Wikipedia:Peer review/Italian music terminology/archive1

Italian music terminology

This is a glossary page, a companion to music of Italy and its subarticles. There are no pictures, but I don't think they're necessary here. I plan on creating a redirect from every item on the list to this page, unless an article already exists. I'd especially like input from Italian speakers. Tuf-Kat 02:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find the referencing inconsistent and confusing. About 34 terms are referenced (3), the New Grove Encyclopedia, but other terms are referenced individually with apparently identical referencing: (11, 12, 18, 20, 27). Others are similar: (19, 22, 23) and (26). At least for me, it would be easier to see references for New Grove 637-680, Garland 604-625, Garland 860-864, and Alessio 189-201, and let some of the terms have two or more distinct reference marks. Gimmetrow 23:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Everything that has one source is cited with a multi-use reference, everything cited by more than one has its own footnote. I like your idea, but I thought it was considered bad form to have more than one footnote in one spot. Tuf-Kat 03:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's common in Harvard-style referencing. In numbered-style multiple reference marks conveys information that the statement has multiple independent sources. Gimmetrow 17:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, done. Tuf-Kat 01:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tuf-Kat. I think it's potentially a useful list, though I am confused (nothing new for me!) about overlap between this and the article on Italian musical terms used in English, the discussion page for which indicates some debate about that article, itself, being redundant or about to be merged with another--or something. In any event, I added a link to one of the terms--maggio drammatico. Do you want additions to the list--dynamic and tempo markings such as allegro, forte, etc. etc.?

Also, the lead sentence might indicate that such terms are not just useful in the music of Italy, but elsewhere since it was and still is common to use Italian terms. Somewhere, a short list of common abbreviations might be useful; that is, f for forte, p for piano, mf for mezzoforte. An interesting point of trivia--for the sake of completeness--is that such abbreviations have by now been "foreignized"--that is, rendered un-Italian. For example, the abbreviation pp stands for pianissimo, grammatically a superlative in Italian, meaning "as soft as possible". You can't play any softer than that, yet Tschaikovsky has a section in the 6th symphony that is marked pppppp. Anything more than two is unpronouncable in Italian. There are also many examples of the ff--fortissimo--being upped to fff and fff. Jeffmatt 06:44, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this page is supposed to be about terms used to describe "Italian music", not Italian words used to describe music. So, I don't think stuff like "allegro" should be there because they're not primarily used to describe Italian music -- that's incidental to the English language, because they're used to describe any kind of music. That's really better at Italian musical terms used in English. Admittedly, there's some overlap, but I think it's two useful, and separate, ideas. Tuf-Kat 01:29, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, the main thing I am looking for an Italian speaker to help with is clearing up the Italian language. Many of the items begin with what appears to be a preposition (e.g. a voca diritta, alla metitora) or a word meaning "song" or "dance" (e.g. canti alla stesa, ballo di Mantova). Are these things necessary? Are any items listed multiple times due to variations in display? Should they be alphabetized under alla and canti or metitora and stesa (or alla stesa)? Tuf-Kat 01:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Got the idea. Thank you for the clarification. More later. Jeffmatt 05:40, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is some confusion even among Italian librarians on this (I'm married to one!). Italian-language music glossaries are as likely to list, for example, a capella under A as under C, as in capella (coro a). In your case, all of the entries in the A section that have the preposition+article compound alla--alla cepranese, for example-- (alla means "like a" or "as a") could be listed by the noun, as well--C, in this case. Since the list is relatively short and since English-speakers (and many Italian speakers) are likely to look under A first, I suggest (with concurrence from two native sources) leaving the A section as is. It is not confusing or incorrect as it stands. It does leave you with the problem that an English-speaker might conclude that the whole noun is alla cepranese--as in "They're playing an alla cepranese" instead of, correctly, "They're playing a cepranese. I don't see a way around that problem unless you want to move those entries to their repsective letters and say something like cepranese, alla: played in the manner of a cepranese, which is ackward. I think you can leave it the way it is. Another solution is to eliminate the compound altogether and simply list cepranese: a form of multi-part song in Lazio. Those prep+article compounds are not necessary, to answer your question. Maybe that's the best solution of all. If you decide to do that, do not eliminate alla between terms--that is, in canti alla stesa, for example. That alla is different and is an integral part of the description of the term.

On your list, check alla'asprese. It is almost certainly all'asprese; the apostrope is meant to stand for the first A. Also, Lazio is the Italian noun for the area. If it is accepted English to use geographical names as adjectives, leave it. If it isn't, I suggest saying "in Lazio"(instead of Latian, which might confuse readers. You correctly have Calabrian and Sardinian. Might as well be consistent.)

"Addio padre" is the name of one particular song, I think, compposed in 1916 (during WW1). You have it as "A post-war political song," which makes it sound like a generic reference to many songs--a type of song-- after WW2.

For consistency, if the Italian noun is singular, make the English singular; if plural, plural. That is: ballo is singular, so it should read "ballo di baraben: a ritual dance," and not "Ritual dances". See also under C. Canti is plural and should be rendered as "songs" and not "song". Canto is the singular--song. The same with canzone. That's singular--song. Also, a ciaramella has a double-reed, not single. That is, it's a folk oboe, which is a double-reed instrument. Jeffmatt 07:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks! I'll make some modifications based on this tonight. Tuf-Kat 10:58, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. The more I think about it, the more I think the last solution is the best. That is, listing the name without the prep+article compound. Cheers from Naples. Jeffmatt 12:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, realphabetized.

Since this article is about the terms, not the study of terms, shouldn't it be called Italian music terms? Also, as it's a list, should it be called List of Italian music terms? Percy Snoodle 11:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so for two reasons: I hope to add a bit more about these terms in the near future. Plus, terminology means "The vocabulary of technical terms used in a particular field, subject, science, or art", which seems appropriate for this article. Tuf-Kat 03:32, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ _t 15:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]