Darcy James Argue / 05.2.10 / 00:09 AM wrote:
No, it absolutely does. Let me try one last time:
Dog bites man.
Man bites dog.
What's the difference? Same three words. Different meaning. What
accounts for the difference?
Grammar. Grammar controls meaning.
Or may be the grammar style is
On 10 Feb 2005, at 12:26 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 10 Feb 2005 at 0:09, Darcy James Argue wrote:
No, it absolutely does. Let me try one last time:
Dog bites man.
Man bites dog.
What's the difference? Same three words. Different meaning. What
accounts for the difference?
The fact that
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 9 Feb 2005 at 6:40, dhbailey wrote:
A friend of mine who is a professional violinist and violin teacher
has explained to me the importance of physical memory for the solo
violinist in regard to intonation as opposed to having a good ear.
The point is that hitting
Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account wrote:
Agreed. If it were only as simple as having a window with the staff,
clef, sharps, flats, naturals, and being able to drag the symbols to
where they are required on the staff, it would be great!
Yes, it's a big help not having to touch that dialog box. I
Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 7:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
I just pointed
out that if the music is incomprehensible without reference to
outside information that is not musical in nature, then it's not very
good music.
Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree there. I
Mark D Lew wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 4:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
. . . Is it important to know
that _The Magic Flute_ is full of Masonic symbolism? . . .
Perhaps, because otherwise, it's fairly incoherent. I would say that
proves that it's not a very good opera.
The fact that Flute has
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Feb 2005 at 17:56, Mark D Lew wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 4:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
. . . Is it important to know
that _The Magic Flute_ is full of Masonic symbolism? . . .
Perhaps, because otherwise, it's fairly incoherent. I would say that
proves that it's not a
Darcy James Argue wrote:
[snip]
Both a human and a pool-playing robot (like, say, Deep Green --
http://www.ece.queensu.ca/hpages/faculty/greenspan/) have to solve
exactly the same problem, which happens to be a problem of applied physics.
So one solves it with neurons and one solves it with
Do you consciously think about grammar when you speak?
Is grammar significant to communication?
- Darcy
Can someone communicate effectively without having consciously learned
the rules of grammar specifically (as opposed to picking up general
concepts of communication)? Certainly, children
d. collins wrote:
Jari Williamsson écrit:
For now, the workaround is to right-click on the text block in TBM and
use Copy to other document..., available in the 0.18 betas. This can
copy the text block directly to other opened documents (without going
though the TBM Clipboard).
I was just
A-NO-NE Music wrote:
I hope my erratic grammar passes for communication here :-)
Seriously, I wish if I had any talent in linguistics. I just don't have
a heart for it.
Do not about it worry.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
I am acutely aware of the physics involved in music - always, albeit at a subconscious level that some might describe as trivial.
As I am planning sounds - is the piano lid open or closed, French Horns face backward and spread their sound, gut strings sound different than steel, French double
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Hey, I'm not ignoring it! I was just trying to resist the urge to make my
no-doubt-anticipated musico-politically incorrect two-finger mouth salute
over Mozart's incessantly repetitive noodling.
I feel for you, too, Dennis.
On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at 11:33 AM, Raymond Horton wrote:
A-NO-NE Music wrote:
I hope my erratic grammar passes for communication here :-)
Seriously, I wish if I had any talent in linguistics. I just don't
have
a heart for it.
Do not about it worry.
That's the kind of tomfoolery up
On 09 Feb 2005, at 7:07 AM, dhbailey wrote:
Richard Yates wrote:
Do you consciously think about grammar when you speak?
Is grammar significant to communication?
- Darcy
Oooh, good one!
Can someone communicate effectively without having consciously learned
the rules of grammar specifically (as
At 10:33 AM -0500 2/9/05, dhbailey wrote:
Could you please explain what aspects of physics are in my conscious
thought while I'm playing the trumpet?
Physics is the science which defines and describes in precise detail
the actions and interactions. I don't concede that we're discussing
Andrew suggested that history's verdict on Janacek is long since
in. I think it's way too soon to say that. I can think of a dozen
opera composers who were considered great 75 years after their death
but were discarded by history 50 years later. (Plus a few more who
were great for a
On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at 12:42 PM, Phil Daley wrote:
At 2/9/2005 11:54 AM, Chuck Israels wrote:
I am acutely aware of the physics involved in music - always, albeit
at a subconscious level that some might describe as trivial.
As I am planning sounds - is the piano lid open or closed,
On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at 03:02 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
I cannot think of a single composer, in any genre, who having been
considered great at the age of 150, came to be considered
insignificant, or even minor, at any later time.
Composers, living or dead, do tend to go out of
On Feb 9, 2005, at 12:02 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
First of all, Janacek is not an opera composer--he wrote important
music in a wide variety of genres, and even were all his operas to be
forgotten the remaining body of work would be more than sufficient to
maintain his standing as a major
On Feb 9, 2005, at 1:01 PM, Owain Sutton wrote:
For composers of age of 150, the limiting date is 1855. So your
description actually focuses on a few decades of composition, and on
those composers' current reputation. It neither proves nor
demonstrates anything.
How do you figure only a few
On Feb 9, 2005, at 3:16 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Since he dangle his grammatical temporal dongle, I wonder if he'd
clarify
if he meant the fame from the late 18th century on, or the composer
from
the late 18th century on.
Ah, now I see the confusion. I assumed he meant fame from the late
Two companies I work for use Times Semibold font for lyrics. I'm using Mac Finale 2004c and Mac OS 10.3.5 on a G4 powerbook. I've always used "1. Xxx" at the beginning of the verses with an "option space" to hold everything together as one syllable. In F2004c Times Semibold looks fine on the
Ken Moore commented:
If by comprehensibility you mean the same as I do, then I agree.OTOH, I
don't see how you could get any grasp on meaning (which is very tenuous
concept in music, IMO) without reference to outside information.
in response to David Bailey:
I never claimed the right to make
http://www.finalemusic.com/downloads/download_file.asp?id=308
At 08:54 PM 2/9/2005 -0500, you wrote:
DId Coda post a new build or something?
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
Could you please explain what aspects of physics are in my conscious
thought while I'm playing the trumpet?
You are calculating the air pressures necessary using Bernoulli's Principle
and the modulus of elasticity of skin as it relates to the natural
vibrational frequency of the air column from
Bernouli's law, actually, making the lips buzz like any other double
(or single) reeds. Same law that holds up both fixed-wing and
rotary-wing aircraft. John
I cannot believe that someone else also mentioned Bernoulli! By the way, I
heard somewhere recently that the relative force of
On 8 Feb 2005 at 19:38, Mark D Lew wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 6:05 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
No one is a bigger fan of Mozart than I am. But I have always felt
that the Magic Flute is incoherent *as an opera* (or Singspiel,
technically speaking, I guess). If it did not have some of the
On 9 Feb 2005 at 0:27, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 08 Feb 2005, at 7:30 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Feb 2005 at 1:31, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Please explain how you would build a pool-playing robot without
including some sort of physics module in the AI.
A human pool player
On 8 Feb 2005 at 22:07, Richard Yates wrote:
Do you consciously think about grammar when you speak?
Is grammar significant to communication?
- Darcy
Oooh, good one!
No, it's the same question as before, and the answer is that it is
significant to *enabling* it, but does not necessarily
On 9 Feb 2005 at 10:40, Ken Moore wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] David W.
Fenton writes: Well, now you're in a whole different set of issues,
none of which are fundamental to the meaning and comprehensibility of
music.
I'm not sure that I understand your use of the terms meaning and
That doesn't mean grammar has any significance to the meaning of any
particular utterance (though it certainly *could*).
If you really believe this then I can only assume that you have a rather
nonstandard definition of 'grammar' in mind. Can you write some examples of
utterances in which you
On 9 Feb 2005 at 6:33, dhbailey wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 7:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
I just pointed
out that if the music is incomprehensible without reference to
outside information that is not musical in nature, then it's not
very good music.
On 9 Feb 2005 at 6:40, dhbailey wrote:
Darcy James Argue wrote:
[snip]
Both a human and a pool-playing robot (like, say, Deep Green --
http://www.ece.queensu.ca/hpages/faculty/greenspan/) have to solve
exactly the same problem, which happens to be a problem of applied
physics.
On 9 Feb 2005 at 5:19, Richard Yates wrote:
Do you consciously think about grammar when you speak?
Is grammar significant to communication?
- Darcy
Can someone communicate effectively without having consciously
learned the rules of grammar specifically (as opposed to picking up
No. We haven't changed it. The only fix (outside of HP and SmartMusic Marker
PI's) was the insert measure problem.
On 2/9/05 8:45 PM, Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I meant Did Coda post a new build of *FinMac2005b* -- which I
downloaded and installed as soon as it was announced.
On 9 Feb 2005 at 6:48, Richard Yates wrote:
I don't think anybody has said physics has no significance, just
that it is not part of people's conscious thought processes while
making music or playing pool.
My part of this thread has been to respond to the post that said:
Physics is
On 9 Feb 2005 at 19:28, Richard Yates wrote:
That doesn't mean grammar has any significance to the meaning of any
particular utterance (though it certainly *could*).
If you really believe this then I can only assume that you have a
rather nonstandard definition of 'grammar' in mind. Can
On 9 Feb 2005 at 19:37, Richard Yates wrote:
It seems to me that you are willfully re-reading everything I've
written -- I'm talking about *musical* significance, and always have
been, and quite clearly.
There are those asterisks again! . . .
Asterisks are not equal to quotation marks.
That doesn't mean grammar has any significance to the meaning of any
particular utterance (though it certainly *could*).
If you really believe this then I can only assume that you have a
rather nonstandard definition of 'grammar' in mind. Can you write some
examples of utterances in
On 10 Feb 2005 at 0:09, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 10 Feb 2005, at 12:04 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 9 Feb 2005 at 23:58, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 09 Feb 2005, at 10:36 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Physics has no necessary *musical* significance, just has grammar
has no
On 9 Feb 2005 at 21:11, Richard Yates wrote:
That doesn't mean grammar has any significance to the meaning of
any particular utterance (though it certainly *could*).
If you really believe this then I can only assume that you have a
rather nonstandard definition of 'grammar' in
42 matches
Mail list logo
