2007/5/3, Lukáš Lalinský <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Št, 2007-05-03 at 10:32 +0200, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote: > Classical users are so used to "chorus master" that we might be a > little annoyed at losing this term, OTOH, "x conducted choir on y" (or > is it "choirs"?) seems better than "x performed chorus master on y" to > me! > > Can you explain what the second option would offer more than the > first? Well, in my opinion it reduces duplication, because both AR types deal with the same action: conducting. I know that "chorus master" is a well known term, but the problem is that it's a noun. For AR phrase you need a verb and given that chorus master does "conduct" a chorus, having just AR type seems better to me.
Ha! As usual, my question was not precise enough. As I said, I like "conducted choir" better than "performed chorus master". In your first post, you spoke of a "first idea" then of "another idea". I was trying to understand what are the advantages and drawbacks of each idea. -- Frederic Da Vitoria
_______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
