On 8 Jul 2005 at 21:18, Christopher Smith wrote: > On Jul 8, 2005, at 5:24 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: > > > On 8 Jul 2005 at 10:21, Christopher Smith wrote: > > > >> My trick was (for 4 sixteenths, a quintuplet, and a quarter note) > >> to say out loud "TEE-ry tee-ry MATH-e-ma-ti-cal TAH." My nine year > >> old can do it (I tested it out on him.) > > > > Hmm. You pronounce "mathematical" differently than I do. My rhythm > > for it is 8th 8th 16th 16th 8th, with "ma-ti" being a subdivision of > > the length of the other syllables. In other words, four feet. > > Canadian. I have no other explanation. > > This came up a while ago, and some regions drop the "e", making it > four syllables, not unlike the beginning of a Viennese waltz QEEQ.
I pronounce all the syllables, just in a different rhythm than you. The rhythm of English is foot-based, and that's why it comes out that way. Of course, that contrasts with Italian, which is *not* foot- based. > > Yes, I can distort the pronunciation to be a quintuplet. > > Try this one from an older musician than I am: for quintuplets say > "Lollobrigida." For septuplets, say "Gina Lollobrigida." Hey, works > for me! Well, if you don't mind the implied accent pattern of GIna LOLloBRIgida, it seems OK to me -- because it's Italian, the lengths of the syllables all come out the same, but there's very marked strong/weak patterning there. I think it's better to learn these things without resort to imperfect analogs like this. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
