Thanks for the information :-)

Pierre Couderc corrected me aswell... I should stop doing such comments
given my complete lack of knowledge of semiology ;-)

Olivier


2014-03-06 13:49 GMT+01:00 Home <[email protected]>:

> Olivier,
>
> I don't think the bug tracker is the best forum for my reply since the
> essence of the bug is not changed, so I am replying directly.
>
> I beg to differ. The figure I attached is indeed a salicus. I'm sure the
> confusion between scandicus and salicus noted at the link you provided is
> one of the reasons Solesmes has adopted the figure with the oriscus in the
> middle as the salicus since the 1983 publication of the Liber Hymnarius. As
> noted in the link, this is also why Dom Mocquereau placed the ictus as an
> editorial mark under the second note of a salicus. As you probably know,
> the figure for a salicus in the non-diastematic notation, in both Laon and
> St. Gall, is a punctum-oriscus-virga, so the figure adopted by Solesmes in
> more recent books, like the Antiphonale Romanum II, the source of the
> figure I attached, is rather appropriate.
>
> Regards,
> Henry
>
>
>
> On March 6, 2014 4:05:01 AM Olivier Berten <NO-REPLY.INVALID-ADDRESS@gna.
> org> wrote:
>
>  Follow-up Comment #1, bug #21502 (project gregorio):
>>
>> According to the litterature <http://www.ccwatershed.org/Gregorian/08/>,
>> this
>> is rather a scandicus. And it is indeed missing from gregorio, with or
>> without
>> oriscus.
>>
>> (file #20272)
>>     _______________________________________________________
>>
>> Additional Item Attachment:
>>
>> File name: extended_scandicus.png         Size:0 KB
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________________
>>
>> Reply to this item at:
>>
>>   <http://gna.org/bugs/?21502>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>   Message posté via/par Gna!
>>   http://gna.org/
>>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Gregorio-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-devel

Répondre à