tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 29 15:22:20 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Question from a newbie
On Mon, 29 Jun 1998, Paul Hahn wrote:
>However, I'm a bit confused by one thing: MO calls the tlhIngan scale
>nonatonic (i.e. nine tones to the octave), but what he then actually
>describes is an _octa_tonic scale, since the ninth note duplicates the
>first. Has anybody ever asked him to clarify this? Or should I just go
>by the description and chalk up the incorrect use of the term
>"nonatonic" to MO's unfamiliarity with standard musical usage?
charghwI' (Will Martin) asked Marc Okrand about this on the old MSN Expert
Forum, which I've appended. Note that the two {yu}mey are indeed a "nonave"
apart.
Unfortunately, I did not think to save Will's post until it was too late, so
I don't know what "version" Okrand approved. charghwI', do you still have
your original post?
Voragh
***************************************************************************
From: "Marc Okrand" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: msn.onstage.startrek.expert.okrand
Date: 01 Sep 1997
Subject: Re: yu - bIm - 'egh
I didn't have my oscilloscope handy when Maltz was explaining all of this.
Nor my tricorder, which I suspect would have done an even better job of
analysis.
I'm not a musical theorist, but from what I can figure, the first <yu> and
the next <yu> are not an octave apart; they are a nonave apart.
Does that help?
(Actually, I suspect it's more like the charghwI' version -- though I'd
have to hear it and run it by Maltz again to be sure.)
***************************************************************************