RE: Terminology question

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

David,

Yes, yet what if the level was dynamic, i.e., changing, then dynamic would 
operate as an adjective - stating what kind?

-----Original Message-----
From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr.com@gnu.org] 
On Behalf Of David Zelinsky
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:12 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Terminology question

Just a pendantic remark that, in the phrase "dynamic level", the word "dynamic" 
is still being used as a noun, though it is modifying another noun.  
Technically it is a "noun adjunct".  It would also make sense to interperet it 
as the *adjective* "dynamic", but then "dynamic level"
would mean a level that is dynamic, i.e. changing.  That makes sense, but it's 
not what was meant in the present context.

-David

Robert Gaebler <Bob.Gaebler@outlook.com> writes:

> Jacques,
>
> Thanks… happy to advise.  I would call \ff a dynamic.
> “Dynamics” is an interesting word, described as “plural in form, 
> singular or plural in construction” in Merriam-Webster. The plural 
> construct usually refers to the entire range of variation of loud to 
> soft within a piece.  So you might say, “The dynamics in this etude 
> are exquisite!”  (Plural in construction.) But a conductor or music 
> teacher might caution, “Now, watch the dynamics here!” (Singular in 
> construction, admonishing caution in the _application_ of dynamic 
> expression in this particularly difficult
> passage.)
> The \ff is a specific mark denoting a dynamic level to be applied at 
> the point of usage.  Note that “dynamic” is both an adjective and a 
> noun.  The mark in the score is referred to as a dynamic (noun).  It 
> denotes a dynamic (adjective) level to be expressed.
> I hope this helps.
>
> BoG
>
> From: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muzhic@bluewin.ch>
> Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:00 AM
> To: Robert Gaebler<mailto:Bob.Gaebler@outlook.com>
> Cc: Jacques Menu<mailto:imj-muzhic@bluewin.ch>; 
> lilypond-user@gnu.org<mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: Terminology question
>
> Hello Robert,
>
> 'figured bass signature’ is also a temptating choice, analog to ’time 
> signature’…
>
> BTW, another question came to me: in the LP notation manual, ‘dynamic’ is 
> sometimes a noun as in ‘dynamics’ and sometimes an adjective as in ’dynamic 
> mark’.
> So, is \ff a dynamic or a dynamics?
>
> These questions of mine are to stick to strict naming in my code, where both 
> figured bass and dynamics occur in the singular and plural forms.
>
> JM
>
>
>
> Le 17 juin 2021 à 18:26, Robert Gaebler 
> <Bob.Gaebler@outlook.com<mailto:Bob.Gaebler@outlook.com>> a écrit :
>
>
> Jacques Menu <imj-muzhic@bluewin.ch<mailto:imj-muzhic@bluewin.ch>> writes:
>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> What would be the plural of ‘figured bass’, if that applies, to 
>> denote several occurrences of the figures in a score, the same way 
>> has there can be several harmonies? Maybe ‘figured bass figures’?
>>
>> In the example below, there 5 such occurrences:
>>
>>
>> Thanks for. your help!
>
>
> As many others have pointed out, there is no standard term, for what 
> you have in mind, in English.  I think the phrase "bass figure" works, 
> and would be reasonably well understood from context.
>
> Nevertheless, ad hoc neologisms abound in English usage, and you would 
> not be out of place introducing your own term. Just try to make it 
> intuitive or recognizable from similar usage.
>
> Borrowing from the German, as mentioned by Lukas, let me mention that 
> the word "signature" has fairly common English usage within 
> technology, to refer to a collection of properties or characteristics 
> that identify a particular instance of an object or event. So in a 
> discussion of some specific figured bass examples, you might mention 
> "these five figured bass signatures from measures 10, 12, 14, 22, and 
> 23...". I think most people would figure it out from the context. 
> Maybe it would even catch on and become our English term for an 
> instance of a figured bass symbol.
> -----
> Bob Gaebler