User:FloraC/Critique on D&D's terminology: Difference between revisions

Line 37:

=== Specificity ===

At this point, they further argue for ''domain basis'' than ''subspace basis'': they prefer more specialized ~~musical~~ terms to general mathematical terms.

At this point, they further argue for ''domain basis'' than ''subspace basis'': they prefer more specialized tuning terms to general mathematical terms.

Line 45:

</div>

To understand this point of theirs, we must look back at time before they changed ''interval basis'' to ''domain basis''. Back then, ''interval basis'' was indeed more ''specialized'' for ~~music~~, though not more ''specific'' in its form. Yet that is no longer the case. ''Domain'' is by no means more specialized or specific than ''subgroup'', if not less. So the reason is obsolete.

To understand this point of theirs, we must look back at the time before they changed ''interval basis'' to ''domain basis''. Back then, ''interval basis'' was indeed more ''specialized'' for tuning, though not more ''specific'' in its form. Yet that is no longer the case. ''Domain'' is by no means more specialized or specific than ''subgroup'', if not less. So the reason is obsolete.

=== Inclusivity ===

Line 58:

There is no explicit, clear-cut exclusion of standard subgroups in the definition. Technically, a full prime-limit JI is a subgroup of a larger prime-limit JI. It happens that we have distinct vocabulary for standard subgroups, so the word only tends to appear at the nonstandard type. They also say the term "has taken on a specialized meaning in RTT", which I am again not sure about. For one thing, it has never gained a distinct definition. Still, according to my observation, whether it is meant to include the standard type is up to the context.

The hope for a term that invariably includes standard ~~subgroup~~ does not hold itself because language does not work like that. So long as prime limits continue to be used, chances are the actual usage of ''domain'' will turn out the same as ''subgroup''.

The hope for a term that invariably includes standard subgroups does not hold itself because language does not work like that. So long as prime limits continue to be used, chances are the actual usage of ''domain'' will turn out the same as ''subgroup''.

=== My suggestion ===

Line 64:

== "Prime-count vector" ==

''Prime-count vector'' is D&D's replacement for ''monzo''. This is one of the worse proposed terms. A vector is a mathematical structure rather than a form of presentation, so a JI interval is a vector no matter how it is written. For example, the syntonic comma, 81/80, and {{monzo| -4 4 -1 }} are all vectors, and since the vectors represent the number of each prime harmonics, they are prime-count vectors. It would be ridiculous to say the syntonic comma was not a vector, or to say 81/80 was not a vector.

''Prime-count vector'' is D&D's replacement for ''monzo''. This is one of the worse proposed terms as it includes an inaccurate use of the term ''vector''. A vector is a mathematical structure rather than a form of presentation, so a JI interval is a vector no matter how it is written. For example, the syntonic comma, 81/80, and {{monzo| -4 4 -1 }} are all vectors, and since the vectors represent the number of each prime harmonics, they are prime-count vectors. It would be ridiculous in RTT to say the syntonic comma was not a vector, or to say 81/80 was not a vector.

A monzo is a particular form of presentation. The ''monzo'' article clearly tells us a monzo is "a way of notating a JI interval". In the more technical ''monzos and interval space'' article it reads: "this is often written in ket vector notation as […] in which case it is called a monzo." In the above example, neither the syntonic comma nor 81/80 is a monzo, but {{monzo| -4 4 -1 }}.

A monzo is a particular form of presentation. The ''monzo'' article clearly tells us a monzo is "a way of notating a JI interval". In the more technical ''monzos and interval space'' article it reads: "this is often written in ket vector notation as […] in which case it is called a monzo." It often happens that the different forms of an interval such as the name, ratio, and monzo are shown side by side. In the above example, neither the syntonic comma nor 81/80 is a monzo, but {{monzo| -4 4 -1 }}.

I will not have a problem with Plainsound Music Edition's ''harmonic space coordinates'' as a synonym of ''monzo'', because a list of coordinates is indeed a form of presentation. ''Monzo'' has the advantage that it is concise – more on the name side than on the description side.

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 === Specificity ===
-At this point, they further argue for ''domain basis'' than ''subspace basis'': they prefer more specialized musical terms to general mathematical terms.
+At this point, they further argue for ''domain basis'' than ''subspace basis'': they prefer more specialized tuning terms to general mathematical terms.
 <div style="font-style: italic; border: 1px solid silver; margin: 15px; padding: 15px;">
@@ Line 45: / Line 45: @@
 </div>
-To understand this point of theirs, we must look back at time before they changed ''interval basis'' to ''domain basis''. Back then, ''interval basis'' was indeed more ''specialized'' for music, though not more ''specific'' in its form. Yet that is no longer the case. ''Domain'' is by no means more specialized or specific than ''subgroup'', if not less. So the reason is obsolete.
+To understand this point of theirs, we must look back at the time before they changed ''interval basis'' to ''domain basis''. Back then, ''interval basis'' was indeed more ''specialized'' for tuning, though not more ''specific'' in its form. Yet that is no longer the case. ''Domain'' is by no means more specialized or specific than ''subgroup'', if not less. So the reason is obsolete.
 === Inclusivity ===
@@ Line 58: / Line 58: @@
 There is no explicit, clear-cut exclusion of standard subgroups in the definition. Technically, a full prime-limit JI is a subgroup of a larger prime-limit JI. It happens that we have distinct vocabulary for standard subgroups, so the word only tends to appear at the nonstandard type. They also say the term "has taken on a specialized meaning in RTT", which I am again not sure about. For one thing, it has never gained a distinct definition. Still, according to my observation, whether it is meant to include the standard type is up to the context.
-The hope for a term that invariably includes standard subgroup does not hold itself because language does not work like that. So long as prime limits continue to be used, chances are the actual usage of ''domain'' will turn out the same as ''subgroup''.
+The hope for a term that invariably includes standard subgroups does not hold itself because language does not work like that. So long as prime limits continue to be used, chances are the actual usage of ''domain'' will turn out the same as ''subgroup''.
 === My suggestion ===
@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 == "Prime-count vector" ==
-''Prime-count vector'' is D&D's replacement for ''monzo''. This is one of the worse proposed terms. A vector is a mathematical structure rather than a form of presentation, so a JI interval is a vector no matter how it is written. For example, the syntonic comma, 81/80, and {{monzo| -4 4 -1 }} are all vectors, and since the vectors represent the number of each prime harmonics, they are prime-count vectors. It would be ridiculous to say the syntonic comma was not a vector, or to say 81/80 was not a vector.
+''Prime-count vector'' is D&D's replacement for ''monzo''. This is one of the worse proposed terms as it includes an inaccurate use of the term ''vector''. A vector is a mathematical structure rather than a form of presentation, so a JI interval is a vector no matter how it is written. For example, the syntonic comma, 81/80, and {{monzo| -4 4 -1 }} are all vectors, and since the vectors represent the number of each prime harmonics, they are prime-count vectors. It would be ridiculous in RTT to say the syntonic comma was not a vector, or to say 81/80 was not a vector.
-A monzo is a particular form of presentation. The ''monzo'' article clearly tells us a monzo is "a way of notating a JI interval". In the more technical ''monzos and interval space'' article it reads: "this is often written in ket vector notation as […] in which case it is called a monzo." In the above example, neither the syntonic comma nor 81/80 is a monzo, but {{monzo| -4 4 -1 }}.
+A monzo is a particular form of presentation. The ''monzo'' article clearly tells us a monzo is "a way of notating a JI interval". In the more technical ''monzos and interval space'' article it reads: "this is often written in ket vector notation as […] in which case it is called a monzo." It often happens that the different forms of an interval such as the name, ratio, and monzo are shown side by side. In the above example, neither the syntonic comma nor 81/80 is a monzo, but {{monzo| -4 4 -1 }}.
 I will not have a problem with Plainsound Music Edition's ''harmonic space coordinates'' as a synonym of ''monzo'', because a list of coordinates is indeed a form of presentation. ''Monzo'' has the advantage that it is concise – more on the name side than on the description side.