#whereas we had three different translations that communicated the gist of it

[transhawks]

Love going on Viz to find out Caleb did not translate it as "my back isn't broad enough" and instead did some dumb shit "with my neck on the line."" completely fucking up the meaning of that line and how important it was.

[ozumsturkishmusic]

Last week I had a chance to interview Murat Aydemir, the author of the Turkish Music Makam Guide. His book is accepted to be the primary resource on this subject and is also translated into English. This was an incredible opportunity, and I appreciate his humbleness.

Aydemir started the interview by saying, "We have variations for each perde (note) and play them differently each time." An example he gave was the third degree of Rast. There are three versions of this perde. In an ascending movement, it's higher; in a descending movement, it's lower, and other times (in a cadence), it's played as the original pitch. The styles differ in çeşnis (flavors). He also suggested that the çeşnis were an ideal way to start learning Turkish music. He indicated, "We’re not thinking as if we’re making microtonal music. There are no mathematical measurements. Counting the number of commas is not practical when playing. One should learn the natural flow of microtones."

Then I asked him why this genre lacked standardizations. He answered by saying, "Most of the contemporary theory, including Yavuzoglu's work, is experimental. Turkish Music has been played for hundreds of years, however, recording and notating began only a hundred years ago. Tanburi Cemil Bey was the initiator. Later the conservatories and musicologists (such as Yekta, Ezgi, and Arel) adapted the Western notation system to Turkish classical music. Unfortunately, there are deficiencies in this system. In performance, we use up to 60 perdes, whereas only 24 are notated. It's hard to read and perform when all the decorations are notated with this system. As a result, it's a challenge to learn this genre from books. Studying with a good teacher is necessary."

My next question was about the differences between teachers. If meşk is the primary method of learning, and if this genre lacks standardizations, how can musicians play together in the same way? Aydemir responded by pointing out the main differences between teachers, which are not the notes and pitches, but the phrasing and style. He said, "All good teachers know Tanburi Cemil Bey's notes and the way he played them. This is the standard for the notes. Sometimes if a musician studies with a wrong method, s/he might play them differently. The way to correct this is by imitating other musicians. Perdes also differ between instruments. Ney, kanun, yaylı tambur, and kemençe don't exactly play every note the same way."

 As a singer, I was curious about how the singers of Turkish music practiced ear training. I asked him if there were any online resources or known methods. Aydemir responded by saying, "They usually learn the intonation from their teachers. By imitating what they hear in the conservatory, they get a gist of the right perdes. People who grow up in this geography develop a natural tendency for microtones, based on the style of music that they hear. The most common lullaby (ninni) is in the Hicaz makam, for instance. There are also songs and makams that live within the community and are repeatedly performed. One example is the call to prayer [publicly audible in Turkey]. In the mornings, it's in the Segâh makam, which is known to be relaxing. Singers usually internalize makams by learning songs. This is an application-based method, and clearly not mathematics-based. There were experiments in conservatories to digitally play Turkish music commas. That was useless and didn't work out. Think of it as cooking. You can learn how to cook from books or online, but it'll never be as good as a chef's careful combination of the materials. You should study it with a master."

Next, I asked him why most singers adapt makam based tunes to the 12-tone system (some of them just ignore the microtones!) Aydemir answered, "Only a few makams are used in popular music (Nihavent, Hicaz, Uşşak). And not every singer can perform the commas perfectly. You should listen to Münir Nurettin Selçuk, Safiye Ayla, and Tanburi Cemil Bey (an instrumentalist). Although there are over 500 makams in theory, only around 60 of them are used today in Turkish music."   

 When Aydemir mentioned the relaxing mood of Segâh, it reminded me of the Ottoman music therapy methods featuring makams. When I asked more information about this, he added, "Each makam has a specific mood. Similarly, in Western music, the minor and major keys raise different feelings. The addition of commas results in a broader spectrum of emotions. Those were applied to music therapy in the Edirne Şifahanesi. The music heals psychological problems."

 I continued the interview by asking him for advice, as a Western-trained musician who wants to learn Turkish music. Luckily, he's currently writing a book addressing this purpose. The book will serve as part one to the makam guide, focusing on çeşnis. He said, "You should learn the primary çeşnis (there are 14-15 of them). Then you will use it within the makams. All the books, unfortunately, first teach makams, whereas a beginner musician should focus on çeşnis (corresponding fourths and fifths) instead." His statement gave me an idea to develop an online ear-training tool. He suggested me to sample a yaylı tambur or kanun instead of producing sounds digitally. He also told me that vocalists are generally accompanied by tambur players in conservatories, which shows that tambur is the best learning guide for ear-training.

Through the past month, I also noticed how improvisation was a significant element in Turkish music. I asked Aydemir about how to integrate this into Western music. He responded, "The taksim improvisations are much similar to jazz. You should check out my Itri & Bach project. To integrate Turkish elements into Western music, you should first learn both styles really well. Some Greek musicians such as Theodora Athanassiou and Martha Mavroidi excel in this merge. It's really challenging to combine harmony with Turkish melodies because not every chord sounds appropriate to makams and çeşnis. This is not a random process, as the makams also have cadences. There are only a few bands who attempt this merge in Turkey, my band Incesaz being one of them."

Aydemir also kindly invited me to an Incesaz concert. Here is a photo I took during the performance. It was amazing!

[catholiccom-blog]

Quoting Jesus: Was it Live, or Was It Memorex?

Perhaps you’ll recall back in February when the head of the Jesuit order, Fr. Arturo Sosa, cast doubt on the trustworthiness of the Gospels (in particular, Jesus’ teaching on divorce):

There would have to be a lot of reflection on what Jesus really said. At that time, no one had a recorder to take down his words. What is known is that the words of Jesus must be contextualized, they are expressed in a language, in a specific setting, they are addressed to someone in particular.

Although he later walked back these comments to some extent, the fact remains that Fr. Sosa’s attitude towards the trustworthiness of the Gospels is not uncommon in certain clerical circles, and also among many biblical scholars. Like melting snow from mountain peaks, in these two groups skepticism towards the trustworthiness of the Gospels tends to filter down to the laity, who naturally wonder if these documents can indeed be trusted to communicate what Jesus really did and what he really said.

Right now let’s focus on authenticating the words of Jesus. Of course, the first half of Fr. Sosa’s comment is unimpeachably true: there were no tape recorders or smartphones recording Jesus’ exact words, say, on divorce (which are presented in Matthew 19, among other places). But I take umbrage, and so should you, with Fr. Sosa’s conclusion that we can’t really know what Jesus actually said—on this or any other issue that arose in his teaching.

Was it live, or was it Memorex?

Perhaps you remember the old ads for Memorex cassette tapes. I know I do. The tagline in those ads was, well, memorable: “Is it live, or is it Memorex?” Scholar Darrell Bock once wrote an article relating this line to how Jesus’ teachings were written. Were they “live” (the “living” words of Jesus), or were they “Memorex” (word-for-word, as if recorded)?  

The latter option must be ruled out. First of all, the Gospels were composed in Greek, whereas in all likelihood Jesus preached and taught in Aramaic, the “street language” of Palestine. So, we’re already dealing with a translation issue. This is why “red-letter” editions of the New Testament, which feature the words of Christ in red ink, are somewhat misleading. They weren’t the literal, actual Aramaic words and phrases Jesus used, except perhaps in a few instances (for example, his use of the term Abba in referring to God the Father).

Scholars differentiate between the ipsissima verba (the actual words) of Jesus, and the ipsissima vox (the actual voice) of Jesus. Thus, what we really have in the Gospels is the “live” option—the living words of Jesus. Gospel writers referred to Jesus as rabbi or teacher, with themselves as his students. What’s the job of any rabbinical student? To master the message of his rabbi. If a student were simply to “parrot” Jesus’ words to an audience, repeating them word-for-word, that person would actually be considered a very poor student. What was actually expected was that a student could re-present the rabbi’s teaching in ways that are helpful for listeners or readers.

How was this done?

First, a word must be said regarding the ability of the disciples to memorize Jesus’ teaching. The German scholar Armin Baum has calculated that Matthew, Mark, and Luke together contain approximately 15,000 words of Jesus’ teaching. Could the disciples have committed that much material to memory? You bet.

Braun demonstrates that many rabbis of the time had not only committed to memory 300 thousand words of the Hebrew scriptures, but also that some Jewish scholars had memorized the nearly two million-word Babylonian Talmud. Surely the followers of Jesus, steeped as they were in a culture of oral transmission of doctrine, could accurately recall and communicate to others the comparatively smaller block of material in the Gospels.

Also, the evangelists knew how to use compression techniques to recount Jesus’ messages accurately in short spaces. Think about it: the Gospels speak of Jesus holding crowds spellbound for hours, yet his speeches can be read in just a few minutes. We do this as well when reporting on conversations we’ve had with others, communicating the “gist” of what was said. This is perfectly consonant with techniques used in the construction of Greco-Roman biographies, the genre of literature to which the Gospels belong. The one thing no student would have ever done is invent teaching by putting words into a rabbi’s mouth that he never said. Again, accuracy was paramount.

A simple example of this method (cited by Bock) can be found in examining the Gospel accounts of Peter’s confession of Jesus as Messiah. Jesus prompts the discussion with a query:

Matthew 16:13: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”

Mark 8:27: “Who do people say I am?”

Luke 9:18: “Who do the crowds say that I am?”

Here we have the same basic question being restated in slightly different ways. “Son of Man” is Jesus’ favorite self-appellation in the Gospels, with Mark and Luke rendering this as simply “I”. Similarly, the choice of the terms “people” (Matthew, Mark) and “crowds” (Luke) might be a case of the Evangelists choosing different Greek words to translate an Aramaic term used by Jesus. In any case, the “gist” of the question gets across to the reader.  

The Gospels also present slightly varied takes on how Peter answers Jesus:

Matthew 16:16: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

Mark 8:29: “You are the Christ.”

Luke 9:20: “The Christ of God”

Matthew’s rendering is longer, more complex and theologically unique, echoing not only the idea of Jesus as Son of God, but also hinting at a kingly sonship (Ps. 2). Luke adds “God” to Mark’s matter-of-fact statement. But in all three, the bottom line remains: Peter correctly identified Jesus as Messiah.

While maintaining basic accuracy, there existed a degree of flexibility in recording speeches in Greco-Roman biography, which was the genre of the Gospels. Despite this, the Gospels are much more stringent on this count than most Greco-Roman biographies. It’s actually startling to note how few variations there are between Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the synoptic Gospels) when one compares the words of Jesus in parallel passages.

And this is truly the point: we have to judge the Gospels by the historical standards of the first century A.D., not the twenty-first. When judged by the historical standards of their day, the Gospels pass with flying colors. The evangelists were clearly concerned about getting Jesus’ message right, and despite the claims of many skeptics, both within the Church and without, we can indeed know with a great degree of certainty what it was that Jesus taught.

[us-buy-essay-blog]

Vietnamese Language - Structural Analysis

The news report of the Vietnamese language has been shared out into hexad different completions, namely the Pre-Vietnamese, Proto-Vietnamese, Archaic Vietnamese, Ancient Vietnamese, substance Vietnamese, and Modern Vietnamese distributor point of times (p.1, talking to Translation). For purposes of this assignment I testament solely briefly handle each period. The Pre-Vietnamese period attach the time of the Muong language which is give tongue to to be the predecessor of Vietnamese and the closest language cognize today to Vietnamese. During the Proto-Vietnamese period we contrive an influx of Chinese language in the language of the community living during that time. It is dated circa seventh to 9th carbon A.D. Also during this period the Vietnamese language only had three tones, whereas today it has sise tones.\nThe Archaic Vietnamese period is the period when the language started to germinate its own lexicon circa 10th nose candy A.D. The Ancient Vietnamese peri od comes around circa 15th speed of light A.D. The Vietnamese changed their writing schema from the standard Chinese agreement to a more logographic system of writing, called Ch? n么m (which today literally gist simple words). This meant that the types and characters adopted from the Chinese were still present, but rather of one symbol gist one word, one symbol could mean a artistic style or a pigeonholing of words, making it simpler to learn how to file and write. There was also a split in the tones, split up the three previous tones into six tones. During the Middle Vietnamese period, legion(predicate) Jesuit missionaries from Europe came to the domain in the 17th century and brought with them their language in the work of dictionaries and other writings, like Jesuit Alexandre de Rhodes of Portugal. He created a Vietnamese-Portuguese-Latin vocabulary which allowed for a transfer amidst the languages of the Vietnamese people and just about anyone else from Europe whose language derived from Latin (French, Spanish, Italian, etc.). The Modern Vietnamese stop consonant is just simply V... If you indispensability to get a bounteous essay, order it on our website: Custom essay writing service. Free essay/order revisions. Essays of any complexity! Courseworks, term papers, research papers. 100% confidential! Homework live help. Custom Essay Order is available 24/7!