Well of course the Second Viennese School did exactly that. Schoenberg, Webern et al. It caught on like wildfire (NOT).
On 31/03/2011, at 7:17 PM, Mark D Lew wrote: > On Mar 25, 2011, at 2:37 PM, <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Expletives deleted, isn't it time we moved beyond the egotistical false >> pride of insisting that expressions be in Italian? Or that dynamics be >> in abbreviated Italian with extended greater than or less than signs? >> >> This is not an attack on the Italians or on time-honored traditional >> practices. If German or French composers wish to notate in their native >> languages for native players, why not? >> The purpose of notation is to communicate as directly and to make the >> music as easily performable as possible for the players. >> If most of the players speak English, why not use English for >> expressions and dynamics? [...] > > For many of the commonest musical terms, the English word *is* the Italian > word. > > The English word for crescendo is ... crescendo. > > The English word for allegro is ... allegro. > > And likewise for andante, legato, rubato, perdendosi, etc. > > To render them instead as "increasing", "cheerful", "moving", "bound", > "stolen", "losing oneself", etc, would not further the purpose of direct > communication, even for us anglophones. > > mdl > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale –––––––––––––– Graeme Gerrard www.resonant.com.au 02 6494 5387 / 0414 396 754 _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
