Tomoko,
Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the left,
   choose
a language you think it is in, and press the little speaker
underneath. Then keep changing languages until you think it 
rhymes

  best with âAve MarÃa'. Stupid but works ;)
  Jerzy
  â

> On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail

<[4][16]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear lute-list,
>
> Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza" 
in
Dowland's composition
> to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
>

  > I thought it could be " viÃvà ¦t ("Vivat" read in
 ecclesiastical
  Latin?) and " ÃiÃzÃ" (with this pronunciation it rhymes 
with
 "Ave
  Maria" ) though many sang it " vaà ªvà ¦t Ãlà ¬Ã ªzÃ
" for which
 I

couldn't find any reason...
>
> Tomoko
>
>
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at

  > [5][17]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


  --
   References
  1. mailto:[18]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
  2. [19]http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/

3. mailto:[20]jurek...@gmail.com
4. mailto:[21]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
5. [22]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   2. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   3. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
   4. mailto:jurek...@gmail.com
   5. mailto:lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
   6. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   7. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   8. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
   9. mailto:jurek...@gmail.com
  10. mailto:lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
  11. 

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[Matthew Daillie]

I forgot to mention an interesting book that was published a few years 
ago by Indiana University Press entitled 'Singing Early Music'. It is 
edited by Timothy McGee and covers the pronunciation of European 
Languages in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance. There are chapters on 
Anglo-Latin and French Latin as well as a CD with examples.


Best,
Matthew

On 24/04/2017 12:44, Mumin Lute wrote:

Dear David san
I didn't think of HIP, but am glad that the topic moved on to it and to
know the latest perspective of experts' ...:-)  I know Robert Spencer's
opinion on singing early modern English which I am not trying to
question at the moment.
I should have asked 'received pronunciation' (?) of Laten in Anglican
church of today..
 I am not sure about "Eliza" in latin. "Vivat" is to be pronounced like
vee-vat as far as I know... ( other Latin phrases appear in the song
didn't sound t





To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[David van Ooijen]

   Mumin-chan
   Wakata. I think Eliza will be pronounced in English, regardless of the
   singer's hipness
   David.

   ***
   David van Ooijen
   [1]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   [2]www.davidvanooijen.nl
   ***
   On 24 April 2017 at 12:44, Mumin Lute
   <[3]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear David san
I didn't think of HIP, but am glad that the topic moved on to it
 and to
know the latest perspective of experts' ... :-) I know Robert
 Spencer's
opinion on singing early modern English which I am not trying to
question at the moment.
I should have asked 'received pronunciation' (?) of Laten in
 Anglican
church of today..
 I am not sure about "Eliza" in latin. "Vivat" is to be
 pronounced like
vee-vat as far as I know... ( other Latin phrases appear in the
 song
didn't sound that English-like in the Rooley's recording.)
Tomoko
2017/04/24 0:48 "David van Ooijen"
 <[1][4]davidvanooi...@gmail.com>:
 HIP 2.0 (?!)
 Wa chotto hen desu, yo!
 ***
 David van Ooijen
 [1][2][5]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
 [2][3][6]www.davidvanooijen.nl
 ***
 On 23 April 2017 at 17:44, Jerzy Zak
 <[3][4][7]jurek...@gmail.com>
  wrote:
   Dear Tomoko,
   Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the
 left,
  choose
   a language you think it is in, and press the little
 speaker
   underneath. Then keep changing languages until you think
 it
  rhymes
   best with à ¢Ave MarÃa'. Stupid but works ;)
   Jerzy
   Ã ¢
   > On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
   <[4][5][8]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:
   >
   > Dear lute-list,
   >
   > Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat
 Eliza"
  in
   Dowland's composition
   > to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
   >
   > I thought it could be " viÃvà ¦t ("Vivat" read in
  ecclesiastical
   Latin?) and " ÃiÃzÃ" (with this pronunciation it rhymes
 with
  "Ave
   Maria" ) though many sang it " vaà ªvà ¦t Ãlà ¬Ã ªzÃ" 
for
 which
  I
   couldn't find any reason...
   >
   > Tomoko
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > To get on or off this list see list information at
   > [5][6][9]http://www.cs.dartmouth.
 edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
 --
  References
 1. mailto:[7][10]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
 2.   [8][11]http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
 3. mailto:[9][12]jurek...@gmail.com
 4. mailto:[10][13]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
 5.   [11][14]http://www.cs.dartmouth.
 edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
2017/04/24 0:48 "David van Ooijen"
 <[12][15]davidvanooi...@gmail.com>:
 HIP 2.0 (?!)
 Wa chotto hen desu, yo!
   ***
   David van Ooijen
   [1][13][16]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   [2][14][17]www.davidvanooijen.nl
   ***
   On 23 April 2017 at 17:44, Jerzy Zak
 <[3][15][18]jurek...@gmail.com>
wrote:
 Dear Tomoko,
 Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the
 left,
choose
 a language you think it is in, and press the little speaker
 underneath. Then keep changing languages until you think it
 rhymes
   best with à ¢Ave MarÃa'. Stupid but works ;)
   Jerzy
   Ã ¢
 > On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
 <[4][16][19]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:
 >
 > Dear lute-list,
 >
 > Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat
 Eliza" in
 Dowland's composition
 > to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
 >
   > I thought it could be " viÃvà ¦t ("Vivat" read in
  ecclesiastical
   Latin?) and " ÃiÃzÃ" (with this pronunciation it rhymes
 with
  "Ave
   Maria" ) though many sang it " vaà ªvà ¦t Ãlà ¬Ã ªzÃ" 
for
 which
  I
 couldn't find any reason...
 >
 > Tomoko
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > To get on or off this list see list 

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[Mumin Lute]

   Dear David san
   I didn't think of HIP, but am glad that the topic moved on to it and to
   know the latest perspective of experts' ... :-) I know Robert Spencer's
   opinion on singing early modern English which I am not trying to
   question at the moment.
   I should have asked 'received pronunciation' (?) of Laten in Anglican
   church of today..
I am not sure about "Eliza" in latin. "Vivat" is to be pronounced like
   vee-vat as far as I know... ( other Latin phrases appear in the song
   didn't sound that English-like in the Rooley's recording.)
   Tomoko
   2017/04/24 0:48 "David van Ooijen" <[1]davidvanooi...@gmail.com>:

HIP 2.0 (?!)
Wa chotto hen desu, yo!
***
David van Ooijen
[1][2]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
[2][3]www.davidvanooijen.nl
***
On 23 April 2017 at 17:44, Jerzy Zak <[3][4]jurek...@gmail.com>
 wrote:
  Dear Tomoko,
  Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the left,
 choose
  a language you think it is in, and press the little speaker
  underneath. Then keep changing languages until you think it
 rhymes
  best with âAve MarÃa'. Stupid but works ;)
  Jerzy
  â
  > On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
  <[4][5]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:
  >
  > Dear lute-list,
  >
  > Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza"
 in
  Dowland's composition
  > to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
  >
  > I thought it could be " viÃvà ¦t ("Vivat" read in
 ecclesiastical
  Latin?) and " ÃiÃzÃ" (with this pronunciation it rhymes with
 "Ave
  Maria" ) though many sang it " vaà ªvà ¦t Ãlà ¬Ã ªzÃ" for 
which
 I
  couldn't find any reason...
  >
  > Tomoko
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > To get on or off this list see list information at
  > [5][6]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
 References
1. mailto:[7]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
2.  [8]http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
3. mailto:[9]jurek...@gmail.com
4. mailto:[10]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
5.  [11]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   2017/04/24 0:48 "David van Ooijen" <[12]davidvanooi...@gmail.com>:

HIP 2.0 (?!)
Wa chotto hen desu, yo!

  ***
  David van Ooijen
  [1][13]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
  [2][14]www.davidvanooijen.nl
  ***

  On 23 April 2017 at 17:44, Jerzy Zak <[3][15]jurek...@gmail.com>
   wrote:
Dear Tomoko,
Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the left,
   choose
a language you think it is in, and press the little speaker
underneath. Then keep changing languages until you think it rhymes

  best with âAve MarÃa'. Stupid but works ;)
  Jerzy
  â

> On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail

<[4][16]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear lute-list,
>
> Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza" in
Dowland's composition
> to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
>

  > I thought it could be " viÃvà ¦t ("Vivat" read in
 ecclesiastical
  Latin?) and " ÃiÃzÃ" (with this pronunciation it rhymes with
 "Ave
  Maria" ) though many sang it " vaà ªvà ¦t Ãlà ¬Ã ªzÃ" for 
which
 I

couldn't find any reason...
>
> Tomoko
>
>
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at

  > [5][17]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

  --
   References
  1. mailto:[18]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
  2. [19]http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/

3. mailto:[20]jurek...@gmail.com
4. mailto:[21]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
5. [22]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   2. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   3. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
   4. mailto:jurek...@gmail.com
   5. mailto:lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
   6. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   7. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   8. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
   9. mailto:jurek...@gmail.com
  10. mailto:lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
  11. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  12. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
  13. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
  14. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
  15. mailto:jurek...@gmail.com
  16. mailto:lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
  17. 

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk]

I wonder whether English lute songs were ever performed in Romanesque 
churches in the Elizabethen era.
Monica

Original Message
From: dail...@club-internet.fr
Date: 23/04/2017 22:06 
To: "Ron Andrico"<praelu...@hotmail.com>
Cc: "lutelist Net"<Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Subj: [LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

It would be interesting to know when Robert Spencer made his comment. 
Some years ago now, I suspect, and many aspects of early music 
performance have probably evolved positively since.

If a good quality lute in the right hands is played in an appropriate 
acoustic (here in France we are lucky to have numerous Romanesque 
churches which certainly fit the bill), it is anything but 'nearly 
inaudible'. As to the music being 'strange', I have very often noted 
how 
immediately many even neophyte audiences take to renaissance music.

What is this 'inward' looking you suggest Ron? What ulterior motives 
should I be looking for??

Here is a link to an introduction by David Crystal of original 
pronunciation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPlpphT7n9s

I think he makes a very convincing case for the use and 
intelligibility 
of an early accent. Obviously there was not just one Elizabethan 
accent 
but that is hardly a reason for downing tools and systematically 
adopting R.P., which itself is an obvious instance of your McDonald's 
'predictable French fries' (and I am definitely not a consumer of the 
latter). In my opinion, pronunciation is every bit as important as 
many 
other aspects of early music performance for conveying aesthetics, 
meaning and emotion and is anything but 'so much window dressing'.

Best,

Matthew

On 23/04/2017 23:28, Ron Andrico wrote:
> While there is a case to be made for singers studying early
> pronunciation, I have to say I agree with Robert Spencer that the
> primary objective in performing lute songs to modern audiences is 
to
> communicate the aesthetic to that audience.  It's really enough 
to ask
> of a modern audience just to sit and listen to strange music sung 
to
> the accompaniment of a nearly inaudible instrument, let alone 
making an
> otherwise familiar language obscure.   I think those who strongly
> advocate performing with a (very questionable) "authentic" 
English
> pronunciation to a modern audience should look inward and ask
> themselves what their real motives might be.
>
> I, too, am a little tired of singers who learn and perform with a
> "one-size-fits-all" technique - singing Morley today, Monteverdi
> tomorrow, Machaut next week and Mahler next month.  While it can 
be
> done, it can't be done well and up to the standard we should 
expect.
> Most importantly, specializing in lute songs means learning to 
sing
> with a natural voice.  Lute songs were nearly always performed in 
an
> intimate, domestic environment, and singing with a modern 
projected
> voice severely distorts the aesthetic of the music, which I 
happen to
> think is much worse than trivial issues to do with pronunciation.
>
> I don't recall who remarked that, when dealing with "authentic"
> pronunciation, one must decide which pronunciation.  Regional 
dialects
> abound in every country and from every period.  Deciding on one
> approved historical pronunciation is following the path of 
McDonalds,
> who used modern production techniques to produce a very 
predictable
> french fry.   I don't think this is a good thing.
>
> Much to consider, but the most important aspect of performing 
early
> music to modern audiences is to convey the aesthetic of the 
music.  All
> else is so much window dressing.
>
> RA




To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[Ed Durbrow]

When the famous musicologist Donald Jay Grout came to my college, he responded 
to an homologous question (should Bach be played on a piano, perhaps ???), “If 
it is worth doing, it is worth doing badly”. Ray Nurse said we haven’t had an 
early music revival, we’ve had an early instrument revival. 
I agree that putting the song across is paramount. I don’t think early 
pronunciation is a barrier to that though, especially here in Japan where 
nobody has a clue about the lyric anyway. Even in English pop, I rarely can 
understand many of the words just by listening. As a songwriter, I feel that 
the actual sound of the syllables is very important and rhyme is very important 
in most songs. I find eye rhyme hard to swallow as a performance practice. My 
own approach is to compromise (because of my limited linguistic knowledge) and 
at least bend some of the important words to rhyme. I often compromise in many 
ways in performance. We are in the entertainment business, after all, even if 
it is entertaining ourselves.

Ed Durbrow
Saitama, Japan
http://www.youtube.com/user/edurbrow?feature=watch
https://soundcloud.com/ed-durbrow
http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/








--

To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[Matthew Daillie]

It would be interesting to know when Robert Spencer made his comment. 
Some years ago now, I suspect, and many aspects of early music 
performance have probably evolved positively since.


If a good quality lute in the right hands is played in an appropriate 
acoustic (here in France we are lucky to have numerous Romanesque 
churches which certainly fit the bill), it is anything but 'nearly 
inaudible'. As to the music being 'strange', I have very often noted how 
immediately many even neophyte audiences take to renaissance music.


What is this 'inward' looking you suggest Ron? What ulterior motives 
should I be looking for??


Here is a link to an introduction by David Crystal of original 
pronunciation:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPlpphT7n9s

I think he makes a very convincing case for the use and intelligibility 
of an early accent. Obviously there was not just one Elizabethan accent 
but that is hardly a reason for downing tools and systematically 
adopting R.P., which itself is an obvious instance of your McDonald's 
'predictable French fries' (and I am definitely not a consumer of the 
latter). In my opinion, pronunciation is every bit as important as many 
other aspects of early music performance for conveying aesthetics, 
meaning and emotion and is anything but 'so much window dressing'.


Best,

Matthew

On 23/04/2017 23:28, Ron Andrico wrote:

While there is a case to be made for singers studying early
pronunciation, I have to say I agree with Robert Spencer that the
primary objective in performing lute songs to modern audiences is to
communicate the aesthetic to that audience.  It's really enough to ask
of a modern audience just to sit and listen to strange music sung to
the accompaniment of a nearly inaudible instrument, let alone making an
otherwise familiar language obscure.   I think those who strongly
advocate performing with a (very questionable) "authentic" English
pronunciation to a modern audience should look inward and ask
themselves what their real motives might be.

I, too, am a little tired of singers who learn and perform with a
"one-size-fits-all" technique - singing Morley today, Monteverdi
tomorrow, Machaut next week and Mahler next month.  While it can be
done, it can't be done well and up to the standard we should expect.
Most importantly, specializing in lute songs means learning to sing
with a natural voice.  Lute songs were nearly always performed in an
intimate, domestic environment, and singing with a modern projected
voice severely distorts the aesthetic of the music, which I happen to
think is much worse than trivial issues to do with pronunciation.

I don't recall who remarked that, when dealing with "authentic"
pronunciation, one must decide which pronunciation.  Regional dialects
abound in every country and from every period.  Deciding on one
approved historical pronunciation is following the path of McDonalds,
who used modern production techniques to produce a very predictable
french fry.   I don't think this is a good thing.

Much to consider, but the most important aspect of performing early
music to modern audiences is to convey the aesthetic of the music.  All
else is so much window dressing.

RA





To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[David van Ooijen]

   But I agree with you wholeheartedly! But then, I like to read Le Morte
   d'Arthur in its original; not everyone's cup of tea, you'd have to
   agree.
   One of my pet peeves is that everybody in early music is a specialist
   these days (well, was, but that's another pet peeve) except for the
   singers. All this effort from us, poor instrumentalists, and then a
   modern singer comes along and spoils it all by saying something stupid
   like (oeps, wrong lyrics ...). Anyway, you get my drift.
   But still, there's a strong argument for modern pronunciation in lute
   song, because most (I think) people will get more from a modern version
   of Elizabethan English. That's all.
   David

   ***
   David van Ooijen
   [1]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   [2]www.davidvanooijen.nl
   ***
   On 23 April 2017 at 22:13, Matthew Daillie
   <[3]dail...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

 Dear David,
 I think that it is very unfortunate that early pronunciation has not
 become a more essential part of performing practice. If one looks at
 the work carried out by David Crystal and his son Ben, notably for
 the Globe Theatre productions of Shakespeare, the benefits seem to
 far outweigh the disadvantages. The texts actually become more
 intelligible to the audience who hear them, with many puns and
 rhymes suddenly coming to the fore. It is, after all, somewhat of an
 aberration to consider Received Pronunciation as the norm for
 performing 16th century theatre; it is estimated that only 2% of the
 present UK population actually speak it and the term itself was only
 coined in the late 19th century, not coming to the fore until the
 1920s.
 We pride ourselves on using carefully crafted copies of early
 instruments with appropriate authentic style stringing, we study and
 compare facsimiles of original works to create faithful performing
 editions, we read treatises on performance practice and adopt
 unequal temperaments and yet we are happy to carry on using totally
 anachronistic pronunciation.
 At a round table on performance practice of Dowland three or four
 years ago, Anthony Rooley and Emma Kirkby discussed their early
 attempts at adopting period pronunciation. They became discouraged
 by the fact that there were several possible period accents to chose
 from but admitted that probably the next step in getting closer to
 'authentic' performance was to devote more time and study to singing
 with original pronunciation. Some singers, such as Charles Daniels
 and Catherine King, have gone down that path. Obviously it will take
 years of general practice to arrive at a totally convincing result
 since singing in such a fashion must become totally ingrained and
 seem as natural as possible (just as it has taken several decades of
 performance practice to make period ornamentation totally seamless -
 some of the early attempts at 'trillo', for example, were pretty
 risible).
 Best,
 Matthew
   On 23/04/2017 21:11, David van Ooijen wrote:

   In HIP lute song performance, you can choose for early English
 pronunciation, but this is very difficult to do, not so clear
 about how
 to pronounce exactly, and not so clear for a modern audience to
 understand. So there is a strong argument in favour of modern
 English
 pronunciation of lute song. Robert Spencer, one of my teachers,
 was
 strongly in favour of modern pronunciation for reasons of
 communication: performing lute songs is about giving your
 audience the
 text, not the sounds. But for a little later songs, like
 Purcell, I
 think it's nice to try, as here the sound of the language is so
 much a
 part of the composition. On the other hand, the greatest changes
 in
 English pronunciation are already past by the time of Purcell.
 For what
 I know of it, anyway. I'm sure someone can - and will! - correct
 me
 here.

 To get on or off this list see list information at
 [4]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   2. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
   3. mailto:dail...@club-internet.fr
   4. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[Matthew Daillie]

Dear David,

I think that it is very unfortunate that early pronunciation has not 
become a more essential part of performing practice. If one looks at the 
work carried out by David Crystal and his son Ben, notably for the Globe 
Theatre productions of Shakespeare, the benefits seem to far outweigh 
the disadvantages. The texts actually become more intelligible to the 
audience who hear them, with many puns and rhymes suddenly coming to the 
fore. It is, after all, somewhat of an aberration to consider Received 
Pronunciation as the norm for performing 16th century theatre; it is 
estimated that only 2% of the present UK population actually speak it 
and the term itself was only coined in the late 19th century, not coming 
to the fore until the 1920s.


We pride ourselves on using carefully crafted copies of early 
instruments with appropriate authentic style stringing, we study and 
compare facsimiles of original works to create faithful performing 
editions, we read treatises on performance practice and adopt unequal 
temperaments and yet we are happy to carry on using totally 
anachronistic pronunciation.


At a round table on performance practice of Dowland three or four years 
ago, Anthony Rooley and Emma Kirkby discussed their early attempts at 
adopting period pronunciation. They became discouraged by the fact that 
there were several possible period accents to chose from but admitted 
that probably the next step in getting closer to 'authentic' performance 
was to devote more time and study to singing with original 
pronunciation. Some singers, such as Charles Daniels and Catherine King, 
have gone down that path. Obviously it will take years of general 
practice to arrive at a totally convincing result since singing in such 
a fashion must become totally ingrained and seem as natural as possible 
(just as it has taken several decades of performance practice to make 
period ornamentation totally seamless - some of the early attempts at 
'trillo', for example, were pretty risible).


Best,

Matthew

  On 23/04/2017 21:11, David van Ooijen wrote:

  In HIP lute song performance, you can choose for early English
pronunciation, but this is very difficult to do, not so clear about how
to pronounce exactly, and not so clear for a modern audience to
understand. So there is a strong argument in favour of modern English
pronunciation of lute song. Robert Spencer, one of my teachers, was
strongly in favour of modern pronunciation for reasons of
communication: performing lute songs is about giving your audience the
text, not the sounds. But for a little later songs, like Purcell, I
think it's nice to try, as here the sound of the language is so much a
part of the composition. On the other hand, the greatest changes in
English pronunciation are already past by the time of Purcell. For what
I know of it, anyway. I'm sure someone can - and will! - correct me
here.





To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[David van Ooijen]

   About your recording.
   I think the Vivat he sang like English pronunciation of Latin.
   Liza like modern English, because I suppose he sang the rest of the
   song in modern English too.
   (I've recorded it too. Should check what the singer did, maybe ...)
   In HIP lute song performance, you can choose for early English
   pronunciation, but this is very difficult to do, not so clear about how
   to pronounce exactly, and not so clear for a modern audience to
   understand. So there is a strong argument in favour of modern English
   pronunciation of lute song. Robert Spencer, one of my teachers, was
   strongly in favour of modern pronunciation for reasons of
   communication: performing lute songs is about giving your audience the
   text, not the sounds. But for a little later songs, like Purcell, I
   think it's nice to try, as here the sound of the language is so much a
   part of the composition. On the other hand, the greatest changes in
   English pronunciation are already past by the time of Purcell. For what
   I know of it, anyway. I'm sure someone can - and will! - correct me
   here.
   The pronunciation of Latin in Early music is generally regulated
   according to country and time. 16th century French-Latin is pronounced
   differently than 16th century English or Italian Latin. This might seem
   a similar can of worms as the early English pronunciation, but
   apparently it is much more clearly defined. Or so my early music
   singers tell me. There's even a convenient little booklet with all the
   details. But then, regarding the 'vivat' you're left with the question:
   if you pronounce the rest of the song in modern English, would you not
   choose modern English-Latin for the few Latin bits too, or would you go
   for early English-Latin? (I don't know if there's much, if any,
   difference.)
   Regarding rhyme in 17th century English. This is a debated subject.
   With early pronunciation you'd get more (all?) rhyme than with modern
   pronunciation. Modern scholars have invented 'eye rhyme'  or 'visual
   rhyme'  for words that seem to rhyme on paper, but due to the
   idiosyncrasies of the English language don't rhyme when pronounced. If
   'visual rhyme' was a known concept for 16th century poets, I don't
   know, but I doubt it.
   Anyway, ganbatte kudasai!

   ***
   David van Ooijen
   [1]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   [2]www.davidvanooijen.nl
   ***
   On 23 April 2017 at 18:31, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
   <[3]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:

 Arigato go zai mas, David-san,
 In Rooley's The Consort of Musicke recording, David Thomas sang
 "Vivat" like
 "va;y-vat" (similar to syllables of "Wyatt")
 "Eliza" like "eh-lie-zah".   Sounds quite modern-english-english to
 my ears
 and I was wondering why he sang like that.
 Tomoko
 -Original Message-
 From: [4]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[5]lute-arc@cs.dartmouth.
 edu] On Behalf
 Of David van Ooijen
 Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 12:16 AM
 To: lutelist Net <[6]Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
 Subject: [LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza
Konnichiwa Tomoko-san
Vivat Eliza = Long live (Queen) Elisabeth.
So as English-Latin as you like the Vivat, and then as
 English-English
as you like Eliza.
This little song cycle has some more Latin in it. Either make it
period-English-Latin, or make it clearly Latin. There are
 different
'schools' of doing this.
David
***
David van Ooijen
[1][7]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
[2][8]www.davidvanooijen.nl
***
On 23 April 2017 at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
<[3][9]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:
  Dear lute-list,
  Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza" in
  Dowland's composition
  to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
  I thought it could be " viãä¹ãδã²t ("Vivat" read in
 ecclesiastical
  Latin?) and " ãæ°¸ãå¸ãã» (with this pronunciation it rhymes
 with "Ave
  Maria" ) though many sang it " vaãå¯ã§vãδã²t ãçãç¯ 
ã£ãå¯ã§zãã»
 for which I
  couldn't find any reason...
  Tomoko
  To get on or off this list see list information at
  [4][10]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
 References
1. mailto:[11]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
2. [12]http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
3. mailto:[13]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
4. [14]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   2. http://

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[lutenist.mumin.koide gmail]

Arigato go zai mas, David-san,

In Rooley's The Consort of Musicke recording, David Thomas sang "Vivat" like
"va;y-vat" (similar to syllables of "Wyatt")
"Eliza" like "eh-lie-zah".  Sounds quite modern-english-english to my ears
and I was wondering why he sang like that.

Tomoko


-Original Message-
From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf
Of David van Ooijen
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 12:16 AM
To: lutelist Net <Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

   Konnichiwa Tomoko-san
   Vivat Eliza = Long live (Queen) Elisabeth.
   So as English-Latin as you like the Vivat, and then as English-English
   as you like Eliza.
   This little song cycle has some more Latin in it. Either make it
   period-English-Latin, or make it clearly Latin. There are different
   'schools' of doing this.
   David

   ***
   David van Ooijen
   [1]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   [2]www.davidvanooijen.nl
   ***
   On 23 April 2017 at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
   <[3]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:

 Dear lute-list,
 Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza" in
 Dowland's composition
 to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
 I thought it could be " viテ久テδヲt ("Vivat" read in ecclesiastical
 Latin?) and " テ永テ吸テ・ (with this pronunciation it rhymes with "Ave
 Maria" ) though many sang it " vaテ可ェvテδヲt テ瑛テ篠ャテ可ェzテ・ for which I
 couldn't find any reason...
 Tomoko
 To get on or off this list see list information at
 [4]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   2. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
   3. mailto:lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
   4. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[David van Ooijen]

   HIP 2.0 (?!)
   Wa chotto hen desu, yo!

   ***
   David van Ooijen
   [1]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   [2]www.davidvanooijen.nl
   ***
   On 23 April 2017 at 17:44, Jerzy Zak <[3]jurek...@gmail.com> wrote:

 Dear Tomoko,
 Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the left, choose
 a language you think it is in, and press the little speaker
 underneath. Then keep changing languages until you think it rhymes
 best with âAve MarÃa'. Stupid but works ;)
 Jerzy
 â
 > On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
 <[4]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:
 >
 > Dear lute-list,
 >
 > Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza" in
 Dowland's composition
 > to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
 >
 > I thought it could be " viËvæt ("Vivat" read in ecclesiastical
 Latin?) and " ÉiËzÉ" (with this pronunciation it rhymes with "Ave
 Maria" ) though many sang it " vaɪvæt ÉlάɪzÉ" for which I
 couldn't find any reason...
 >
 > Tomoko
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > To get on or off this list see list information at
 > [5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   2. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
   3. mailto:jurek...@gmail.com
   4. mailto:lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
   5. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[Jerzy Zak]

Dear Tomoko,
Try GoogleTranslate. Put your fraze in the space on the left, choose a language 
you think it is in, and press the little speaker underneath. Then keep changing 
languages until you think it rhymes best with ‘Ave María’. Stupid but works ;)

Jerzy
—


> On 23 Apr 2017, at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail 
>  wrote:
> 
> Dear lute-list,
> 
> Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza" in Dowland's 
> composition 
> to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
> 
> I thought it could be " viːvæt ("Vivat" read in ecclesiastical Latin?) and " 
> əiːzə" (with this pronunciation it rhymes with "Ave Maria" ) though many sang 
> it " vaɪvæt əlάɪzə" for which I couldn't find any reason...
> 
> Tomoko
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: Vivat Eliza

[David van Ooijen]

   Konnichiwa Tomoko-san
   Vivat Eliza = Long live (Queen) Elisabeth.
   So as English-Latin as you like the Vivat, and then as English-English
   as you like Eliza.
   This little song cycle has some more Latin in it. Either make it
   period-English-Latin, or make it clearly Latin. There are different
   'schools' of doing this.
   David

   ***
   David van Ooijen
   [1]davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   [2]www.davidvanooijen.nl
   ***
   On 23 April 2017 at 17:02, lutenist.mumin.koide gmail
   <[3]lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com> wrote:

 Dear lute-list,
 Could anyone help me clarify pronunciation of "Vivat Eliza" in
 Dowland's composition
 to Sir. Henry Lee's poem "Time's Eldest Son"?
 I thought it could be " viËvæt ("Vivat" read in ecclesiastical
 Latin?) and " ÉiËzÉ" (with this pronunciation it rhymes with "Ave
 Maria" ) though many sang it " vaɪvæt ÉlάɪzÉ" for which I
 couldn't find any reason...
 Tomoko
 To get on or off this list see list information at
 [4]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:davidvanooi...@gmail.com
   2. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
   3. mailto:lutenist.mumin.ko...@gmail.com
   4. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html