Unterschiede
Hier werden die Unterschiede zwischen zwei Versionen angezeigt.
| Beide Seiten der vorigen RevisionVorhergehende Überarbeitung | |
| gr_indiv:0982 [2026/03/14 15:19] – xaverkainzbauer | gr_indiv:0982 [2026/03/14 15:19] (aktuell) – xaverkainzbauer |
|---|
| <fc #4682b4>‘et exau-//di//-vit’</fc> The isolated oriscus in E is to be read as an inferior resupin note; in Ch also ?\\ | <fc #4682b4>‘et exau-//di//-vit’</fc> The isolated oriscus in E is to be read as an inferior resupin note; in Ch also ?\\ |
| ‘murumuratio-//nem//’ The applied oriscus confirms the tenor ‘sol’, before in\\ | ‘murumuratio-//nem//’ The applied oriscus confirms the tenor ‘sol’, before in\\ |
| <fc #4682b4>‘//ves//-tram’</fc> the peak note is in question (‘si-sa-do’). Kl + Mp write ‘sa’. E contradicts this with “sursum”. Does one avoid the tritone “fa-si” by rising to “do” (the Oriscus in Ch could be read this way), or is the peak note “si” after all; the Oriscus on the preceding syllable has defused the tritone: “sol-si”.------- | <fc #4682b4>‘//ves//-tram’</fc> the peak note is in question (‘si-sa-do’). Kl + Mp write ‘sa’. E contradicts this with “sursum”. Does one avoid the tritone “fa-si” by rising to “do” (the Oriscus in Ch could be read this way), or is the peak note “si” after all; the Oriscus on the preceding syllable has defused the tritone: “sol-si”. |
| | ------- |
| {%syn:analyse:grad:0982%} | {%syn:analyse:grad:0982%} |
