Term for "shyly" ?

To get slightly technical: if you use english terminology for one thing, then you must use english terminology for ALL things in your score. This is one of the basic rules of engraving. Do not switch to mutiple languages for score expressions within the same score.

Stravinsky would disagree. But then again, he's also dead.

Schumann used both German and Italian in his markings.

Stravinsky would disagree. But then again, he's also dead.

*Wonders if he's the only that laughed at that* :D

Stravinsky would disagree. But then again, he's also dead.

But then, Strawinski wasn't an engraver nor a publisher, now was he. If Strawinski had jumped off a bridge, would you go and do it too?

Why copy the bad habits of another composer when the good habits are there for you to learn?

No, I live in a country where Italian is the standard for communication on a score.

There are no exact "standards". There are equally as many scores written in German, Italian, French and English.

As Qccowboy said, it's important not to mix the terms. It would be quite silly to say "Un poco allegretto and cheerful". Also, Gardener, you're just being too picky :P There are a few things that are terribly standardised, like dynamics and technical terms (sul ponticello, arco, pizzicatto, although I have seen the respective terms in German, but I guess that's a tendency of the Germans, using German for every-single-thing :P ). But for example, Birtwistle's scores are all in English, Lachenmann's are all in German, Messiaen's are all in French etc. It also depends largely on the editor/engraver and the publishing company.

But I do believe that using Italian terms is a bit silly, when something is more easily understood by writing it in English or another language.

Depends entirely if you consider a score art as well. If it's prettier to have something in Esperanto, then hell, why not. You can always write translations later for the people who don't speak Esperanto (Berio's Sequenzas have tons of instructions both in english and german, and of course probably in italian in other editions.) It's not like you have to limit yourself to write in only one language or another, or any given combination. And, moreover, engravers and publishers are starting to be pretty pass

But for example, Birtwistle's scores are all in English, Lachenmann's are all in German, Messiaen's are all in French etc.

Just for the sake of it I had to check! I don't have any Birtwistle scores, but I had a quick look with Messiaen and Lachenmann. With Messiaen, the first thing I noticed in "Les oiseaux de Karuizawa" out of the "sept Haikai" was the mixing of Italian and French tempo-related terms, such as "rall. sempre - - - - - - - Presque lent". A bit earlier he uses "ralentir". For Lachenmann, I checked the Toccatina for violin solo, where he combines terms such as "distinto" and "fluido" with "Saiten hinter dem Steg", or "2 Oktaven h

*should totally write a score in Klingon*

has the person who started this thread even said anything?

Timido would be the Italian word for "Timid" which has the same basic meaning as "shyly" while sounding quite a bit more pretentious.

haha sounds PERFECT! lol I did want pretentious Italian terms if possible :-)

Timid is exactly what I meant. I asked a harp player and they were like:

"Well 'shyly' is a word."

And I was like "Yeah, but you know what I mean!"

and she was "Like, In a shy manner?"

Me: "YES IN A SHY MANNER! What else would it mean?"

Her: "Ummm... No, I can't think of anything."

Me: "Omg, why couldn't you have just said that 5 minutes ago?!"

lol *sigh*

Anyway I did a search for Timid and found "Pauroso" which means "timidly, fearfully". Sounds perfect :-)

Happy I could help. :)

has the person who started this thread even said anything?

I have now... I only posted this a few days ago. I didn't expect so many replies so quickly lol

I figured there be like three posts with different terms haha...

Thanks everyone!

Chris :-)

Well, case closed. haha

have fun Chris

Thanks!

I'm enjoying writing this piece which is good. Only problem is I still have 30 minutes of OTHER music I need to write over the next half a dozen weeks. Sounds easy, right?

Well it isn't when you've got 6 other subject which all need study as well :'( lol

Anyway, I'll post a copy when I'm done and get some Opinions :-)

Go for one that's actually an accepted musical term, rather than botching through an online translator.

Affannoso

Pauroso is a proper musical term. I got it from a listing of musical terms :-)

What exactly defines a word as an "accepted musical term" anyways? How many composers must have used it before until it becomes "accepted"? And weren't -all- musical terms in the end used by one composer for the first time, when they certainly weren't an "accepted musical term" yet? I quite agree with sticking to more well-known terms if you're using Italian, of course, but the primary concern should be understandability, nothing else. At least go by the guideline that if you don't know a term, don't use it. Yes, a professional musician might be able to understand it, but how can you know how well-known it is if you don't even know it yourself?

If you have to use a dictionary (musical or other) for your musical indications, better use English right away. If you're very lucky, those musicians who don't understand "pauroso" (which will be quite many) will look it up in a dictionary. But it's much more likely they'll be too lazy for that and simply ignore it alltogether.

Communication is the purpose of the score (in most cases). As long as you make your point across clearly, anything is allowed, and as Gardener said, if you don't understand it, it probably isn't the right term.

That's what Gardner (heh :P ) Read's book says, that in the bottom line, the purpose of inventing new symbols for notation should only happen if it makes it easier for the performer to understand what you have in mind, otherwise there is no point.

I concur with jujimufu. The reason composers combine native tongue with Italian is to make their scores as understandable as possible. Ultimately, that's what notation is about; conveying what you consider important as clearly as is possible. If your performers are going to be mainly English-speaking, it doesn't make sense to use extended Italian terms any more than it does to write 'decrease' when you want someone to get quieter.

Decrease is a bad term to use for a decrescendo. Decrease what? Decrease the tempo? the volume? the level of 'espressivo'? the vibrato?

And for music that is going to be played perhaps in different countries, English cannot be assumed to be the standard language -- that's half the point of this. Most non-English speaking countries use the Italian terms -- English is not the lingua franca of musical scores. Italian is.

I think you misunderstood Zetetic, and he was actually using the "decrease" as an example of something where using English wouldn't be advisable, in contrast to "extended" non-standard terminology for which English might be more suitable.

And whether English is a "standard" language or not, it's simply a fact that it's (after Mandarin and Spanish, I think) one of the most well-known languages around the world. The fact that using Italian words in music has more tradition doesn't mean every musician speaks Italian fluently. In fact, most musicians do not speak Italian at all, but just know a certain range of terms, whereas a good number of them can speak English. Therefore if you describe something where no well-known standard exists, chances are better that you will be understood if you use English.

I think we all agreed that for very standartised terms, we should simply stick with the standard, which is in many cases Italian. I don't think anybody here advocates the use of "softly" over "p". The only question is how far and for what it makes sense to use Italian or any other specific language.

Dynamic markings are okay, considering those are more symbols than actual "directions".

"Stealthy Symphony" has a certain ring to it... :D

Bashful?