EF Prayers, festal tone -- critique needed
  • JonLaird
    Posts: 242
    We have had a monthly low Mass for a little over a year now, and we are finally having a Missa Cantata next month for Our Lady of Guadalupe. The priest has asked me to set his prayers to chant notation, something I have never had to do before but which seems fairly straightforward.

    I have tried the collect (doing my best to follow the festal tone rules in the Liber) and am inviting correction from anyone with more experience. Attached is the result, and I have also pasted the GABC below.

    Deus, qui sub beatíssimae Vírginis Maríae singulári patrocínio constitútos, perpétuis benefíciis nos cumulári voluísti: † praesta supplícibus tuis; ut cujus hódie commemoratióne laetámur in terris, * ejus conspéctu perfruámur in caelis. Per Dominum.

    (c3) O(h)re(h)mus.(h.) (:) De(h)us,(h) qui(h) sub(h) be(h)a(h)tis(h)si(h)mæ(h) Vir(h)gi(h)nis(h) Ma(h)ri(h)æ(h) sin(h)gu(h)la(h)ri(h) pa(h)tro(h)ci(h)ni(h)o(h) con(h)sti(h)tu(h)tos,(h) per(h)pe(h)tu(h)is(h) be(h)ne(h)fi(h)ci(h)is(h) nos(h) cu(h)mu(h)la(h)ri(h) vo(g)lu(f)i(h)sti(.h) :(;) præ(h)sta(h) sup(h)pli(h)ci(h)bus(h) tu(h)is(h) ut(h) cu(h)jus(h) ho(h)di(h)e(h) com(h)me(h)mo(h)ra(h)ti(h)o(h)ne(h) læ(h)ta(h)mur(h) in(h) ter(h)ris,(g.) (;) e(h)jus(h) con(h)spec(h)tu(h) per(h)fru(h)a(h)mur(h) in(h) cæ(h)lis.(h.) (:) Per(h) Do(h)mi(h)num(h) nos(h)trum(h) Ie(h)sum(h) Fi(h)li(h)um(h) tu(h)um(g.) :(;) qui(h) te(h)cum(h) vi(h)vit(h) et(h) re(h)gnat(h) in(h) u(h)ni(h)ta(h)te(h) Spi(h)ri(h)tus(h) San(g)cti(f) De(h)us(h.) :(;) per(h) om(h)ni(h)a(h) sae(h)cu(h)la(h) sae(h)cu(h)lo(h)rum.(h.) (::) A(h.)men.(h.) (::)
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,131
    Does the collect omit "Christum"?
  • JonLaird
    Posts: 242
    No it does not...thank you for noticing, I will put that back in. Must have missed it when transcribing. I was probably distracted double- and triple- checking the spelling of "patrocinio"!
  • JonLaird
    Posts: 242
    I have attached a revised Collect, along with the Postcommunion. I have also attached the relevant pages from the Liber indicating how to apply the festal tone.
  • Nice. A few quick thoughts:

    1. It is incorrect style to use the J in "cujus" or "ejus" but then an I in "Iesum."
    2. "Obique" ought to be "ubique," surely.
    3. In a text intended for proclaiming, the accent marks should be supplied on all words of three or more syllables.
    Thanked by 1JonLaird
  • I'll second the motion about accents on three syllable words. This is necessary.

    Also, if you are going to put the colon under the bars, I'd think you'd probably want to do the same with the semi-colon.
  • For my own work done under my own personal parameters :

    I use the traditional "j", even though this is technically incorrect for '62.

    I put accents on the two syllable words as well. This was because of the influence of the LU, which does them inconsistently; rather than no accents, I went with putting them on all, on the grounds that this was the way to go for beginners.

    Colons, semicolons, exclamation points, and question marks are all separated from the end of the word by the ~ type of space. This system can be applied more consistently when there may be other things to put under the bar lines.

    In a fully notated collect, I always mark the asterisk and dagger at the cadences ; this is what goes under the bar. I do this because they are part of the collect in a book such as the Antiphonale, also to reinforce the notation & make it so that you can sing just from the text.

    * * *

    Moral of the story : there are a lot of decisions to make if you really want to haggle over every detail. However, if you are doing any amount of typesetting, these sorts of things are worth thinking about and settling one way or the other for future reference.

    Anyhow, it's fun to see someone figuring out how to apply the festal tone, so thanks for sharing this.

    "Metrum at the colon, flex at the semi-colon or else the first comma."

    Vale in Domino,

    Thanked by 2CHGiffen JonLaird
  • JonLaird
    Posts: 242
    Thank you, these comments are very helpful. It is true that I put little thought into the i/j inconsistency, and other typographical factors, though I do understand why they would be important particularly if I end up doing this consistently. The main thing I wanted to get was to make sure the tone was appropriately married to the syllables, which I am assuming it is since there has been no mention of that yet. Tomorrow I will revise and post again when I am back in my office.