Le 24 oct. 06 à 10:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
>
> I think it is interesting because her performance uses much less vocal
> technique than sting and if elizabethans were untrained (which was
> most likely not
> the case) then they may have sounded more like this. English folk
> singing maybe
> contain some remnants of ballad singing from the 16th century. It
> is a style
> that is based around the text more than rock singing, so maybe has
> more
> relevance (in terms of HIP research) than what a rock singer would
> do with the
> music.
>
Mark
I would personally doubt whether some Irish folk singers are
completely untrained. Perhaps it is not a scholarly training, but
some (not of course the present singer) that I have heard make such
extraordinary vocalizations I can't think this is just the result of
a spontaneous breaking into song, as it were.
If this were so, why can't I do that. There has to be a long
tradition behind such singers. I believe the folk tradition is less
broken in Ireland, and less artificial than perhaps in England.
Who knows that there was no voice training at the time of Dowland (as
you say yourself this is highly unlikely)? Clearly there was lute
training, so why not some form of voice training? Surely there would
have been strict training for singers in religious ceremonies, I
imagine. Just listen to some of those complex polyphonous creations.
Surely this would have spread into secular singing in some way. In
Robison PL XII and Pl XIII we see a chapter including "Rules to
instruct you to sing". This would certainly seem to imply some form
of instruction.
Whether, the techniques for singing at that time might have been
closer to those for a ballad singer, is a different question.
Perhaps one completely different point might be that the vowels in an
Irish accent are less diphthonged than present day standard and
southern English (take for example <day> and <go>, <house> ). It
could both be closer in some ways to Shakespearian English and also
to Dowland's English. Irish English is often considered to have kept
some features that have been lost in present day Southern English. It
could just be that certain vowel sounds therefore sound somehow better.
However, to contradict myself, even if Dowland had been Irish, as
some have suggested, how similar would an Irishman's pronunciation
today, be to that of an Irishmen of Dowland's time in terms of speech?
Regards
Anthony
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
