[VIHUELA] Re: Polyphony and counterpoint
Grove 1980 vol 15:71 speaks of English usage. As a non-English speaker I see different options: - Usage in England - In the English language, not limited only to places where English is spoken. I am not quite sure what point you are making here. English usage refers to all places where English is spoken. i.e. it includes the United States, Canada etc. Other parts of the world where English may be spoken as a second language would be expected to follow that, rather than inventing their own usage. In fact many of the contributors to Groves are from the USA and the editing of the entries in Grove is intended to reflect universal standard usage in the English speaking world not just usage in England itself. I read quickly through the entry in Groves on line. The purpose of this is to trace the use of the word polyphony from the ancient Greeks up to the present day including its use by different writers on musical theory. It is scholarly article not intended to give common definitions. You need to read the article on Counterpoint as well which is similar. The Oxford Concise Dictionary and the Harvard Dictionary are standard works of reference in England and the USA which give definitions of terms in every day common usage. As far as I could understand it, the entry in the Dutch Dictionary which I quoted seem to support what I was saying - there are two facets to musical theory - harmony and counterpoint. We study harmony and counterpoint and when we analyse the music we analyse the harmony and counterpoint. The term polyphony refers more generally to different styles of counterpoint from different periods of musical history. I assume that in the Netherlands you extend the Polyphonic Era to include J.S. Bach which has some logic to it. However, we tend to make a difference between counterpoint which is modal - which is why our cut off point is circa 1600, and counterpoint which is tonal - which it is increasingly after 1600. That of course is a generalization. Monica From the context I understand that the first option is intended. Could anyone with better skills for English and linguistics have a look? In the (newer) Grove Music Online this paragraph is no longer there. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Polyphony/Counterpoint
2011/2/10 Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk: Just as a matter of interest I looked these terms up in a Dutch Dictionary. Interesting Dutch dictionary you have, that uses German for some of its definitions. ;-) Are they not to some extent interchangeable? For example we use terms like barre because it is untranslatable. But either way - it is defining the terms in a language other than English! Monica David -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Polyphony/Counterpoint
On 11 February 2011 14:18, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: Interesting Dutch dictionary you have, that uses German for some of its definitions. ;-) Are they not to some extent interchangeable? Auch, that hurt! I suppose it was the inimitable Oscar Wilde who said something to the extent that Britain and the United States were two nations divided by a common language. You can be certain the division between the Dutch and the German, let alone the division between their languages, is incomparably bigger. Anyway, looking up the definition of a Dutch word in a German dictionary would certainly not be deemed socially acceptable, let alone proper scholarly behaviour. David - for the less observant persons on this list: this was a message with a ;-) -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Polyphony/Counterpoint
I take your point - although it was an internet site that purported to be of Dutch/English dictionaries and the terms I put in were taken from another Dutch/English dictionary site - so they must be the same in German. I'll try again. Are they not to some extent interchangeable? Auch, that hurt! Sorry about that! I can tell you another funny (I hope) story. An English woman and her family were living in the Netherlands and she wrote an interesting article about life there for the newpaper. About the language she said Dutch is really the same as English - it is just that you spell it in a funny way. Monica I suppose it was the inimitable Oscar Wilde who said something to the extent that Britain and the United States were two nations divided by a common language. You can be certain the division between the Dutch and the German, let alone the division between their languages, is incomparably bigger. Anyway, looking up the definition of a Dutch word in a German dictionary would certainly not be deemed socially acceptable, let alone proper scholarly behaviour. David - for the less observant persons on this list: this was a message with a ;-) -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Polyphony/Counterpoint
Dear Monica, You're probably thinking of Dutch and Flemish, which you could say are to some extent interchangeable. German is quite different. Best wishes, Stewart. -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of David van Ooijen Sent: 11 February 2011 14:55 To: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Polyphony/Counterpoint On 11 February 2011 14:18, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: Interesting Dutch dictionary you have, that uses German for some of its definitions. ;-) Are they not to some extent interchangeable? Auch, that hurt! I suppose it was the inimitable Oscar Wilde who said something to the extent that Britain and the United States were two nations divided by a common language. You can be certain the division between the Dutch and the German, let alone the division between their languages, is incomparably bigger. Anyway, looking up the definition of a Dutch word in a German dictionary would certainly not be deemed socially acceptable, let alone proper scholarly behaviour. David - for the less observant persons on this list: this was a message with a ;-) -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Polyphony/Counterpoint
Yes! I got caught out by Google! Perhaps they don't always make a distinction between Dutch and Deutsch. Some of the terms did look like German to me but as my knowledge of Dutch is nil I took it at face value. Anyway - pace all the Dutch on this list, German is a major European language and German scholars are or have been in the forefront of musicology. The definitions and usage given seemed to me to be the same as we use in England. Monica - Original Message - From: Stewart McCoy lu...@tiscali.co.uk To: Vihuela List vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 6:50 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Polyphony/Counterpoint Dear Monica, You're probably thinking of Dutch and Flemish, which you could say are to some extent interchangeable. German is quite different. Best wishes, Stewart. -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of David van Ooijen Sent: 11 February 2011 14:55 To: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Polyphony/Counterpoint On 11 February 2011 14:18, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: Interesting Dutch dictionary you have, that uses German for some of its definitions. ;-) Are they not to some extent interchangeable? Auch, that hurt! I suppose it was the inimitable Oscar Wilde who said something to the extent that Britain and the United States were two nations divided by a common language. You can be certain the division between the Dutch and the German, let alone the division between their languages, is incomparably bigger. Anyway, looking up the definition of a Dutch word in a German dictionary would certainly not be deemed socially acceptable, let alone proper scholarly behaviour. David - for the less observant persons on this list: this was a message with a ;-) -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Virgil, Vergil, the usefulness of etymology or bourdon details
That's an interesting summary and very generous of you to say that you find Lex's and my discussion important as I often feel I am wasting everyone's time and getting very cross in the process. The etymology of the term motet is a fascinating topic in its own right. But we had better not start a discussion on that. Best Monica - Original Message - From: Nelson, Jocelyn nels...@ecu.edu To: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 6:48 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Virgil, Vergil, the usefulness of etymology or bourdon details Dear List, I listened to an entertaining talk yesterday afternoon on how research worked in the renaissance (it seems research didn't work so well, according to the speaker, who gave us some good laughs during his talk). The poet and scholar Poliziano (1454-1494) made a strong case for the correct spelling of the Roman poet's name, Vergil (Vergilius). His evidence, which was better than the evidence on the opposing side according to the professor giving the talk (such as the poet's spelling preference for his own name), has been ignored ever since--most of us know the poet as Virgil. The talk centered on why the truth was ignored and the difference between truth and influence: we consistently sacrifice truth forusefulness and custom, which is more influential. Some classicists in the room did bring up Virgil's word plays on his own name, and some other Latin and Italian spelling issues, but people generally appreciated his basic premise: that this sacrifice--usefulness over truth--is eventually to our detriment, even when the truth in the short run seems like it doesn't matter. Which brings me back to our conversation about etymology. I was surprised to read Ralf eschew the importance of the original meaning of a style, genre, or technique in musicbecause I happen to come to that particular question from the opposite direction: why wouldn't a performer or scholar in the field of early music want to understand a term's origins? Etymology might be interesting in itself and important in the study of language, but is of no use in a terminological discurse. In what way is the fact that the top voice of a polyphonic piece once was considered a texted version of an untexted clausula (and hence named 'motetus' - with words) relevant to the study of, say, Motets by Marc-Antoine Charpentier? We could argue the relevance of understanding the origins of the motet to an understanding of Charpentier's motets, and we could each make good points (perhaps while entirely convinced the other is wrong). But I'm more interested in how we decide to explore early musical techniques and performance practices. If we're brazen enough to perform music of the distant past, every detail and item of evidence we can find is vital to an understanding of any certain genre or performance practice, even when the final answer doesn't always seem to include many of the details. That's why I wouldn't want to teach the 17^th century French motet literature to students who haven't been through the earlier lectures on the substitute clausulae; in fact, the earlier course is officially a prerequisite for the later course at my school for just that reason. And that's why I find the evidentiary details in the discussion on bourdons between Monica and Lex and others on this list important. I'm grateful to them for taking the trouble to defend their viewpoints with specifics. Best wishes, Jocelyn -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
