John: 
> On Apr 16, 2018, at 4:16 PM, John F Sowa <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> JLRC
>> [Music notation] is pragmatically successful despite the linguistic
>> ambiguity of the two temporal reference systems in the notation.
> 
> The only vagueness in music notation (when written carefully) is
> in the words that refer to continuously variable quantities, such
> as speed (allegro moderato, andante cantabile...) or volume (forte,
> fortissimo, pianissimo...).
> 
> In ordinary language, musicians talk about music notation in ordinary
> language with their colleagues and students.  And what they say is
> sufficiently precise that it can be translated to any notation for
> logic.  For example, see page 27 of http://jfsowa.com/pubs/eg2cg.pdf 
> <http://jfsowa.com/pubs/eg2cg.pdf>
> 
> At the top of that page is a passage in the traditional notation.
> Beneath it is a translation to a conceptual graph.  A good musician
> can read and play the top diagram at sight, but even with a great
> deal of practice, the CG would be much harder to read and play.

I was referring to music, not merely a collection of notes.
Are your assertions, based on 7 notes in one measure, rather broad and 
superficial for meaningful musical notation for a score?
See: 
The Topos of Music: Geometric Logic of Concepts, Theory, and Performance 2002nd 
Edition
by Guerino Mazzola 
<https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=dp_byline_sr_book_1?ie=UTF8&text=Guerino+Mazzola&search-alias=books&field-author=Guerino+Mazzola&sort=relevancerank>
 (Author)
> But if the CG were translated to predicate calculus, it would be
> impossible to play without a great deal of analysis.  And any
> musician who did that analysis would probably translate it to
> the notation at the top before playing it
Have your translated your CG notation into propositional statements?
I am curious about what the sentence structure(s) would look like, 
mereologically.
Cheers
Jerry

-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L 
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To 
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the 
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at 
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .




Reply via email to