John wrote:
>
> Jon,
> Don't be confused by Mr. Trovosky's spin on the word "transliteration.
>Mr. Trovosky said, and I quote
>
> " Wrong. transliteration is the rewriting of words into a different
>Alphabet, essentially the same as a transcription" un quote.
>
> Trovosky, actually confused himself but didn't know it
> One can can do a " transcription " of piano music for harp, using the
>same" Alphabet". It would be more accurate to say a "transliteration"
>can be made from piano notation, to lute tablature, one "alphabet" to
>another.
Roman is actually quite correct here. If I may employ that apparently hated
tool of linguists and scholars, the dictionary;
trans·lit·er·ate (trns-lt-rt, trnz-)
tr.v. trans·lit·er·at·ed, trans·lit·er·at·ing, trans·lit·er·ates
To represent (letters or words) in the corresponding characters of another
alphabet.
Roman's analogy was quite correct in explaining the differences between
tablature and staff notation, at least as far as it went given that, in
simplest terms, staff notation directly represents notes on a scale while
tablature represents finger positions on a string for a specific instrument, in
this case the lute. But the alphabet analogy is quite apropos.
The best example of linguistic transliteration is of course the three forms of
Japanese writing; Kanji, Katakana and Hiragana. Same language, different
alphabets. And so it is with music when going from staff notation to any other
form of musical notation or tablature.
Regards,
Craig
___________________________________________________________
$0 Web Hosting with up to 200MB web space, 1000 MB Transfer
10 Personalized POP and Web E-mail Accounts, and much more.
Signup at www.doteasy.com
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
