On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 14:34:43 -0500 (EST)
Ralph Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Accidentals are only printed on tied notes which
> > begin a new system:
>
> Each to his/her own I guess.
>
> In this case "that" is correct and "which" is incorrect.
> To me, "which" sounds strange in this cont
> Accidentals are only printed on tied notes which
> begin a new system:
Each to his/her own I guess.
In this case "that" is correct and "which" is incorrect.
To me, "which" sounds strange in this context.
It implies to me that tied notes begin a new system
*which* is, of course, untrue. :)
Wh
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:58:35 -
"Trevor Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote 04 February 2008 16:27
> >
> > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 09:42:55 -0600
> > Stan Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 4, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> > >
> > > >> I bet
Hi Trevor (et al.),
I think Kieren also meant the distinction between less and fewer :)
Indeed! =)
Perhaps it means, "Accidentals are printed on
tied notes only when the note to which they are
tied is on the previous system."
Good point.
Incidently, the MS Grammar checker -always-
annoy
Hi Graham,
I mean, does this sentence _actually_ bother anybody? Or make it
unclear?
No... but there *are* things in NR 1.1 Pitches which *could* be clearer.
I'm teaching every week day, and have rehearsals every evening this
week, but am hoping to get my NR 1.1 comments in soon.
I am w
Hi Stan,
Might not the same arguments be applied to the benefits of knowing
Lilypond's "grammar?"
I agree:
1. By using "poor Lilypond grammar", I can write an .ly file which
compiles and outputs a "valid" score of Beethoven 9, but is
essentially unreadable (as an input file) by any human
Graham Percival wrote 04 February 2008 16:27
>
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 09:42:55 -0600
> Stan Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 4, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> >
> > >> I bet that there's less than a hundred people
> > >
> > > You mean "I bet there are fewer than..."
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 09:42:55 -0600
Stan Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 4, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
>
> >> I bet that there's less than a hundred people
> >
> > You mean "I bet there are fewer than..." ;-)
*hmph*
In modern Canadian, an apostrophe followed by an `s'
On Feb 4, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Graham,
I bet that there's less than a hundred people
You mean "I bet there are fewer than..." ;-)
In all seriousness, while it may be true that "knowledge of formal
grammar is [not] necessary to be a good writer", it is undeniable
Hi Graham,
I bet that there's less than a hundred people
You mean "I bet there are fewer than..." ;-)
In all seriousness, while it may be true that "knowledge of formal
grammar is [not] necessary to be a good writer", it is undeniable
that better grammarians make better writers, all othe
10 matches
Mail list logo
