Klarinet Archive - Posting 000529.txt from 1998/10
From: Roger Shilcock <roger.shilcock@-----.uk> Subj: Re: [kl] Accents again Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:58:41 -0400
Yes -- I expect we can.
I wish I had time to write that book, though (something completely
different).....
Roger S.
On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Roger Garrett wrote:
> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:06:10 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Roger Garrett <rgarrett@-----.edu>
> Reply-To: klarinet@-----.org
> To: klarinet@-----.org
> Subject: Re: [kl] Accents again
>
>
> Sure I'm serious.....there is a mark on paper called an accent in
> music.....do you disagree? Do we always have to think of it that
> way...nope. Do I assert that we should.....nope. Do young music students
> (eg. university undergraduates) always
> understand.........sometimes....sometimes not.
>
> I understand your perception of how accent was being used in the context
> of phrasing - I also see that it was a different perception than mine. I
> don't see that there was anything wrong with the idea of accents
> used as a teaching tool....or of my description.....no need to attack or
> sarcastically imply something other than there was a difference of
> understanding in what was being said.
>
> I don't teach students using the word accents - primarily because of my
> background in public school teaching where I notice students learn one
> definition of the word accent. Most music students are not taught the
> subtle nuances of "accent" as it is applied toward phrasing (although
> the teaching technique would be very effective in most applications
> that I can think of). Most music students are taught that it means to
> emphasize a particular note - sometimes to tongue harder, or, worse, to
> play it louder than the other notes. It is far more common for students
> to misunderstand the word "accent" as a teaching tool for phrasing than it
> is for them to misunderstand direction of air stream and arrival point in
> a phrase - of course, that is only my opinion based on teaching privately
> and in the public and private schools (ages 5-12, and university).
>
> Nice description of accent by the way. Keep in mind that not everyone
> (students) will know your chosen definition out of the several that are
> available. The two listed in the music dictionary I keep by my desk
> for teaching are: Accent - 1) an emphasis on a particular note, giving
> a regular or irregular rhthmic pattern. For more detail, see Rhythm.
> 2) the name applied to the simplest forms of plainsong tones, i.e. very
> slightly infected monotones. There is not description of accent as a part
> of a phrase.....although it certainly could be.
>
> I don't mind arguing about the word accent! I just don't enjoy the
> insinutation that my initial posting.....a suggested contribution
> to the discussion regarding phrasing that I perceived as a simple,
> innocent idea for helping students to understand phrasing had to be called
> an example of "bad properties of American woodwind playing." I felt that
> was an inappropriate comment.
>
> Do you think we could get off this issue now?
>
> Roger Garrett
> IWU
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Roger Shilcock wrote:
> > "Accent" in poetry and rhetoric is to do with emplasis. "Accent" in music,
> > according to Roger G, is a mark on a
> > piece of paper. He can-not be ser-i-ous!
> > The use of "accents" to mean various signs on paper is secondary, and
> > came into English (and other languages) from Early Modern French. Perhaps
> > it should have stayed there. The history and provenance of such signs
> > deserves a book, which I don't think exists - but I'm open to
> > commissions....
> > Roger Shilcock
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|