Do sentences have phrasing?

[Bob]

Yes.  Agree?  Disagree?

Each word has a piece that gets more emphasis, more accent.  But the whole sentence has certain words that are highlighted, giving it a certain meaning.  But that exaggeration or stress on certain words in a sentence is just like music phrasing, isn't it? 

And then a brief group of sentences, whatever that is with speech, if it's a paragraph or whatever, that also has stress in certain spots, though broader.  That's similar to shaping a section of a piece of music.

The stress for sentences and then for sections keeps getting more and more broad.  It's not nearly as precise or well-defined as it is for a single word, but then it's not as hard either.

[faulty_damper]

Yes.

In fact, in spoken speech there is

1. pitch
2. rhythm
3. intonation
4. dynamics
5. tempo
6. articulation
7. phrasing
8. structure
9. form
10. tonality

(FYI: The most common interval in speech is the minor 3rd.  Questioning intonation is that of a rising perfect 5th.)

Here's a radio cast that highlights parts of these aspects.
https://mediasearch.wnyc.org/m/audio/11808082/musical_language_radio_lab.htm?col=en-aud-pod_wnyc-ep&q=%22Musical+Language%22&match=QUERY

[eastman_grad]

I've read conversations with some very good writers, and have read some books on writing written by some prominent authors. All seem to agree that the written word has phrases, much like in music. Certain writers are very attentive to the "rhythm" and "phrasing" of words (e.g. Truman Capote, E.M. Forster, Flaubert), and others are not so much, but focus on other aspects of the writing.

[Bob]

I suppose what I was thinking is that if you spoke without that phrasing, you wouldn't sound right.  That phrasing is necessary in a sentence.  Otherwise you don't sound fluent. 

[db05]

I used to write poetry before I learned guitar, and that for sure has phrasing. It's like music without the notation. Spoken sentences have phrasing, too, it's like improv. Written sentences have less focus on sound, and more on meaning. But like I said, written poetry implies form, rhythm and phrasing.

Now I find it funny because I had it the other way around. Now am applying my old poet thinking to music.

[pianochick93]

Well, there's the difference in pause places that entirely changes the meaning of this sentence:

Let's eat, Grandpa.
Let's eat Grandpa.
Be literate, save lives. 

[Bob]

In speaking you can emphasize things so many different ways.  I don't think writing it down can capture it just right.  Same with music.

[invictious]

Iambic pentameter anyone? Anyone who can read Shakespeare would know about it.

That's natural phrasing.

[tanman]

Iambic pentameter anyone? Anyone who can read Shakespeare would know about it.

That's natural phrasing.

omg
my literature teacher got pissed and started yelling at everyone today because no one was paying attention to his long lecture on Shakespeare. he's 70 something and looks exactly like the pope. me serious.

*starts having flashbacks... shiver shiver...

[eastman_grad]

In speaking you can emphasize things so many different ways.  I don't think writing it down can capture it just right.  Same with music.

I tend to agree, but what about this example?

Extra-marital sex versus extra marital sex?

I suppose one might pause slightly between the "extra" and "marital" of the second example, but probably not much to make an oral distinction.

[Bob]

Oral distinction?    I guess.  Maybe.  You might be on to something there.

I was really just thinking about the sound, but the punctuation is true too. 

It's can be such a slight leaning though.  Time, loudness...  It's where the magic is I think.  And the profoundness.  There must be more.  The warping effect to slow down a bit to emphasize something.

I had one of those moments of speaking a sentence where you understand it in a different way.  I tried applying some music things to it.  Linguistic fun!  Oh yeah.  Changing the meaning.  Or making it sound stilted, like you don't understand English at all.  But there's always an emphasis in speaking.  It's just natural. 

And just like music.  It's so subtle though for some of it.  Gets the ears working. 

[eastman_grad]

Oral distinction?    I guess.  Maybe.  You might be on to something there.

An intentional play on words...I thought it was good! haha

[rc]

My teacher once mentioned how certain linguistics find their way into different cultures music.  So there might be traits about German language that influences their music.

I don't know much about other languages, but it makes sense.  Language is such an important aspect of how we think, it couldn't help but influence music.

Let's eat, Grandpa.
Let's eat Grandpa.
Be literate, save lives. 

Well if there's nothing in the fridge, a growing boy has to eat!

[faulty_damper]

My teacher once mentioned how certain linguistics find their way into different cultures music.  So there might be traits about German language that influences their music.

I don't know much about other languages, but it makes sense.  Language is such an important aspect of how we think, it couldn't help but influence music.

Yes, the spoken language of a culture influences the music of that culture.  This is why a culture's music sounds similar to its language.  Language effects music, but not the other way around.

Music is derived from the pitch, intonation, dynamics, tempo, articulation, phrasing, tonality, etc. of a cultures language.

[rc]

Yes, the spoken language of a culture influences the music of that culture.  This is why a culture's music sounds similar to its language.  Language effects music, but not the other way around.

Music is derived from the pitch, intonation, dynamics, tempo, articulation, phrasing, tonality, etc. of a cultures language.

Yes that makes sense.

I've also read theories about the evolution of language - creating common meaning to expressions of sound (pitch, intonation, etc.).  They share a common source.

[faulty_damper]

If a culture's music is tied to the spoken language, why does A = 440?

This means that the tonality/tone center is faster in frequency than most spoken language(s).

Many languages' inclined tonal center is higher in pitch than German, like Italian and French.  This probably meant that to the French and Italian, the perception of German music was lower in frequency.  They desired the music to be raised to match their own tonal centers.  This probably also meant that as European music culture bloomed in the 19th century, the pitch incrementally went up.

A = 440 became the standard in 1936, well after the global influences of dozens of cultures on German-origin music.  This standard is incompatible with the written music of the 19th century and prior - it is much too bright.

One of the problems of mixing languages of different tonal centers is that the human mind does not like to hear poly-tonality - it is dissonant.  So immediately, two speakers of different tone centers will adjust to the same tonality.  In fact, even two speakers of the same language will adjust to the same tonality in a matter of seconds.

I would like to lower the A440 standard to match tonal centers with the average pitch of English because English is the dominant language spoken in every continent.

[Bob]

What's the tonal center of English then?

[faulty_damper]

I don't know.  I don't know how to measure it in conversations.  And in what context of conversation?  In casual speech, anger, adoration, etc... the tonal centers change.  Think of it like modulation.  But probably casual speech.

The tonal center should be adjusted so that C is the average pitch.  This would most likely correspond most closely to the 19th century "standard" pitch which is a about a tone lower.  Once C is adjusted, then it's just simple math to find the frequency of A.

(I don't know why A is the given frequency.  It really should be C because, historically, C was the average tonal center.)

[Bob]

Something to do with strings maybe or oboes, giving the tuning note?