Print

Print


On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Padraic Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> --- On Tue, 2/28/12, Nikolay Ivankov <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Therefore, I've been wondering, if someone has studied sound
> > changes in
> > birds vocalization. Well, I anticipate the problems of such
> > a research, but still, maybe someone has done it.
>
> I don't know if this has been done or not. I do know that people have been
> transcribing bird song into musical notation for a while -- one place to
> look would be in the direction of musically inclined birdwatchers over the
> decades, and perhaps centuries back. Another direction would be birdsong
> as translated into music (Respighi comes to mind immediately -- one of my
> faovrites, Gli Uccelli), but of course keep in mind that this isn't
> birdsong per se. It would be a matter of comparison of those older written
> / notated records with recordings of modern birds of the same species in
> the same regions.
>
> For example: http://www.math.sunysb.edu/~tony/birds/music/intro.html
> "Bird Song" by F. S. Mathews (cited above) is available at Amazon
> http://www.pentatonika.net/songbirds.html
>
> etc.


Thanks for the matherial. I've seen people doing this before - not that
I've been looking for this on a purpose. Yet, I think these works aim on
the aesthetical side of the songs - not something like "_*tweet*_ in this
position becomes _*weet*_" or "this sound is a doubly aspirated beak
click".

Well, I won't really expect something like a bird IPA - the number of
people on Earth exceeds the number of all the wild bids nearly twice. I'm
afraid, this would only be possible is we've had a race of sentient
raptors. But that's what I've been interested in: what if there were
sentient creatures with non-human vocalization apparatus? They'll
definitely use all its advantages and suffer all its disadvantages, and te
rules of the development of this idioms - I can't call it language, because
I'm not sure they'll use the tongue - well, the rules may be completely
different.

In writing, I can present some non-human characteristics by choosing a
proper vocabulary. Say, the creatures have a different kind of colour
perception - so I never use the adjectives for colorus except for the
grayscale, and use something like "the colour of the sky" or "mottled" when
I need to go beyond that.

Of course, if sometimes I'll continue writing something about my conworld,
I'd use "human" letters and sounds - for these are the humans who would be
supposed to read this stuff. But still, I feel rather uncomfortable knowing
that my approximation may be quite far from how it could sound in fantastic
reality.

Sorry for a longish answer

Kolya



> > Maybe a stupid question, though.
>
> The only stupid question is the question unasked for fear of embarrassment.
>
> And even then, we can't blame the question so much as the questioner.
>
> Padraic
>