Re: Terminology question

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Jean,

> Le 31 oct. 2022 à 09:04, Jean Abou Samra  a écrit :
> 
> Hi Jacques,
> 
> Le 31/10/2022 à 06:39, Jacques Menu a écrit :
>> Hello folks,
>> 
>> Is there a LilyPond-specific term for the position of an element in a 
>> measure, such a 7/16?
> 
> 
> Do you mean 7/16 as a fraction of the length of a whole note,

Yes.

> or a fraction of the length of a measure?
> 
> The former is called "measure position" by LilyPond and stored
> in the measurePosition context property. The latter has no specific
> name as far as I know, but could be computed as
> measurePosition / measureLength.
> 
> Both of these are of the type Moment that Aaron described. It's
> essentially a rational number plus an optional grace part
> (another rational number). The grace part of measurePosition
> can be nonzero, that of measureLength is always zero.

Thanks, that’s what I was looking for.

A nice day!

JM

Re: Terminology question

[Jean Abou Samra]

Hi Jacques,

Le 31/10/2022 à 06:39, Jacques Menu a écrit :

Hello folks,

Is there a LilyPond-specific term for the position of an element in a measure, 
such a 7/16?



Do you mean 7/16 as a fraction of the length of a whole note,
or a fraction of the length of a measure?

The former is called "measure position" by LilyPond and stored
in the measurePosition context property. The latter has no specific
name as far as I know, but could be computed as
measurePosition / measureLength.

Both of these are of the type Moment that Aaron described. It's
essentially a rational number plus an optional grace part
(another rational number). The grace part of measurePosition
can be nonzero, that of measureLength is always zero.

Best,
Jean

Re: Terminology question

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Aaron,

> Le 31 oct. 2022 à 08:38, Aaron Hill  a écrit :
> 
> On 2022-10-30 10:39 pm, Jacques Menu wrote:
>> Is there a LilyPond-specific term for the position of an element in a 
>> measure, such a 7/16?
> 
> I believe "moment" is what you are looking for.

That was my first thought, but moment looks more like a duration, cf the uses 
of make-moment().

Re: Terminology question

[Aaron Hill]

On 2022-10-30 10:39 pm, Jacques Menu wrote:
Is there a LilyPond-specific term for the position of an element in a 
measure, such a 7/16?


I believe "moment" is what you are looking for.


-- Aaron Hill

Re: Terminology question

[Kenneth Wolcott]

IMSLP uses the term "Extract" when the score is available but no parts
are and you want to have the parts; it does the extraction for you.

Ken

On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 2:41 PM Jacques Menu  wrote:
>
> Hello everybody,
>
> Thanks for your answers, parts/staves/voices extraction will do for what I 
> have in mind.
>
> A nice w/e!
>
> JM
>
> > Le 13 nov. 2021 à 23:34, Leo Correia de Verdier 
> >  a écrit :
> >
> > I’ve just said writing parts (from a score) even if that, for most of my 
> > musicwriting life, mostly meant layout.
> >
> >> 13 nov. 2021 kl. 23:23 skrev David Nalesnik :
> >>
> >> On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 3:42 PM Kieren MacMillan
> >>  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
>  The *extraction* of parts is something that only
>  makes sense in times of computer score representation, as you’d extract 
>  a part
>  of the information from a full score.
> >>>
> >>> I know it’s a fine semantic point… but the dictionary gives the 
> >>> definition “the action of taking out something”. What better word is 
> >>> there to describe the action of taking a single instrumental part out of 
> >>> a full orchestral score?
> >>>
> >>
> >> "Extraction" somehow doesn't imply representation to me.  It's an
> >> operation performed on data whether that data yields a score or not.
> >> Or I'm just imagining things.  I do like the word.  What else
> >> describes the activity which precedes writing out a part?
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: Terminology question

[Jacques Menu]

Hello everybody,

Thanks for your answers, parts/staves/voices extraction will do for what I have 
in mind.

A nice w/e!

JM

> Le 13 nov. 2021 à 23:34, Leo Correia de Verdier 
>  a écrit :
> 
> I’ve just said writing parts (from a score) even if that, for most of my 
> musicwriting life, mostly meant layout. 
> 
>> 13 nov. 2021 kl. 23:23 skrev David Nalesnik :
>> 
>> On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 3:42 PM Kieren MacMillan
>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
 The *extraction* of parts is something that only
 makes sense in times of computer score representation, as you’d extract a 
 part
 of the information from a full score.
>>> 
>>> I know it’s a fine semantic point… but the dictionary gives the definition 
>>> “the action of taking out something”. What better word is there to describe 
>>> the action of taking a single instrumental part out of a full orchestral 
>>> score?
>>> 
>> 
>> "Extraction" somehow doesn't imply representation to me.  It's an
>> operation performed on data whether that data yields a score or not.
>> Or I'm just imagining things.  I do like the word.  What else
>> describes the activity which precedes writing out a part?
>> 
> 

Re: Terminology question

[Leo Correia de Verdier]

I’ve just said writing parts (from a score) even if that, for most of my 
musicwriting life, mostly meant layout. 

> 13 nov. 2021 kl. 23:23 skrev David Nalesnik :
> 
> On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 3:42 PM Kieren MacMillan
>  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>>> The *extraction* of parts is something that only
>>> makes sense in times of computer score representation, as you’d extract a 
>>> part
>>> of the information from a full score.
>> 
>> I know it’s a fine semantic point… but the dictionary gives the definition 
>> “the action of taking out something”. What better word is there to describe 
>> the action of taking a single instrumental part out of a full orchestral 
>> score?
>> 
> 
> "Extraction" somehow doesn't imply representation to me.  It's an
> operation performed on data whether that data yields a score or not.
> Or I'm just imagining things.  I do like the word.  What else
> describes the activity which precedes writing out a part?
> 

Re: Terminology question

[David Nalesnik]

On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 3:42 PM Kieren MacMillan
 wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> > The *extraction* of parts is something that only
> > makes sense in times of computer score representation, as you’d extract a 
> > part
> > of the information from a full score.
>
> I know it’s a fine semantic point… but the dictionary gives the definition 
> “the action of taking out something”. What better word is there to describe 
> the action of taking a single instrumental part out of a full orchestral 
> score?
>

"Extraction" somehow doesn't imply representation to me.  It's an
operation performed on data whether that data yields a score or not.
Or I'm just imagining things.  I do like the word.  What else
describes the activity which precedes writing out a part?

Re: Terminology question

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi all,

> The *extraction* of parts is something that only 
> makes sense in times of computer score representation, as you’d extract a 
> part 
> of the information from a full score.

I know it’s a fine semantic point… but the dictionary gives the definition “the 
action of taking out something”. What better word is there to describe the 
action of taking a single instrumental part out of a full orchestral score?

Cheers,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info

Re: Terminology question

[Valentin Petzel]

That is somewhat correct. The *extraction* of parts is something that only 
makes sense in times of computer score representation, as you’d extract a part 
of the information from a full score. Before that parts would have been 
separate scores prepared by the editor. So in this sense „extraction” does not 
really make sense. And in the case of unpublished works you’d have a so called 
copyist, which was usually some musician in the orchestra who’d hand write 
parts from the full score for the whole orchestra. So this is what *copying* 
would be.

Cheers,
Valentin
> 
> I checked my copy of Gardner Read's Music Notation (1979).  There's no
> use of "extracting" in the context of parts.  He writes of "part
> preparation" and "copying."  (His focus is on writing them out by
> hand.)
> 
> -David N.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Terminology question

[Frederick Bartlett]

'Copying,' and those who do it are 'copyists' (sometimes 'music copyists').

Re: Terminology question

[David Nalesnik]

Hi,

On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 1:11 PM bobr...@centrum.is  wrote:
>
> Commercial programs like Finale and Sibelius refer to “extracting” parts.  
> That doesn’t really apply to LilyPond.  With LilyPond, scores are built from 
> the input.  A score may contain a single part or a complete orchestral score. 
>  Parts are not extracted from anything in LilyPond. I would simply say 
> “create parts.”
>
> -David
>
> - Phil Holmes  wrote:
> > As far as I know (native English speaker and BA in music) there isn't a
> > standard word.  I would call it "creating parts from a conductor's
> > score" ...
> >
> > Phil Holmes
> >
> > On 13/11/2021 18:26, Jacques Menu wrote:
> > > Hello folks,
> > >
> > > What is the english name for the process of creating invidual
> > > parts/staves/voices scores from a director’s score?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your help!
> > >
> > > JM
>

I checked my copy of Gardner Read's Music Notation (1979).  There's no
use of "extracting" in the context of parts.  He writes of "part
preparation" and "copying."  (His focus is on writing them out by
hand.)

-David N.

Re: Terminology question

[bobr...@centrum.is]

Commercial programs like Finale and Sibelius refer to “extracting” parts.  That 
doesn’t really apply to LilyPond.  With LilyPond, scores are built from the 
input.  A score may contain a single part or a complete orchestral score.  
Parts are not extracted from anything in LilyPond. I would simply say “create 
parts.”  

-David

- Phil Holmes  wrote:
> As far as I know (native English speaker and BA in music) there isn't a 
> standard word.  I would call it "creating parts from a conductor's 
> score" ...
> 
> Phil Holmes
> 
> On 13/11/2021 18:26, Jacques Menu wrote:
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > What is the english name for the process of creating invidual 
> > parts/staves/voices scores from a director’s score?
> >
> > Thanks for your help!
> >
> > JM 

Re: Terminology question

[Jacques Menu]

Bonsoir Kieren!

Yes, that helps, thanks.

Let’s wait for more suggestions if any!

JM

PS> Longing to meet you again at Salzburg or elsewhere for a nice music 
engraving conference, Covid permitting...

> Le 13 nov. 2021 à 19:30, Kieren MacMillan  a 
> écrit :
> 
> Bonjour Jacques!
> 
>> What is the english name for the process of creating invidual 
>> parts/staves/voices scores from a director’s score?
> 
> “Extraction” is the term that most engraving industry people would 
> immediately recognize… but that might be a post-computer-application term, so 
> I’d love to find out if there’s a more traditional term.
> 
> Hope that helps!
> Kieren.
> 
> 
> Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
> ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
> ‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info
> 

Re: Terminology question

[Phil Holmes]

As far as I know (native English speaker and BA in music) there isn't a 
standard word.  I would call it "creating parts from a conductor's 
score" ...


Phil Holmes

On 13/11/2021 18:26, Jacques Menu wrote:

Hello folks,

What is the english name for the process of creating invidual 
parts/staves/voices scores from a director’s score?


Thanks for your help!

JM 

Re: Terminology question

[Kieren MacMillan]

Bonjour Jacques!

> What is the english name for the process of creating invidual 
> parts/staves/voices scores from a director’s score?

“Extraction” is the term that most engraving industry people would immediately 
recognize… but that might be a post-computer-application term, so I’d love to 
find out if there’s a more traditional term.

Hope that helps!
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info

Re: Terminology question

[Carl Sorensen]



From: Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Date: Monday, June 21, 2021 at 12:21 PM
To: Carl Sorensen , "lilypond-user@gnu.org" 

Subject: RE: Terminology question

How more forte is his fortissimo than his forte given that a fortissimo may not 
be his forte?

From: Carl Sorensen [mailto:c_soren...@byu.edu]
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 10:52 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org; Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Subject: Re: Terminology question

His fortissimo varies between locations in the music.
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S®6 active, an AT 4G LTE smartphone
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>


From: lilypond-user 
mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carl.d.sorensen=gmail@gnu.org>>
 on behalf of Mark Stephen Mrotek 
mailto:carsonm...@ca.rr.com>>
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 11:38:25 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org<mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org> 
mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>>
Subject: RE: Terminology question

Aah, another fly in the ointment!

What do you mean by asking for my meaning?

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means 
just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many 
different things.’"
Through the Looking Glass - Lewis Carrol

M

-Original Message-
From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 7:23 AM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek mailto:carsonm...@ca.rr.com>>
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org<mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Terminology question

On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 18:05:15 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
>
> I'll accept the burden.
> His plays with dynamic dynamics.

Apart from the typo (it's not a sentence), I suppose it might be interesting to 
know what you would mean by uttering it.

> From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 5:38 PM
>
> On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 10:53:40 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
>
> > Yes, yet what if the level was dynamic, i.e., changing, then dynamic would 
> > operate as an adjective - stating what kind?
>
> When I listen to the TV, the dynamic level varies between programmes
> and adverts. I think the burden is on you to construct a sentence that
> describes this, and which uses dynamic as an adjective. (Of course,
> any example will do.)
>
> > From: lilypond-user
> > [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On
> > Behalf Of David Zelinsky
> > Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:12 AM
> >
> > Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word 
> > "dynamic" is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another 
> > noun.  Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to 
> > interperet it as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
> > would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense, but 
> > it's not what was meant in the present context.
> >
> > -David
> >
> > Robert Gaebler mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>> 
> > writes:
> > >
> > > Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> > > “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form,
> > > singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural
> > > construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud
> > > to soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this
> > > etude are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.) But a conductor
> > > or music teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics here!”
> > > (Singular in construction, admonishing caution in the
> > > _application_ of dynamic expression in this particularly difficult
> > > passage.)
> > > The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied
> > > at the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective
> > > and a noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic
> > > (noun).  It denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> > > I hope this helps.
> > >
> > > BoG
> > >
> > > From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
> > > Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> > >
> > > BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> > > sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in 
> > > ’dynamic mark’.
> > > So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
> > >
> > > JM

Cheers,
David.

RE: Terminology question

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

How more forte is his fortissimo than his forte given that a fortissimo may
not be his forte?

 

From: Carl Sorensen [mailto:c_soren...@byu.edu] 
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 10:52 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org; Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Subject: Re: Terminology question

 

His fortissimo varies between locations in the music.

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy SR6 active, an AT 4G LTE smartphone

Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> 

 

  _  

From: lilypond-user mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carl.d.sorensen=gmail@gnu.org> > on behalf
of Mark Stephen Mrotek mailto:carsonm...@ca.rr.com> >
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 11:38:25 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org <mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>
mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org> >
Subject: RE: Terminology question 

 

Aah, another fly in the ointment!

What do you mean by asking for my meaning?

"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means
just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many
different things.'"
Through the Looking Glass - Lewis Carrol

M

-Original Message-
From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk] 
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 7:23 AM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek mailto:carsonm...@ca.rr.com>
>
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org <mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org> 
Subject: Re: Terminology question

On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 18:05:15 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> 
> I'll accept the burden.
> His plays with dynamic dynamics.

Apart from the typo (it's not a sentence), I suppose it might be interesting
to know what you would mean by uttering it.

> From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 5:38 PM
> 
> On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 10:53:40 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> 
> > Yes, yet what if the level was dynamic, i.e., changing, then dynamic
would operate as an adjective - stating what kind?
> 
> When I listen to the TV, the dynamic level varies between programmes 
> and adverts. I think the burden is on you to construct a sentence that 
> describes this, and which uses dynamic as an adjective. (Of course, 
> any example will do.)
> 
> > From: lilypond-user
> > [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On 
> > Behalf Of David Zelinsky
> > Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:12 AM
> > 
> > Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word
"dynamic" is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another
noun.  Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to
interperet it as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
> > would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense,
but it's not what was meant in the present context.
> > 
> > -David
> > 
> > Robert Gaebler mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>
> writes:
> > >
> > > Thanks. happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> > > "Dynamics" is an interesting word, described as "plural in form, 
> > > singular or plural in construction" in Merriam-Webster. The plural 
> > > construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud 
> > > to soft within a piece.  So you might say, "The dynamics in this 
> > > etude are exquisite!"  (Plural in construction.) But a conductor 
> > > or music teacher might caution, "Now, watch the dynamics here!" 
> > > (Singular in construction, admonishing caution in the 
> > > _application_ of dynamic expression in this particularly difficult
> > > passage.)
> > > The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied 
> > > at the point of usage.  Note that "dynamic" is both an adjective 
> > > and a noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic 
> > > (noun).  It denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> > > I hope this helps.
> > >
> > > BoG
> > >
> > > From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
> > > Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> > >
> > > BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, 'dynamic'
is sometimes a noun as in 'dynamics' and sometimes an adjective as in
'dynamic mark'.
> > > So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
> > >
> > > JM

Cheers,
David.

Re: Terminology question

[Carl Sorensen]

His fortissimo varies between locations in the music.

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S®6 active, an AT 4G LTE smartphone
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>


From: lilypond-user  
on behalf of Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 11:38:25 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org 
Subject: RE: Terminology question

Aah, another fly in the ointment!

What do you mean by asking for my meaning?

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means 
just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many 
different things.’"
Through the Looking Glass - Lewis Carrol

M

-Original Message-
From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 7:23 AM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Terminology question

On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 18:05:15 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
>
> I'll accept the burden.
> His plays with dynamic dynamics.

Apart from the typo (it's not a sentence), I suppose it might be interesting to 
know what you would mean by uttering it.

> From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 5:38 PM
>
> On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 10:53:40 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
>
> > Yes, yet what if the level was dynamic, i.e., changing, then dynamic would 
> > operate as an adjective - stating what kind?
>
> When I listen to the TV, the dynamic level varies between programmes
> and adverts. I think the burden is on you to construct a sentence that
> describes this, and which uses dynamic as an adjective. (Of course,
> any example will do.)
>
> > From: lilypond-user
> > [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On
> > Behalf Of David Zelinsky
> > Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:12 AM
> >
> > Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word 
> > "dynamic" is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another 
> > noun.  Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to 
> > interperet it as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
> > would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense, but 
> > it's not what was meant in the present context.
> >
> > -David
> >
> > Robert Gaebler  writes:
> > >
> > > Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> > > “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form,
> > > singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural
> > > construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud
> > > to soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this
> > > etude are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.) But a conductor
> > > or music teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics here!”
> > > (Singular in construction, admonishing caution in the
> > > _application_ of dynamic expression in this particularly difficult
> > > passage.)
> > > The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied
> > > at the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective
> > > and a noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic
> > > (noun).  It denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> > > I hope this helps.
> > >
> > > BoG
> > >
> > > From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
> > > Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> > >
> > > BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> > > sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in 
> > > ’dynamic mark’.
> > > So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
> > >
> > > JM

Cheers,
David.

RE: Terminology question

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

Aah, another fly in the ointment!

What do you mean by asking for my meaning?

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means 
just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many 
different things.’"
Through the Looking Glass - Lewis Carrol

M

-Original Message-
From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk] 
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 7:23 AM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Terminology question

On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 18:05:15 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> 
> I'll accept the burden.
> His plays with dynamic dynamics.

Apart from the typo (it's not a sentence), I suppose it might be interesting to 
know what you would mean by uttering it.

> From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 5:38 PM
> 
> On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 10:53:40 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> 
> > Yes, yet what if the level was dynamic, i.e., changing, then dynamic would 
> > operate as an adjective - stating what kind?
> 
> When I listen to the TV, the dynamic level varies between programmes 
> and adverts. I think the burden is on you to construct a sentence that 
> describes this, and which uses dynamic as an adjective. (Of course, 
> any example will do.)
> 
> > From: lilypond-user
> > [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On 
> > Behalf Of David Zelinsky
> > Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:12 AM
> > 
> > Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word 
> > "dynamic" is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another 
> > noun.  Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to 
> > interperet it as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
> > would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense, but 
> > it's not what was meant in the present context.
> > 
> > -David
> > 
> > Robert Gaebler  writes:
> > >
> > > Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> > > “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form, 
> > > singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural 
> > > construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud 
> > > to soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this 
> > > etude are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.) But a conductor 
> > > or music teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics here!” 
> > > (Singular in construction, admonishing caution in the 
> > > _application_ of dynamic expression in this particularly difficult
> > > passage.)
> > > The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied 
> > > at the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective 
> > > and a noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic 
> > > (noun).  It denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> > > I hope this helps.
> > >
> > > BoG
> > >
> > > From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
> > > Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> > >
> > > BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> > > sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in 
> > > ’dynamic mark’.
> > > So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
> > >
> > > JM

Cheers,
David.

Re: Terminology question

[David Wright]

On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 18:05:15 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> 
> I'll accept the burden.
> His plays with dynamic dynamics.

Apart from the typo (it's not a sentence), I suppose it might
be interesting to know what you would mean by uttering it.

> From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk] 
> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 5:38 PM
> 
> On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 10:53:40 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> 
> > Yes, yet what if the level was dynamic, i.e., changing, then dynamic would 
> > operate as an adjective - stating what kind?
> 
> When I listen to the TV, the dynamic level varies between programmes and 
> adverts. I think the burden is on you to construct a sentence that describes 
> this, and which uses dynamic as an adjective. (Of course, any example will 
> do.)
> 
> > From: lilypond-user 
> > [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf 
> > Of David Zelinsky
> > Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:12 AM
> > 
> > Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word 
> > "dynamic" is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another 
> > noun.  Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to 
> > interperet it as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
> > would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense, but 
> > it's not what was meant in the present context.
> > 
> > -David
> > 
> > Robert Gaebler  writes:
> > >
> > > Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> > > “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form, 
> > > singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural 
> > > construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud to 
> > > soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this etude 
> > > are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.) But a conductor or music 
> > > teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics here!” (Singular in 
> > > construction, admonishing caution in the _application_ of dynamic 
> > > expression in this particularly difficult
> > > passage.)
> > > The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied at 
> > > the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective and a 
> > > noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic (noun).  It 
> > > denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> > > I hope this helps.
> > >
> > > BoG
> > >
> > > From: Jacques Menu
> > > Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> > >
> > > BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> > > sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in 
> > > ’dynamic mark’.
> > > So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
> > >
> > > JM

Cheers,
David.

Re: Terminology question

[J Martin Rushton]

Err, we're back to a terminology question.  Strictly speaking possession 
is one use of the more general genitive which gives a relationship, 
consider:


Give me William's book   - The book owned by William.
Let's go to John's local - The pub frequented by John.

Both are genitives, but only the first is possessive.  Evidently the 
term "possessive case" only came into use in C18, prior to that genitive 
had been universally used.  In short: "possessive case" is a limited 
subset of the grammatical genitive case.



On 20/06/2021 09:50, Kevin Barry wrote:

The problem is that in English we would say "the soldier's weapons", but
that's partly because we only have a genitive and not an ablative case.


I think this is the possessive case, not genitive.



--
J Martin Rushton MBCS

Re: Terminology question

[Kevin Barry]

> The problem is that in English we would say "the soldier's weapons", but
> that's partly because we only have a genitive and not an ablative case.

I think this is the possessive case, not genitive.

Re: Terminology question

[J Martin Rushton]

Robert,

Are you sure about the genitive?  I would have thought the ablative 
would be more appropriate; consider:


rex armis militum interfectus est

The King was killed by the weapons of the soldiers.

The problem is that in English we would say "the soldier's weapons", but 
that's partly because we only have a genitive and not an ablative case.


Martin

On 20/06/2021 04:06, Robert Gaebler wrote:

David,

Good point.  You could look at it as a noun adjunct.  A noun modifying
another noun, serving in the capacity of an adjective, in this case.

I imagine that in an inflected language, such as Latin, the noun 
“dynamic” would
be in the genitive case while the noun “level” would be in accusative 
case (since
it is the object of the verb I used, “denotes”). That would have the 
sentence
translate to English as “It denotes a level of dynamic to be expressed” 
which doesn’t

really change the meaning.





BoG



--
J Martin Rushton MBCS

Re: Terminology question

[Robert Gaebler]

David,

Good point.  You could look at it as a noun adjunct.  A noun modifying
another noun, serving in the capacity of an adjective, in this case.

I imagine that in an inflected language, such as Latin, the noun “dynamic” would
be in the genitive case while the noun “level” would be in accusative case 
(since
it is the object of the verb I used, “denotes”). That would have the sentence
translate to English as “It denotes a level of dynamic to be expressed” which 
doesn’t
really change the meaning.

Since English is a (mostly) non-inflected language, we just stick the two nouns
together without benefit of case endings, and most of the time understand it
the right way, anyhow.

But getting back to the use of “dynamic” as an adjective in my sentence example,
it needn’t be taken to mean “a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing”.  
Merriam-Webster
lists “dynamic” as an adjective with one of the definitions, “of or relating to 
dynamics
(ENTRY 1)” [which is “variation and contrast in force or intensity (as in 
music)” in
definition 3.]  So, you see, we are _both_ right!

Now that I have out-pedanticised you, perhaps I have descended to the level of 
“arrant
pedantry up with which you will not put.”    But I, too, am a logophile, and 
couldn’t
resist the fun of word play.

BoG



David Zelinsky  writes:

Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word
"dynamic" is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another
noun.  Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to
interperet it as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense,
but it's not what was meant in the present context.

-David

Robert Gaebler  writes:

> Jacques,
>
> Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form,
> singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural
> construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud to
> soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this etude
> are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.)
> But a conductor or music teacher might caution, “Now, watch the
> dynamics here!” (Singular in construction, admonishing caution in the
> _application_ of dynamic expression in this particularly difficult
> passage.)
> The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied at
> the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective and a
> noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic (noun).  It
> denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> I hope this helps.
>
> BoG
>
> From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
> Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> To: Robert Gaebler<mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>
> Cc: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>; 
> lilypond-user@gnu.org<mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: Terminology question
>
> Hello Robert,
>
> 'figured bass signature’ is also a temptating choice, analog to ’time 
> signature’…
>
> BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in ’dynamic 
> mark’.
> So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
>
> These questions of mine are to stick to strict naming in my code, where both 
> figured bass and dynamics occur in the singular and plural forms.
>
> JM
>
>
>
> Le 17 juin 2021 à 18:26, Robert Gaebler 
> mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>> a écrit :
>
>
> Jacques Menu mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>> writes:
>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to denote 
>> several
>> occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way has there can be several
>> harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
>>
>> In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
>>
>>
>> Thanks for. your help!
>
>
> As many others have pointed out, there is no standard term, for what
> you have in mind, in English.  I think the phrase "bass figure" works,
> and would be reasonably well understood from context.
>
> Nevertheless, ad hoc neologisms abound in English usage, and you would
> not be out of place introducing your own term. Just try to make it
> intuitive or recognizable from similar usage.
>
> Borrowing from the German, as mentioned by Lukas, let me mention that
> the word "signature" has fairly common English usage within
> technology, to refer to a collection of properties or characteristics
> that identify a particular instance of an object or event. So in a
> discussion of some specific figured bass examples, you might mention
> "these five figured bass signatures from measures 10, 12, 14, 22, and
> 23...". I think most people would figure it out from the
> context. Maybe it would even catch on and become our English term for
> an instance of a figured bass symbol.
> -
> Bob Gaebler

Re: Terminology question

[Aaron Hill]

On 2021-06-19 6:05 pm, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:

I'll accept the burden.
His plays with dynamic dynamics.


Let's throw in some other parts of speech:

"Dynamic dynamcist dynamically dynamicizes dynamicity in dynamics."

(That word is beginning to lose meaning to me now... thanks, semantic 
satiation.)



-- Aaron Hill

RE: Terminology question

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

David,

I'll accept the burden.
His plays with dynamic dynamics.

Mark

-Original Message-  l
From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk] 
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 5:38 PM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Cc: 'David Zelinsky' ; lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Terminology question

On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 10:53:40 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:

> Yes, yet what if the level was dynamic, i.e., changing, then dynamic would 
> operate as an adjective - stating what kind?

When I listen to the TV, the dynamic level varies between programmes and 
adverts. I think the burden is on you to construct a sentence that describes 
this, and which uses dynamic as an adjective. (Of course, any example will do.)

> From: lilypond-user 
> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf 
> Of David Zelinsky
> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:12 AM
> 
> Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word 
> "dynamic" is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another noun. 
>  Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to interperet 
> it as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
> would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense, but 
> it's not what was meant in the present context.
> 
> -David
> 
> Robert Gaebler  writes:
> >
> > Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> > “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form, 
> > singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural 
> > construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud to 
> > soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this etude 
> > are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.) But a conductor or music 
> > teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics here!” (Singular in 
> > construction, admonishing caution in the _application_ of dynamic 
> > expression in this particularly difficult
> > passage.)
> > The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied at 
> > the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective and a 
> > noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic (noun).  It 
> > denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> > I hope this helps.
> >
> > BoG
> >
> > From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
> > Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> >
> > BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> > sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in ’dynamic 
> > mark’.
> > So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
> >
> > JM

Cheers,
David.

Re: Terminology question

[David Wright]

On Sat 19 Jun 2021 at 10:53:40 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:

> Yes, yet what if the level was dynamic, i.e., changing, then dynamic would 
> operate as an adjective - stating what kind?

When I listen to the TV, the dynamic level varies between
programmes and adverts. I think the burden is on you to
construct a sentence that describes this, and which uses
dynamic as an adjective. (Of course, any example will do.)

> From: lilypond-user 
> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of 
> David Zelinsky
> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:12 AM
> 
> Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word 
> "dynamic" is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another noun. 
>  Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to interperet 
> it as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
> would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense, but 
> it's not what was meant in the present context.
> 
> -David
> 
> Robert Gaebler  writes:
> >
> > Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> > “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form, 
> > singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural 
> > construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud to 
> > soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this etude 
> > are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.) But a conductor or music 
> > teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics here!” (Singular in 
> > construction, admonishing caution in the _application_ of dynamic 
> > expression in this particularly difficult
> > passage.)
> > The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied at 
> > the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective and a 
> > noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic (noun).  It 
> > denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> > I hope this helps.
> >
> > BoG
> >
> > From: Jacques Menu
> > Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> >
> > BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> > sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in ’dynamic 
> > mark’.
> > So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
> >
> > JM

Cheers,
David.

RE: Terminology question

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

David,

Yes, yet what if the level was dynamic, i.e., changing, then dynamic would 
operate as an adjective - stating what kind?

-Original Message-
From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] 
On Behalf Of David Zelinsky
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:12 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Terminology question

Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word "dynamic" 
is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another noun.  
Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to interperet it 
as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense, but it's 
not what was meant in the present context.

-David

Robert Gaebler  writes:

> Jacques,
>
> Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form, 
> singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural 
> construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud to 
> soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this etude 
> are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.) But a conductor or music 
> teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics here!” (Singular in 
> construction, admonishing caution in the _application_ of dynamic 
> expression in this particularly difficult
> passage.)
> The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied at 
> the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective and a 
> noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic (noun).  It 
> denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> I hope this helps.
>
> BoG
>
> From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
> Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> To: Robert Gaebler<mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>
> Cc: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>; 
> lilypond-user@gnu.org<mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: Terminology question
>
> Hello Robert,
>
> 'figured bass signature’ is also a temptating choice, analog to ’time 
> signature’…
>
> BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in ’dynamic 
> mark’.
> So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
>
> These questions of mine are to stick to strict naming in my code, where both 
> figured bass and dynamics occur in the singular and plural forms.
>
> JM
>
>
>
> Le 17 juin 2021 à 18:26, Robert Gaebler 
> mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>> a écrit :
>
>
> Jacques Menu mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>> writes:
>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to 
>> denote several occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way 
>> has there can be several harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
>>
>> In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
>>
>>
>> Thanks for. your help!
>
>
> As many others have pointed out, there is no standard term, for what 
> you have in mind, in English.  I think the phrase "bass figure" works, 
> and would be reasonably well understood from context.
>
> Nevertheless, ad hoc neologisms abound in English usage, and you would 
> not be out of place introducing your own term. Just try to make it 
> intuitive or recognizable from similar usage.
>
> Borrowing from the German, as mentioned by Lukas, let me mention that 
> the word "signature" has fairly common English usage within 
> technology, to refer to a collection of properties or characteristics 
> that identify a particular instance of an object or event. So in a 
> discussion of some specific figured bass examples, you might mention 
> "these five figured bass signatures from measures 10, 12, 14, 22, and 
> 23...". I think most people would figure it out from the context. 
> Maybe it would even catch on and become our English term for an 
> instance of a figured bass symbol.
> -
> Bob Gaebler

Re: Terminology question

[David Zelinsky]

Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word
"dynamic" is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another
noun.  Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to
interperet it as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense,
but it's not what was meant in the present context.

-David

Robert Gaebler  writes:

> Jacques,
>
> Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form,
> singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural
> construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud to
> soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this etude
> are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.)
> But a conductor or music teacher might caution, “Now, watch the
> dynamics here!” (Singular in construction, admonishing caution in the
> _application_ of dynamic expression in this particularly difficult
> passage.)
> The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied at
> the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective and a
> noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic (noun).  It
> denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> I hope this helps.
>
> BoG
>
> From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
> Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> To: Robert Gaebler<mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>
> Cc: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>; 
> lilypond-user@gnu.org<mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: Terminology question
>
> Hello Robert,
>
> 'figured bass signature’ is also a temptating choice, analog to ’time 
> signature’…
>
> BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in ’dynamic 
> mark’.
> So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
>
> These questions of mine are to stick to strict naming in my code, where both 
> figured bass and dynamics occur in the singular and plural forms.
>
> JM
>
>
>
> Le 17 juin 2021 à 18:26, Robert Gaebler 
> mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>> a écrit :
>
>
> Jacques Menu mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>> writes:
>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to denote 
>> several
>> occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way has there can be several
>> harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
>>
>> In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
>>
>>
>> Thanks for. your help!
>
>
> As many others have pointed out, there is no standard term, for what
> you have in mind, in English.  I think the phrase "bass figure" works,
> and would be reasonably well understood from context.
>
> Nevertheless, ad hoc neologisms abound in English usage, and you would
> not be out of place introducing your own term. Just try to make it
> intuitive or recognizable from similar usage.
>
> Borrowing from the German, as mentioned by Lukas, let me mention that
> the word "signature" has fairly common English usage within
> technology, to refer to a collection of properties or characteristics
> that identify a particular instance of an object or event. So in a
> discussion of some specific figured bass examples, you might mention
> "these five figured bass signatures from measures 10, 12, 14, 22, and
> 23...". I think most people would figure it out from the
> context. Maybe it would even catch on and become our English term for
> an instance of a figured bass symbol.
> -
> Bob Gaebler

Re: Terminology question

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Robert,

Thanks again, this clarification will be usedful to me!

JM

> Le 18 juin 2021 à 16:50, Robert Gaebler  a écrit :
> 
> Jacques,
>  
> Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form, singular or 
> plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural construct usually 
> refers to the entire range of variation of loud to soft within a piece.  So 
> you might say, “The dynamics in this etude are exquisite!”  (Plural in 
> construction.)  
> But a conductor or music teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics 
> here!” (Singular in construction, admonishing caution in the _application_ of 
> dynamic expression in this particularly difficult passage.)
> The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied at the 
> point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective and a noun.  The 
> mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic (noun).  It denotes a dynamic 
> (adjective) level to be expressed.
> I hope this helps.
>  
> BoG
>  
> From: Jacques Menu <mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
> Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> To: Robert Gaebler <mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>
> Cc: Jacques Menu <mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>; lilypond-user@gnu.org 
> <mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: Terminology question
>  
> Hello Robert,
>  
> 'figured bass signature’ is also a temptating choice, analog to ’time 
> signature’…
>  
> BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in ’dynamic 
> mark’.
> So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
>  
> These questions of mine are to stick to strict naming in my code, where both 
> figured bass and dynamics occur in the singular and plural forms.
>  
> JM
>  
> 
> 
> Le 17 juin 2021 à 18:26, Robert Gaebler  <mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>> a écrit :
>  
> Jacques Menu mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>> writes:
>  
> > Hello folks,
> > 
> > What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to denote 
> > several
> > occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way has there can be several
> > harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
> > 
> > In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks for. your help!
>  
>  
> As many others have pointed out, there is no standard term, for what you have 
> in mind, in English.  I think the phrase "bass figure" works, and would be 
> reasonably well understood from context.
>  
> Nevertheless, ad hoc neologisms abound in English usage, and you would not be 
> out of place introducing your own term. Just try to make it intuitive or 
> recognizable from similar usage.
>  
> Borrowing from the German, as mentioned by Lukas, let me mention that the 
> word "signature" has fairly common English usage within technology, to refer 
> to a collection of properties or characteristics that identify a particular 
> instance of an object or event. So in a discussion of some specific figured 
> bass examples, you might mention "these five figured bass signatures from 
> measures 10, 12, 14, 22, and 23...". I think most people would figure it out 
> from the context. Maybe it would even catch on and become our English term 
> for an instance of a figured bass symbol.
> -
> Bob Gaebler

RE: Terminology question

[Robert Gaebler]

Jacques,

Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
“Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form, singular or 
plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural construct usually refers 
to the entire range of variation of loud to soft within a piece.  So you might 
say, “The dynamics in this etude are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.)
But a conductor or music teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics here!” 
(Singular in construction, admonishing caution in the _application_ of dynamic 
expression in this particularly difficult passage.)
The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied at the point 
of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective and a noun.  The mark in 
the score is referred to as a dynamic (noun).  It denotes a dynamic (adjective) 
level to be expressed.
I hope this helps.

BoG

From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
To: Robert Gaebler<mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>
Cc: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>; 
lilypond-user@gnu.org<mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Terminology question

Hello Robert,

'figured bass signature’ is also a temptating choice, analog to ’time 
signature’…

BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in ’dynamic 
mark’.
So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?

These questions of mine are to stick to strict naming in my code, where both 
figured bass and dynamics occur in the singular and plural forms.

JM



Le 17 juin 2021 à 18:26, Robert Gaebler 
mailto:bob.gaeb...@outlook.com>> a écrit :


Jacques Menu mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>> writes:

> Hello folks,
>
> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to denote several
> occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way has there can be several
> harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
>
> In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
>
>
> Thanks for. your help!


As many others have pointed out, there is no standard term, for what you have 
in mind, in English.  I think the phrase "bass figure" works, and would be 
reasonably well understood from context.

Nevertheless, ad hoc neologisms abound in English usage, and you would not be 
out of place introducing your own term. Just try to make it intuitive or 
recognizable from similar usage.

Borrowing from the German, as mentioned by Lukas, let me mention that the word 
"signature" has fairly common English usage within technology, to refer to a 
collection of properties or characteristics that identify a particular instance 
of an object or event. So in a discussion of some specific figured bass 
examples, you might mention "these five figured bass signatures from measures 
10, 12, 14, 22, and 23...". I think most people would figure it out from the 
context. Maybe it would even catch on and become our English term for an 
instance of a figured bass symbol.
-
Bob Gaebler

Re: Terminology question

[Kevin Barry]

The two ways I am familiar with are
- bass figures
- using "figured bass" as a collective noun

Re: Terminology question

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Robert,

'figured bass signature’ is also a temptating choice, analog to ’time 
signature’…

BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in ’dynamic 
mark’.
So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?

These questions of mine are to stick to strict naming in my code, where both 
figured bass and dynamics occur in the singular and plural forms.

JM


> Le 17 juin 2021 à 18:26, Robert Gaebler  a écrit :
> 
> Jacques Menu mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch>> writes:
>  
> > Hello folks,
> > 
> > What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to denote 
> > several
> > occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way has there can be several
> > harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
> > 
> > In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks for. your help!
>  
>  
> As many others have pointed out, there is no standard term, for what you have 
> in mind, in English.  I think the phrase "bass figure" works, and would be 
> reasonably well understood from context.
>  
> Nevertheless, ad hoc neologisms abound in English usage, and you would not be 
> out of place introducing your own term. Just try to make it intuitive or 
> recognizable from similar usage.
>  
> Borrowing from the German, as mentioned by Lukas, let me mention that the 
> word "signature" has fairly common English usage within technology, to refer 
> to a collection of properties or characteristics that identify a particular 
> instance of an object or event. So in a discussion of some specific figured 
> bass examples, you might mention "these five figured bass signatures from 
> measures 10, 12, 14, 22, and 23...". I think most people would figure it out 
> from the context. Maybe it would even catch on and become our English term 
> for an instance of a figured bass symbol.
> -
> Bob Gaebler

Re: Terminology question

[Robert Gaebler]

Jacques Menu  writes:

> Hello folks,
>
> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to denote several
> occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way has there can be several
> harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
>
> In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
>
>
> Thanks for. your help!


As many others have pointed out, there is no standard term, for what you have 
in mind, in English.  I think the phrase "bass figure" works, and would be 
reasonably well understood from context.

Nevertheless, ad hoc neologisms abound in English usage, and you would not be 
out of place introducing your own term. Just try to make it intuitive or 
recognizable from similar usage.

Borrowing from the German, as mentioned by Lukas, let me mention that the word 
"signature" has fairly common English usage within technology, to refer to a 
collection of properties or characteristics that identify a particular instance 
of an object or event. So in a discussion of some specific figured bass 
examples, you might mention "these five figured bass signatures from measures 
10, 12, 14, 22, and 23...". I think most people would figure it out from the 
context. Maybe it would even catch on and become our English term for an 
instance of a figured bass symbol.
-
Bob Gaebler

Re: Terminology question

[Jacques Menu]

Thanks everybody for your help!

I asked the question because MusicXML describes an element of the figured bass 
this way:

  
3
8
  

I’ll use ‘figured bass element’ and 'figured bass elements’, they suit my 
purpose nicely.

A nice day!

JM


> Le 15 juin 2021 à 20:31, Hans Åberg  a écrit :
> 
> It is Merriam–Webster—there are many Webster. And no.
> 
> 
>> On 15 Jun 2021, at 20:24, Mark Stephen Mrotek  wrote:
>> 
>> Hans,
>> 
>> For Webster is a haircut only just a hair cut?
>> 
>> M
>> 
>> From: lilypond-user 
>> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of 
>> Hans Åberg
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 9:08 AM
>> To: Jacques Menu 
>> Cc: lilypond-user 
>> Subject: Re: Terminology question
>> 
>> 
>>> On 15 Jun 2021, at 16:20, Jacques Menu  wrote:
>>> 
>>> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’,…
>> 
>> It is figured basses, or continuos (singular continuo), according to 
>> Merriam-Webster Dictionary.
> 

Re: Terminology question

[Hans Åberg]

It is Merriam–Webster—there are many Webster. And no.


> On 15 Jun 2021, at 20:24, Mark Stephen Mrotek  wrote:
> 
> Hans,
>  
> For Webster is a haircut only just a hair cut?
>  
> M
>  
> From: lilypond-user 
> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of Hans 
> Åberg
> Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 9:08 AM
> To: Jacques Menu 
> Cc: lilypond-user 
> Subject: Re: Terminology question
>  
>  
>> On 15 Jun 2021, at 16:20, Jacques Menu  wrote:
>>  
>> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’,…
>  
> It is figured basses, or continuos (singular continuo), according to 
> Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

RE: Terminology question

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

Hans,

 

For Webster is a haircut only just a hair cut?

 

M

 

From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] 
On Behalf Of Hans Åberg
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 9:08 AM
To: Jacques Menu 
Cc: lilypond-user 
Subject: Re: Terminology question

 

 

On 15 Jun 2021, at 16:20, Jacques Menu mailto:imj-muz...@bluewin.ch> > wrote:

 

What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’,…

 

It is figured basses, or continuos (singular continuo), according to 
Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

 

 

Re: Terminology question

[Hans Åberg]

> On 15 Jun 2021, at 16:20, Jacques Menu  wrote:
> 
> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’,…

It is figured basses, or continuos (singular continuo), according to 
Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

Re: Terminology question

[Shane Brandes]

It never crossed my mind that figured bass was anything other than a non
countable noun. Just like fish or sheep. As a spoken term it sounds more
like a tax term.

Shane

On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 11:01 AM David Sumbler  wrote:

> I think the real question is "what do you call a single figure or column
> of figures under a bass note".  So far as I am aware, the term "figured
> bass" means a bass line (not a single note) that has figuring to indicate
> the harmonies.
>
> If I want to talk about a number of such bass lines - e.g. the bass lines
> of several pieces so notated - then I would call them "figured basses".
>
> I'm not sure that I have ever heard of a term to describe one single
> harmony so notated.
>
> Not a very helpful answer to your query, perhaps, but that's the usage I
> am familiar with.
>
> David
>
>
> On Tue, 2021-06-15 at 16:20 +0200, Jacques Menu wrote:
>
> Hello folks,
>
> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to
> denote several occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way has
> there can be several harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
>
> In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
>
> Thanks for. your help!
>
> JM
>
>
>

Re: Terminology question

[David Sumbler]

I think the real question is "what do you call a single figure or
column of figures under a bass note".  So far as I am aware, the term
"figured bass" means a bass line (not a single note) that has figuring
to indicate the harmonies.

If I want to talk about a number of such bass lines - e.g. the bass
lines of several pieces so notated - then I would call them "figured
basses".

I'm not sure that I have ever heard of a term to describe one single
harmony so notated.

Not a very helpful answer to your query, perhaps, but that's the usage
I am familiar with.

David


On Tue, 2021-06-15 at 16:20 +0200, Jacques Menu wrote:
> Hello folks,
> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to
> denote several occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way
> has there can be several harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
> 
> In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
> 
> 
> Thanks for. your help!
> 
> JM
> 
> 

Re: Terminology question

[David Kastrup]

Jacques Menu  writes:

> Hello folks,
>
> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to denote 
> several occurrences of the figures
> in a score, the same way has there can be several harmonies? Maybe ‘figured 
> bass figures’?
>
> In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
>
> *
> Thanks for. your help!

I'd lean towards just "bass figures".  There is no plural of "figured
bass" as such since "figured bass" is the name of the notation technique
rather than of individual bass figures.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: Terminology question

[Lukas-Fabian Moser]

Hi Jacques,

Am 15.06.21 um 16:20 schrieb Jacques Menu:
What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to 
denote several occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way has 
there can be several harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?


In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:

Thanks for. your help!


In German, one term that's at least partially in use is "Signatur": Each 
of your five < ... > expressions would be a "Generalbass-Signatur". (The 
word "Signatur" occurs in Heinichen, for example.) It seems not to be in 
use in English, though.


In my teaching, I sometimes refer to, e.g. <6 5> as one single "bass 
figure" or "Generalbassziffer", but of course that's a slight abuse of 
terminology.


Lukas

Re: Terminology question

[Jacques Menu Muzhic]

Thanks Simon & Torsten, it’s all clear now.

A nice day!

JM

> Le 18 juil. 2018 à 12:47, Torsten Hämmerle  a écrit 
> :
> 
> Menu Jacques wrote
>> Is the example realistic, with ligatures both above and below the staff? 
> 
> Yes, in polyphonic notation (stems in opposite direction), ligature brackets
> have to go both above and below the stave, just like slurs, ties, dynamics,
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> Menu Jacques wrote
>> I didn’t find any way to obtain ligatures below the staff in the docs.
> 
> If you use << … \\ … >> or separate Voices with \voiceOne and \voiceTwo, the
> ligature brackets will go below the stave for the second voice.
> 
> 
> 
> Menu Jacques wrote
>> Maybe there was always one voice only per staff at the time?
> 
> Yes, certainly, but it is not uncommon to have voices share a single stave
> in transcriptions using modern notation.
> 
> All the best,
> Torsten
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Terminology question

[Torsten Hämmerle]

Menu Jacques wrote
> Is the example realistic, with ligatures both above and below the staff? 

Yes, in polyphonic notation (stems in opposite direction), ligature brackets
have to go both above and below the stave, just like slurs, ties, dynamics,
...



Menu Jacques wrote
> I didn’t find any way to obtain ligatures below the staff in the docs.

If you use << … \\ … >> or separate Voices with \voiceOne and \voiceTwo, the
ligature brackets will go below the stave for the second voice.



Menu Jacques wrote
> Maybe there was always one voice only per staff at the time?

Yes, certainly, but it is not uncommon to have voices share a single stave
in transcriptions using modern notation.

All the best,
Torsten




--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Terminology question

[Simon Albrecht]

On 18.07.2018 09:22, Menu Jacques wrote:

Thanks Simon!

Is the example realistic, with ligatures both above and below the staff?
I didn’t find any way to obtain ligatures below the staff in the docs.

Maybe there was always one voice only per staff at the time?


At the time certainly so, and it’s very atypical for modern editions to 
put more than one voice in a staff, since they are usually very 
independent rhythmically and often share large parts of their range. 
However, it’s not unheard of and there are valid usecases, e.g. for 
short examples inside a text document – and there’s no problem doing 
that in LilyPond with either a specific LigatureBracket.direction 
override or, better, a \voiceTwo command.


Best, Simon



JM


Le 18 juil. 2018 à 03:15, Simon Albrecht  a écrit :

On 18.07.2018 02:41, Menu Jacques wrote:

Text spanners can be used in LP to obtain that, but what is their name in music 
in general?

They’re ligature brackets, used in modern editions to show that the mensural 
original used a ligature for these notes.
Using text spanners would therefore be not quite correct; the LilyPond 
equivalent is
{ \[ c1 d \] }
Note that this is the only spanner or item in general that unfortunately still 
uses infix syntax instead of the usual postfix syntax.

Best, Simon



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Terminology question

[Menu Jacques]

Thanks Simon!

Is the example realistic, with ligatures both above and below the staff? 
I didn’t find any way to obtain ligatures below the staff in the docs.

Maybe there was always one voice only per staff at the time?

JM

> Le 18 juil. 2018 à 03:15, Simon Albrecht  a écrit :
> 
> On 18.07.2018 02:41, Menu Jacques wrote:
>> Text spanners can be used in LP to obtain that, but what is their name in 
>> music in general?
> 
> They’re ligature brackets, used in modern editions to show that the mensural 
> original used a ligature for these notes.
> Using text spanners would therefore be not quite correct; the LilyPond 
> equivalent is
> { \[ c1 d \] }
> Note that this is the only spanner or item in general that unfortunately 
> still uses infix syntax instead of the usual postfix syntax.
> 
> Best, Simon


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Terminology question

[Simon Albrecht]

On 18.07.2018 02:41, Menu Jacques wrote:
Text spanners can be used in LP to obtain that, but what is their name 
in music in general?


They’re ligature brackets, used in modern editions to show that the 
mensural original used a ligature for these notes.
Using text spanners would therefore be not quite correct; the LilyPond 
equivalent is

{ \[ c1 d \] }
Note that this is the only spanner or item in general that unfortunately 
still uses infix syntax instead of the usual postfix syntax.


Best, Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user