Unterschiede

Hier werden die Unterschiede zwischen zwei Versionen angezeigt.

--- gr_indiv:0980 [2025/07/20 10:12] – xaverkainzbauer
+++ gr_indiv:0980 [2025/11/27 17:02] (aktuell) – xaverkainzbauer
@@ Zeile 1: / Zeile 1: @@
-[[cento:centologia#centones_missalis|🔘]] [[0002|IN]] [[0180|GR]] [[grad:0456|TR]] [[0324|AL]] **<fc #BD0C11>OF</fc>** [[0615|CO]]
+[[cento:centologia#centones_missalis|🔘]] [[0002|IN]] [[0180|GR]] [[grad:0456|TR]] [[0324|AL]] **<fc #BD0C11>OF</fc>** [[0615|CO]] <fc #ffffff>xxxxx</fc>
-<fc #ffffff>xxxxx</fc>
 [[0480|1️⃣]] [[0479|2️⃣]] [[0494|3️⃣]] [[0481|4️⃣]] [[0490|5️⃣]] [[0502|6️⃣]] [[0504|7️⃣]] ✅
-<fc #ffffff>xxxxx</fc>
+<fc #ffffff>xxxxx</fc> [[ant:0004|AN]] [[ant:7001|RP]] [[ant:9815|IV]]  [[alia:alia|alia]]
-[[ant:0004|AN]] [[ant:7001|RP]] [[ant:9815|IV]]  [[alia:alia|alia]]
 ------------------
 [[0566]] ⟽ **[[cento_gr:cento_of8|OF 8]]** ⟾ [[0568]]
 {%syn:title:grad:0980%}
 [[0567|OF]] – [[0979|V1]] – **<fc #BD0C11>V2</fc>** <fc #ffffff>xxx</fc> [[grad:0980|⏹️]]
-<fc #ffffff>xxx</fc>  <fc #4682b4>Tibi soli peccavi</fc>
+<fc #ffffff>xxx</fc> OT 36 - ON xx - BzG 72/9
 -------
 <fc #4682b4>"co-//ram//"</fc> BzG argumentieren für einen Pes "re-mi" mit vergleichbaren Stellen in A und Y (= 11.Jh). Diese Quellen sind längst einer Tonleiter-Ideologie anhängend: jedes größere Intervall, Terz aufwärts, muss zur Tonleiter aufgefüllt werden (Plerosis).\\
@@ Zeile 16: / Zeile 14: @@
 <fc #4682b4>"//in// sermonibus"</fc> Der mögliche [[neumen:neuma#trc_int]], in E alternativ notiert, wird hier grundsätzlich mit Quart notiert, um für die Aufführungspraxis klar zu machen, dass der "erste Ton" des Trc keinen fixen Tonort besitzt, er ist ein portamento. Hier einer der Fälle, wo sich der Intonationstorculus von 3 Tönen auf nur mehr einen Ton reduziert hat. Nur mehr der mittlere Ton ist übrig und trotzdem denkt der Sänger den ganzen Trc mit. Ein eindringliches Beispiel, wie sehr sich "Sprachkunst", der "cantus gregorianus" einer Reduzierung auf "Töne" widersetzt.
--------
+  V2. An dir allein habe ich gesündigt / und das Böse vor dir tat ich,\\
-V2. An dir allein habe ich gesündigt / und das Böse vor dir tat ich,\\
+  erbarme dich meiner / damit du gerechtfertigt würdest / Herr,  in deinen Worten.
-erbarme dich meiner / damit du gerechtfertigt würdest / Herr,  in deinen Worten.
+  V2. I have sinned against you alone / and I have done evil in your sight,\\
-V2. I have sinned against you alone / and I have done evil in your sight,\\
+  have mercy on me / so that you may be justified / Lord, in your words.
-have mercy on me / so that you may be justified / Lord, in your words.
--------
+<fc #4682b4>“co-//ram//”</fc> BzG argue for a pes “re-mi” with comparable positions in A and Y (= 11th century). These sources have long adhered to a scale ideology: every major interval, third upward, must be filled in to the scale (plerosis).\\
+We treat the pes analogously to the [[formulae:alloq|alloquium]]: the first note is very light, merely a portamento that certainly cannot establish its own pitch, hence the unison connection to the preceding neume.\\
+Kl + Mod raise the target note of the pes to “fa” to avoid the semitone tension (do revision), Kl raises the whole third pes (!). Both also change the following semitone movement to “//fe//-ci” “mi-fa-mi-do” to “**fa-fa**-mi-do” for the same reason.\\
+<fc #4682b4>“do-//mi//-ne”</fc> The neume is also a ClvSpp, as in the following word “ser-//mo//-nibus,” 4-tone with 5 positions, the quilisma is in third position. L has only 4 tones, MR writes Quilisma in the third position, as does E. The writing rules in E result in a “Pes disgregatus” in the 4th and 5th positions. In Bv34 and A, positions 3 and 4 are already ‘normal’ tones, but Y writes Quilisma, albeit in the 4th position: the do revision has already become established. The doubling of the last tone in Kl and Mp is a remnant of the Quilisma replacement, as it occurs systematically in Ka. Here, however, the position of the Quilisma is no longer empty.\\
+<fc #4682b4>“//in// sermonibus”</fc> The possible [[neumen:neuma#trc_int]], alternatively notated in E, is generally notated here with a fourth in order to make it clear for performance practice that the “first note” of the Trc does not have a fixed pitch; it is a portamento. This is one of the cases where the intonation torculus has been reduced from 3 notes to just one. Only the middle note remains, and yet the singer still thinks the whole Trc. This is a striking example of how much “linguistic art,” the “cantus gregorianus,” resists reduction to “notes.”
 -------
 {%syn:analyse:grad:0980%}