English accents in speech and chant
  • bonniebede
    Posts: 756
    A question...how do you accommodate different English accents when fitting vernacular chant together?

    The reason I ask, and to give an example...
    I was reading / singing an English version of the Agnus Dei, but could make it sound right to me. The stress in the phrase ' have mercy on us' was placed on the word 'us'. I finally realised that was what made it feel wrong to me. When I speak that phrase it is natural that the stress falls on the word 'on' with 'us' falling away.
    Then I thought, that is probably because, although I am naturally a native English speaker, I am Irish, and there are certain rhythms and stresses in the way we speak English which actually flow from speaking Irish, which like Latin is an inflected language. So in Irish the phrase would be 'dean trocaire orainn' (jane tro -kurra ur-ing). Now 'orainn' means 'on us'.
    There are ways we say things which reflect their original Irish formulation, even though we now speak English, such as the phrase 'he had drink taken' Meaning he was drinking or drunk, but exactly as you would say it in Irish, or you might say 'he had drink on him'.
    My question is this - if I am fitting to a chant melody, a piece of English, or pointing a psalm tone, for example, how can I decide where the stresses in the English phrase actually go? Do they go where I would put them, in my accent, which might sound strange to an English English speaker, or to an American or Australian? Or is there some standard I should be aiming for, for example an RP accent?
    Any thoughts?
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • hartleymartin
    Posts: 1,447
    If you look up the Psalm Tone sheet, the accented (or heavy vowels) notes are indicated by an ictus.
  • Palestrina
    Posts: 364
    It doesn't always work well: the accent structures of English and Latin are different. Anthony Ruff wrote a good article on this and I agree with his principles for adaptation.
    Thanked by 2chonak CHGiffen
  • hartleymartin
    Posts: 1,447
    Is there an online link to this article? I'd be interested to see further guidence on how this should be done.
  • smvanroodesmvanroode
    Posts: 967
    I suppose it's this article by Fr. Ruff: http://www.npm.org/Sections/gregorian-chant/images/Custos%202.pdf
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • BGP
    Posts: 215
    Bonniebede- It seems to me that the accent in English will vary quite a lot from region to region. The way English adapts to chant melody would then be particular to at least some degree to the way the composer speaks English.
    Thanked by 1bonniebede
  • brndurham
    Posts: 71
    Lord knows this is sometimes an issue for me: I'm a British-English-speaking cantor in a parish full of Americans, so I'm sometimes looking down at my SEP copy, thinking. I don't think the stress goes here...
    Thanked by 1bonniebede
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Without going into detail, there are many aspects of various American manners of speech which are best dropped in favour of a (perceived) British 'accent' for the sake of a more euphonic aesthesis. (And, of course, there are some British accents that, likewise, one would not want to imitate.) I often wonder how those who sing in unvarnished regional American tones can fail to realise how awful they sound and want to do something about it. It all comes back to that ingenit imagination and poetic sense that are part and parcel of true musicianship. One either has it or one doesn't.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • brndurham
    Posts: 71
    I personally think a 'perceived' British accent should be the standard for singing in English for church choirs, by which I mean, non-rhotic or very lightly rhotic, so as to avoid having to heavily pronounce the post-vocalic r and still be understood, distinctly pronounce other consonants, and to DROP THE RUDDY TWANG. Granted, all this would actually be more of a neutral Mid-atlantic accent then anything else- just a non-rhotic Gen. Am accent with sharper consonants and devoid of Midwestern nasality.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Felipe Gasper
    Posts: 804
    I would say it's contextual, how "British" an American's sung English should be. If singing the Coverdale psalter, I think it would sound silly not at least to imitate RP. Then again, for ordinary hymn - singing or the Lectionary psalm translation, a bit more restraint is indicated.

    There are aspects of RP diction that simply conduce better to good singing: shape of the "ah", dropped final R, etc. These, IMO, should be in standard use, at least in the U.S., as a matter of cultural expectation.
    Thanked by 2Gavin CHGiffen
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    And then there are some choirs that put all their efforts into a fake British accent, to the neglect of basics like rhythmic integrity and pitch matching.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Um, what is a 'fake' British accent? It seems to me that an accent either is or isn't British, regardless of the accenter. If one speaks with a British accent, whether he is British or not, one is speaking with a British accent. There is nothing that makes it 'fake' (unless, of course, he isn't doing it very well, or he is merely a very pretentious and fake person). In fact, on certain people, it seems quite a normal, 'real', expression of who they are. If we hear someone speak French with a perfect Parisian accent, we admire his accomplishment, we don't say that he is speaking with a fake Parisian accent.

    There are some British accents which are as awful as certain American ones found in places like Texas. What commends the commonly perceived 'British accent' to singing is its vowel purity and consonant clarity, as well as its higher, more tonally developed, more nuanced, more musical voice placement.

    Gavin has made, though, a potent point. There are facets of good choral singing that are of equal importance to diction, and, like diction, they are overlooked at one's peril.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    We're bordering up to the polemical and pedantic here.
    To paraphrase a realtor's expression, "It's all about situation, situation, situation."
    Using "Kings College" diction in many sacred applications and styles is quite appropriate, except if you were singing from the Southern Harmony/Sacred Harp tradition. Then it would be inappropriate and apparently so to the listener who is informed. Just as men who have been instructed to sing Palestrina and Victoria using vocal techniques suited for Puccini and Verdi.
    The aboriginal traditions of the forced larynx formant voice seem to be universal for tribal peoples, but have also evolved into the ethereal methodology of the Bulgarian State Radio Women's Choir and other Balkan forms, but the same tonal clusters are sung with much more refined vocal textures in the Baltics. Hawaiians and Tahitians sometime sing chorally in the aboriginal texture, but if you listen to groups like the Rose Ensemble, those chants can be rendered in more Western manners with equal success and no loss of authenticity.
    One size don't fit all.
    Thanked by 3M. Jackson Osborn CHGiffen Liam
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,768
    ...inappropriate... to sing Palestrina and Victoria using vocal techniques suited for Puccini and Verdi.
    You're confusing technique with style. Instructing singers to use a technique suited to dining room madrigals might achieve some sort of blend with non-professionals, but it's hardly the cathedral singing ideal described in Monteverdi's audition reports.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    euphonic aesthesists unite!
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Richard, I didn't expect that rejoinder from you. But no, I'm not confused. Singing amidst a chorus in La Strada requires a different skill set than singing in St. P's, Lateran, Notre Dame, Rheims or Rouen. If the singer is unaware of that, condemn the singer. If the maestro is intractable about his philosophy regarding the difference in repertoires and techniques, as well as environs, then call him out on it. Bartolucci and his ilk are, were and always will be, wrong.
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,768
    Well, I'm often cranky after "Am I too loud?" gigs. Do I really have to defend Bartolucci?
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Heavens no ;-)
    But it would be fun if you tried!
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,945
    The funny thing is that British accents in singing tend to be less pronounced than spoken (even RP).
    Thanked by 1BruceL
Add a Comment