Vocalist.org archive


From:  "DIANE M. CLARK (MUSIC DEPARTMENT)" <DCLARK@r...>
Date:  Tue May 16, 2000  1:17 am
Subject:  Re: [vocalist-temporary] "s" in Jesus


natural@w... (Do you have a name?) wrote:

>>I have to admit, I'm stumped. I don't see how anyone could
publish such nonsense. I don't doubt there are choral traditions
that drop h's in latin, but all the choral recordings I've ever
heard of latin texts pronounce the h's.

I know for a fact that all h's were sounded in classical latin,

+++++

Sorry to disappoint you, but what Melanie quoted is standard info in any
diction book on sung Latin. That's why I challenged your statement about no
silent letters in the first place. It's true that h's were sounded in classi-
cal Latin, but sung liturgical Latin has traditionally been pronounced more
like Italian (since that's where the church started using Latin). Just
because one hears something performed a certain way does not make it right or
definitive. Many countried do sing Latin in their own special way, but the
standard info is what Melanie quoted.

|\ Dr. Diane M. Clark, Assoc. Prof./Chair of Music Dept., Rhodes College
| 2000 N. Parkway, Memphis, TN 38112, 901-843-3782, dclark@r...
() http://gray.music.rhodes.edu/musichtmls/faculty/dclark.html


  Replies Name/Email Yahoo! ID Date Size
1628 Re: "s" in Jesus natural@w...   Tue  5/16/2000   5 KB

emusic.com