lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: would 'gn' for G-natural be useful in \language "english" ?


From: Brian Barker
Subject: Re: would 'gn' for G-natural be useful in \language "english" ?
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 17:36:54 +0100

At 08:38 29/08/2014 -0700, Keith OHara wrote:
In English the names use two parts, noun-adjective, which allows the construction "C-natural". German has single words (ces c cis) for the pitches, and these are distinct from the names for the alterations (Be, AuflösungZeichen, Kreuz).

Interesting: thank you. I hadn't appreciated that. Rather as some arithmeticians call -3 "negative three" and not "minus three", so as to distinguish negation from subtraction - the result from the process.

The feature-request implicitly assumed, based on experience, that such errors ["c", when "cs" was meant but was in the key signature] already happen.

Oh, indeed they will.

Anyone using, for example, ABC notation had developed the habit of typing 'C' for the pitch at scale-step C in the key. The distinct naming was suggested as a way to help us more efficiently correct those errors.

That's where we disagree.

Would the ability to enter 'cn', or a note in the "Languages" table saying "In English 'cn' is an alternative to 'c' to denote the pitch C-natural", actually increase the rate of forgetting the 's' in 'cs' ?

That's what I'm suggesting - that allowing "cn" would encourage users to think as they would if writing music by hand or reading out the note names.

Brian Barker



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]