Cavaradossi, Roman Interloper, ftbond, NitaMacdonald1930, SOL, etomaria, Kostyantyn, Benny, Ivanov325, DocH, andria, Joe Smith, CanuckK8, AJG80, gzt
4464 Registered Users |
|
|
10 registered (Athanasius The L, Dave in McKinney, StuartK, ByzBob, Pavloosh, Peter J, Kolbe, Francois, Otsheylnik, DTBrown),
185
Guests and
1
Spider online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
4464 Members
26 Forums
30151 Topics
373685 Posts
Max Online: 1087 @ 07/16/07 01:09 PM
|
|
|
#244745 - 07/13/07 01:24 PM
Re: Translation inconsistency
[Re: Mikey Stilts]
|
Member
Registered: 06/22/04
Posts: 840
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
The works prepared and distributed by the Metropolitan Cantor Institute have customarily used "mankind", "men", etc. except where authoritative texts have been prepared by the Inter-eparchial Liturgical Commission. Thus, for example, where a troparion occurs in both the Green Book and MCI publications, the official text is used.
The issue of official texts goes way back. In fact, long before the MCI, the CANTOR-L project was guided by Father Maximos' very strong recommendation that the bishops' blessing should be sought for any extensive work on Vespers and Matins, and that officially promulgated texts should be used where they existed.
While I understand the concern about rubrics, does it really cause a PROBLEM if different wordings are used in translating different texts? The same occurs, of course, if propers from other sources (such as the St. John of Kronstadt Press, or Father Ephrem) are used. Do you have a real difficulty singing proper texts with different phraseology? Or are you asking that the MCI reword all texts "in advance" to use inclusive language?
Yours in Christ, Jeff
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#244749 - 07/13/07 01:32 PM
Re: Translation inconsistency
[Re: John K]
|
Member
Registered: 06/22/04
Posts: 840
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
Dear John,
I suppose you could rewrite it to use "inclusive language" if you want, but since the bishops have never exercised any particular oversight over paraliturgical hymns, I don't see why you would have to. If the bishops issue an explicit directive on translation, I suppose we could achieve even greater consistency - but I'm only really worried about consistent translation of particular texts (e.g. not having three different English translations of Heavenly King in use at once).
The paraliturgical hymns from the Lekvulic pew book being typeset for re-publication have not been modified, except for the tiny number that were also included in the Green Book.
Jeff
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#244751 - 07/13/07 01:38 PM
Re: Translation inconsistency
[Re: John K]
|
Member
Registered: 03/24/02
Posts: 7168
Loc: Kansas/UGCC
|
Vespers stikhera are also available on our St. Irenaeus Mission Society page http://stirenaeus.net/vespers.htm These are metered to Galician or Kyivan samohlasnij but may be of some use.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#244755 - 07/13/07 01:45 PM
Re: Translation inconsistency
[Re: Mikey Stilts]
|
Member
Registered: 06/22/04
Posts: 840
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
Dear Mikey,
I understand and agree - though if you knew how many translations for Vespers and Matins were floating around in our own church in the early 1990's (perhaps you do!), you'd realize the extent to which having a book with all the texts and music for Sunday and feastday Vespers is quite a bit of progress. I would be willing to wager that had the MCI not restored the "non-inclusive" version of Psalm 103 in its books a few years ago, we might very well be using the "inclusive" Basilian version now.
Jeff
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|