(no subject)
Feb. 11th, 2002 11:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cellioI like the web. I don't love the web today, because it only gave me part of what I was looking for, but I still like it.
Our choir is going to do one of the Salamone Rossi pieces from a book I bought recently. I'm re-typesetting the music, though, mainly so I can redo the transliteration. I'm sure the transliteration in the book is perfectly intuitive for a French speaker (it's a French edition), but it's not intuitive to us. And people are intimidated enough by Hebrew without that complication, and I don't want them to be intimidated by Hebrew.
So the problem is that I have this French transliteration, and another ("English") transliteration in a CD booklet, and I can of course listen to the CD. But I'd rather work from the original Hebrew, which I don't quite have. But this particular text is a psalm setting, so I can get that, in theory.
So I searched the web for "psalm 146 Hebrew text" and got a useful hit here. It's a score, but it's not a complete score because it's missing the vowels. (The site's main page is here.)
(Dani actually has a Hebrew-language bible with really teeny tiny type. I wanted to avoid working from that copy as my baseline, but I think I can use it and a good magnifying glass to fill in the vowels on the copy I printed from the web.)
And then, I can do my own transliteration without any risk of compounding someone else's ambiguous Ashkenazi-inspired interpretation, thank you very much. :-)
Our choir is going to do one of the Salamone Rossi pieces from a book I bought recently. I'm re-typesetting the music, though, mainly so I can redo the transliteration. I'm sure the transliteration in the book is perfectly intuitive for a French speaker (it's a French edition), but it's not intuitive to us. And people are intimidated enough by Hebrew without that complication, and I don't want them to be intimidated by Hebrew.
So the problem is that I have this French transliteration, and another ("English") transliteration in a CD booklet, and I can of course listen to the CD. But I'd rather work from the original Hebrew, which I don't quite have. But this particular text is a psalm setting, so I can get that, in theory.
So I searched the web for "psalm 146 Hebrew text" and got a useful hit here. It's a score, but it's not a complete score because it's missing the vowels. (The site's main page is here.)
(Dani actually has a Hebrew-language bible with really teeny tiny type. I wanted to avoid working from that copy as my baseline, but I think I can use it and a good magnifying glass to fill in the vowels on the copy I printed from the web.)
And then, I can do my own transliteration without any risk of compounding someone else's ambiguous Ashkenazi-inspired interpretation, thank you very much. :-)
(no subject)
Date: 2002-02-11 09:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2002-02-12 05:57 am (UTC)The vowels are often left out of things like newspapers and road signs in Israel, but they are in prayer books and printed editions of the Tanakh (most of the time) over here, and there are books that include them. (Mostly children's books, according to Dani, but that's ok.)
Vwls r ptnl n nglsh?
Date: 2002-02-12 02:13 pm (UTC)Ok, I think I proved my point. I'm not sure what it was. Maybe it was that you can leave vowels out in English and still have some legibility. If I'd left, say, 23% of the vowels in, the above would be much more legible:
Ar vwls optnl in nglsh? Wll, srt of. Bt nglsh s mch lss logcl thn Hbrw -- no rts, no rglr vrb frms...
I meant the above to be: Are vowels optional in English? Well, sort of. But English is much less logical than Hebrew -- no roots, no regular verb forms...
Re: Vwls r ptnl n nglsh?
Date: 2002-02-12 02:22 pm (UTC)Sure, if you know a language you can deal with corrupted text. Someone who doesn't know the English language would have just as much trouble with your examples as I have with vowel-less Hebrew; you can only parse corrupted text when you have an idea of what the candidate words really are. I didn't mean to imply that text without vowels is universally bad -- just hard for those not fluent to cope with, is all.