RE: Narrative and Semantic (I)


Subject: RE: Narrative and Semantic (I)
From: SATAN LUCIFER (savana0666@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Oct 11 2005 - 13:02:51 EDT


It would also be nice to know what his definition of music is...Don't ya
think?

Eric

>From: Kevin Austin <kevin.austin@videotron.ca>
>Reply-To: cec-conference@concordia.ca
>To: cec-conference@concordia.ca
>Subject: Narrative and Semantic (I)
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 00:28:20 -0400
>
>I don't agree with this statement. I find 'music' no more devoid of
>explicit semantic content than verbal language. Again there is the comment
>about what "really" is present -- different models of reality I guess.
>
>IMV, the language (either verbal or musical) does not contain the semantic
>content, this is supplied by the person who receives the 'message'.
>
>
> Oh as I was young and easy in the mercy of his means,
> Time held me green and dying
> Though I sang in my chains like the sea.
>
>
>
>>Richard Wentk (or Eliot) wrote:
>>
>>>The final destination here is to wonder if because music has no explicit
>>>semantic content, what it's really made of is the bag of timbral, tonal
>>>and rhythmic tricks that aid memorability in speech commnication *if you
>>>remove the semantic content of what's being said*
>
>Ah ... I see you have been studying Chinese as well. Fellow travelers.
>
>
>>> - in other words tricks like repetition, assonance, alliteration,
>>>onomatopeia, and self-similarity (rhyme).
>
>Rhyme: self-similarity of spectrum.
>
>
>
>
>>>But sound on its own can never *be* that kind of narrative, because it
>>>doesn't offer the full range of semantic features that speech and text
>>>do.
>
>For me, musics offer a wider range of semantic features than speech and
>text, but that could be my fundamental illiteracy (having grown up in the
>slums of North London).
>
>
>
>Best
>
>Kevin



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:13 EST