GMG Classical Music Forum

The Music Room => General Classical Music Discussion => Topic started by: mn dave on June 19, 2008, 06:17:29 PM

Title: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: mn dave on June 19, 2008, 06:17:29 PM
Quote from: M forever on June 19, 2008, 06:15:57 PM
It's Rachmaninoff  ::)

I've seen it both ways. Why are you saying that is the correct way?
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: M forever on June 19, 2008, 06:19:58 PM
Because it's the version he decided for, lived under, published his music, gave concerts, made recordings, and it is the correct version of the name under which he became an US citizen and which he carried when he died. It is also what it says on his headstone.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: mn dave on June 19, 2008, 06:21:36 PM
Quote from: M forever on June 19, 2008, 06:19:58 PM
Because it's the version he decided for, lived under, published his music, gave concerts, made recordings, and it is the correct version of the name under which he became an US citizen and which he carried when he died. It is also what it says on his headstone.

Well, shit. Then why do people spell it the other way? (I usually use Rachmaninoff by the way, but I never knew I was being correct.)
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: M forever on June 19, 2008, 06:26:31 PM
Dunno. Because a lot of people have no clue? I once emailed DG about that and asked why they also misspell his name on their covers. They said they knew that Rachmaninoff was the correct form but that somehow, the version with v had become more widespread, so they used that. I gave them hell for that reply.

Apparently there is a whole DSCH cycle with Ashkenazy. I didn't know that.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/5123-ozLK6L._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Renfield on June 19, 2008, 06:27:15 PM
Quote from: M forever on June 19, 2008, 06:19:58 PM
Because it's the version he decided for, lived under, published his music, gave concerts, made recordings, and it is the correct version of the name under which he became an US citizen and which he carried when he died. It is also what it says on his headstone.

I think (read: don't quote me on that) the "v" represents the way the name is actually pronounced in Russian.

However, I'm sure we've at least a couple of members around who can enlighten us on the matter from a first-hand perspective. Anyone?l.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Brian on June 19, 2008, 06:45:08 PM
Quote from: mn dave on June 19, 2008, 06:21:36 PMI never knew I was being correct.)
Surprising, isn't it?  ;)  ;D

Wonder what exactly dictates the "-off". I always assumed "-ov" was a sort of standard, ala Popov, Labov, Karamazov, Kopylov, Rimsky-Korsakov (though that name, too, is sometimes Korsakoff), Glazunov, etc. Guess I was wrong. I'd love to know the details of how these things are decided, though.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Renfield on June 19, 2008, 06:53:18 PM
Quote from: Brian on June 19, 2008, 06:45:08 PM
Surprising, isn't it?  ;)  ;D

Wonder what exactly dictates the "-off". I always assumed "-ov" was a sort of standard, ala Popov, Labov, Karamazov, Kopylov, Rimsky-Korsakov (though that name, too, is sometimes Korsakoff), Glazunov, etc. Guess I was wrong. I'd love to know the details of how these things are decided, though.

In general, "decisions" for which usage prevails, for instance, are taken at the level of "which usage people use the most".

But the original forms to choose from are most often products of various rules of transliteration that do exist, and which change over time; sometimes drastically. Or they're the result of phonetic approximation. :)
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: M forever on June 19, 2008, 07:50:19 PM
Quote from: Brian on June 19, 2008, 06:45:08 PM
Surprising, isn't it?  ;)  ;D

Wonder what exactly dictates the "-off". I always assumed "-ov" was a sort of standard, ala Popov, Labov, Karamazov, Kopylov, Rimsky-Korsakov (though that name, too, is sometimes Korsakoff), Glazunov, etc. Guess I was wrong. I'd love to know the details of how these things are decided, though.

As a typical monoglot American it doesn't seem to occur to you that there are actually different transliterations in different languages. Who decides that? In this case, the composer himself who chose this form of the name - which is actually the French transliteration, I think. And since we are not describing someone who has never lived in the West but someone who at some point moved permanently into the area of the world in which Roman script is used and decided himself how he wanted his name to be spelled, it shouldn't be too difficult to understand and respect that. He had actually used different local versions himself but from some point on, he only used this version and that is, like I said, what it also said in his paperwork when he became (and died as) an US citizen.

My last name is Schaffer but if I decided to anglicize it to Shaffer (which I never would, but that's beside the point), from that point on it would be the only corrct version of my name.

BTW, the same applies, for roughly similar reasons, to Prokofieff - not Prokofiev. It does not apply to composers like Shostakovich (or Schostakowitsch) or Tchaikovsky (or Tschaikowskij), only to artists who lived extended periods of times in the West and decided on a given version of their names themselves. Therefore it is always Stravinsky, never Strawinskij (although that would be the correct German transliteration) no matter if you sometimes see that in Germany. Also check by which versions of their names the above composers are identified by their official publishers.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Maciek on June 19, 2008, 11:05:19 PM
It's a moot point, really. How do you know the people who use "Rachmaninov" as their chosen spelling are not thinking of it as what it is: an English transcription (not really a transliteration) of the Russian spelling of his name?

BTW 1: While Rachmaninoff/v was alive, there really wasn't any widespread, dominating English standard of how to transcribe Russian names. Many émigrés reached the States through France, and brought over with them the French way of transcribing -ов. But since so many of them came that way, it really wasn't just the French model, but for a while it became a sort of international standard.

BTW 2: I believe the proper transliteration would have been Rakhmaninov.

BTW 3: A proper name is a part of language like any other, a matter of mere convention (witness what happens with the spelling of many very old names, how they evolve over time!). It's a basic premise of linguistics that what languages are is the way people speak, not the way they should speak. If the majority of English speakers use the "Rachmaninov" spelling (and I'm under the impression that's how things stand), then that is the proper spelling.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: ezodisy on June 19, 2008, 11:15:55 PM
Quote from: Renfield on June 19, 2008, 06:27:15 PM
I think (read: don't quote me on that) the "v" represents the way the name is actually pronounced in Russian.

no, it's pronounced softly with an f
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: PSmith08 on June 19, 2008, 11:24:49 PM
As a matter of social grace, the person whose name it is has absolute control over the spelling and pronunciation of his or her name. Operating off incomplete or imperfect information doesn't really change that fact. Even if societal constructs and linguistic style change, if the person made a clear choice, then that choice is the proper form. So, as M points out, if Rachmaninoff chose that spelling for his name in the Latin alphabet, then that's that. Where you have choice - or the "received text" comes into play - is when the person made no such choice. In that case, to pick an example at something approximating random, you can render the name of Homer's hero of the Iliad as Achilles or Achilleus depending on how picky you want to be about Greek transliteration.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: M forever on June 19, 2008, 11:28:10 PM
Quote from: Maciek on June 19, 2008, 11:05:19 PM
It's a moot point, really. How do you know the people who use "Rachmaninov" as their chosen spelling are not thinking of it as what it is: an English transcription (not really a transliteration) of the Russian spelling of his name?

There is no need to decide on a transcription. He already did that himself.

Names are names. And the fact that many old names which represent place names or professions are spelled very differently from the way those professions or place names are spelled today does not lead us to "correct" them to the modern form. These variations in spellings often tell an interesting story, illuminate a background. In the case of Rachmaninoff, that is true, too.

In this case, it's very simple. The man decided himself how he wanted to be spelled. End of story. If he had decided that he wanted his name to by Serge Rackybaby, that would be his name. It shouldn't be too difficult to understand and respect that.

When, for instance, Michel Beroff appears in English speaking countries, should his name be "corrected" to Michael Berov? After all, he is from France, but his family came from Russia, so they should be subjected to the same "linguistically correct" treatment, no matter what their family history is, right?

Please, try to show a little respect to the artist.

(http://s3.amazonaws.com/findagrave/photos/2001/222/rachmaninoff1.jpg)



Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Maciek on June 19, 2008, 11:31:04 PM
Quote from: Maciek on June 19, 2008, 11:05:19 PM
an English transcription (not really a transliteration)

Correction: actually just checked that the ISO/R 9:1968 transliteration does include "ch" for the Russian x.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Maciek on June 19, 2008, 11:42:06 PM
M, as far language is concerned, you're an irrational, naive idealist. What a person calls himself does not mean anything here. I may decide I want everyone to call me "QUDSIYA ZAHER", but whether they will actually do that is not up to me. Language is the way people speak, not the way a specific individual (or group of individuals) wants them to.

Quote from: M forever on June 19, 2008, 11:28:10 PM
Names are names.

That one is too deep for me.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: M forever on June 19, 2008, 11:49:55 PM
Quote from: Maciek on June 19, 2008, 11:42:06 PM
M, as far language is concerned, you're an irrational, naive idealist. What a person calls himself does not mean anything here. I may decide I want everyone to call me "QUDSIYA ZAHER", but whether they will actually do that is not up to me. Language is the way people speak, not the way a specific individual (or group of individuals) wants them to.

We aren't talking about language as a whole anyway and the history of language is rich with examples for individuals who give themselves a name or a form of the name and then they are known under that name from that time on, and if you want that to be your name, you can legally change it to that (I guess, I don't know how that works in Poland). Whether or not people respect your choice doesn't matter. If they chose to address you in another form in correspondence, sure, you can't do much about it but when you have your work published, you are entitled to have your name on the publication in the form you chose. And people who think they have a minimum degree of education should know and respect that in their conversation, too.

After all, I thought we were supposed ot be in the company of at least somewhat educated people here who understand and respect such nuances when it comes to the subjects of music and musicians. This insisting on showing disrespect to an artist by ignoring the correct form of his name for the sake of pseuo-linguistic nuances is pretty idiotic.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: PSmith08 on June 20, 2008, 12:01:05 AM
Quote from: Maciek on June 19, 2008, 11:42:06 PM
M, as far language is concerned, you're an irrational, naive idealist. What a person calls himself does not mean anything here. I may decide I want everyone to call me "QUDSIYA ZAHER", but whether they will actually do that is not up to me. Language is the way people speak, not the way a specific individual (or group of individuals) wants them to.

Not to spoil the fun, but, unless we're talking about the inflection of a name qua noun of a given declension (and that really only goes for highly inflected languages, by which I mean, languages more inflected than English), systematic grammar and syntax - the summa of any sophisticated language - are rarely concerned with names. (This goes at least for the Romance/Germanic families, and I can't speak for other IE language groups.) So, as far as language is concerned, names aren't any more or less important than any other noun in a given declension.

Now, that point is entirely moot in English, since much of the case indication (except in pronouns, and, even then, there isn't a whole lot of inflection) is done with prepositions. Since names aren't the concern of formal language, we're left with social convention. In that case, it's terrible form to tell someone that their spelling or pronunciation is incorrect. They get to determine those things for themselves.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Renfield on June 20, 2008, 12:23:19 AM
Quote from: ezodisy on June 19, 2008, 11:15:55 PM
no, it's pronounced softly with an f

Ah, I see. Thank you for correcting me. :)


About the name issue, and given the evidence that seems to exist to support it, I will ultimately agree with M's view.

Regardless of whether "proper" in language is indeed largely defined by the latter's use, there is still the matter of someone choosing to adopt a name, and other people respecting that. Rachmaninoff it is.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Maciek on June 20, 2008, 12:23:52 AM
First, a point I forgot to address:

Quote from: M forever on June 19, 2008, 11:28:10 PM
There is no need to decide on a transcription. He already did that himself.

That is not exactly relevant because, as I mentioned, the transcription standards back in those days were different. Today nobody transcribes -ов as -off. And since language evolves, it would only be natural that current usage would reflect today's standards and not those of the 1940s.

Quote from: M forever on June 19, 2008, 11:49:55 PM
and if you want that to be your name, you can legally change it to that (I guess, I don't know how that works in Poland).

Irrelevant again - that is a legal matter, it has little to do with what we are discussing. For example, many people decide to publish under a nome de plume (which is not their "legal" name), and in effect come down to posterity under their pseudonym - often contrary to what they would have wished!

Quotewhen you have your work published, you are entitled to have your name on the publication in the form you chose.

Until your work ends up in a library - where it is the librarian who decides under which heading to put it in the catalog...

But I digress.

Quote
After all, I thought we were supposed ot be in the company of at least somewhat educated people here

Not only is that irrelevant - it is also not true. The forum is open to anybody interested in music, no matter what their education. Similarly, language is the way the majority speak, not just some sort of educated sub-group.

Note that my reasoning alone does not imply that either of the spellings is "more correct" - to establish that you need to know which spelling the majority of English-speakers use. It seems quite likely that they in fact use the spelling you prefer, at least Americans do. In the BYU Corpus of American English the number of tokens for "Rachmaninov" is far, far greater than for "Rachmaninoff".

OTOH, if you go to amazon.com and do a search for "Rachmaninoff" and "Rachmaninov", you will find that the latter constitutes 80% of the total number of results in the "Music" category. Since the way CDs are labeled is decided by educated folk rather than the masses, it would seem that only under your line of reasoning is "Rachmaninov" the spelling everyone should adhere to.

Quote from: PSmith08 on June 20, 2008, 12:01:05 AM
Not to spoil the fun, but, unless we're talking about the inflection of a name qua noun of a given declension (and that really only goes for highly inflected languages, by which I mean, languages more inflected than English), systematic grammar and syntax - the summa of any sophisticated language - are rarely concerned with names. (This goes at least for the Romance/Germanic families, and I can't speak for other IE language groups.) So, as far as language is concerned, names aren't any more or less important than any other noun in a given declension.

Now, that point is entirely moot in English, since much of the case indication (except in pronouns, and, even then, there isn't a whole lot of inflection) is done with prepositions. Since names aren't the concern of formal language, we're left with social convention. In that case, it's terrible form to tell someone that their spelling or pronunciation is incorrect. They get to determine those things for themselves.

Don't see your point here at all. What has inflection got to do with anything? The way certain words are classified as proper nouns has absolutely nothing to do with inflection. In fact, the only formal criterion I can think of is the capitalization of proper names. Grammatically, whether you're talking about inflected languages or not, proper names are no different than any other word, or any other noun, to be exact.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Renfield on June 20, 2008, 12:40:19 AM
Maciek, I think you're missing M's point.

He's essentially saying that it is worth dismissing what should, by the unwritten rules of linguistic variance, be the "proper" spelling circa the 21st century, in favour of what the artist chose for himself.

It's like having people refer to you as "Macheek" in 100 years, when you explicitly used Maciek in your lifetime: and M supports we shouldn't try to double-guess you or Rachmaninoff about how you'd like to be called, and just leave your names be.


In other words, you and M's views contrast in whether the "tide" of linguistic evolution should also take chosen names with it, or not.

I hope that makes things a bit clearer. :)
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: PSmith08 on June 20, 2008, 12:43:52 AM
Quote from: Maciek on June 20, 2008, 12:23:52 AM
Don't see your point here at all. What has inflection got to do with anything? The way certain words are classified as proper nouns has absolutely nothing to do with inflection. In fact, the only formal criterion I can think of is the capitalization of proper names. [There is a discrete criterion for proper nouns, and capitalization is the accident, not the substance.] Grammatically, whether you're talking about inflected languages or not, proper names are no different than any other word, or any other noun, to be exact.

That's actually my point. Since formal language does not concern itself with names beyond their status as nouns and how nouns work in a given language, we must go elsewhere to find out how to deal with them. It would be downright perverse to say that a person's name has no more significance in context than the words "stapler," "telephone," or "lamp." Since it is clear that a person's name isn't quite the same in context as "stapler," we must look outside language to figure out what to do, which is where we were left when we couldn't get to an answer through formal language. Where should we go? Let's go where it makes the most sense: The context of the name, i.e., the society and its customs and conventions of the person whose name is under scrutiny, as that context is clearly what makes the name as such special. In the United States of America, where Rachmaninoff held his final citizenship and is buried, it is in terribly poor taste to correct someone's spelling or pronunciation of their name.

In other words, in the final context of Rachmaninoff, he gets to choose how his name is spelled and how it is pronounced. If people choose to spell it differently, they might be reflecting the latest trends in orthography and transcription, but the fact remains that they're committing a not-insubstantial faux pas. In other words, they might be "right," but they're most assuredly being rude.

Hope this clears my point up a little bit. Would that I had a resurrection machine, for the second time tonight, that I might get the man himself here to settle this point once and for all. Alas, the resurrection machine seems just beyond my grasp...
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Renfield on June 20, 2008, 12:46:41 AM
Quote from: PSmith08 on June 20, 2008, 12:43:52 AM
Hope this clears my point up a little bit. Would that I had a resurrection machine, for the second time tonight, that I might get the man himself here to settle this point once and for all. Alas, the resurrection machine seems just beyond my grasp...

Perhaps if you resurrected both Reiner and Rachmaninoff, they might play something together for us! How about the 3rd concerto? ;)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Maciek on June 20, 2008, 01:03:51 AM
Quote from: Renfield on June 20, 2008, 12:40:19 AM
In other words, you and M's views contrast in whether the "tide" of linguistic evolution should also take chosen names with it, or not.

Oh, I understand that all right - I just don't agree. ;D

Quote from: PSmith08 on June 20, 2008, 12:43:52 AM
That's actually my point. Since formal language does not concern itself with names beyond their status as nouns and how nouns work in a given language, we must go elsewhere to find out how to deal with them. It would be downright perverse to say that a person's name has no more significance in context than the words "stapler," "telephone," or "lamp."

Well, actually, if you want to bring it down to semantics, I'd like to point out the fact that proper names do not have meanings at all. They just have referents.

Quote
In other words, in the final context of Rachmaninoff, he gets to choose how his name is spelled and how it is pronounced. If people choose to spell it differently, they might be reflecting the latest trends in orthography and transcription, but the fact remains that they're committing a not-insubstantial faux pas.

I think you're stretching the argument a bit here. You obviously cannot be rude towards a person who has been dead for more than 60 years (at least not in any standard sense of the term). So the comparison is questionable. If there are names from times long past that are spelled differently today than they were in the time of their bearers, I don't think there's anything rude about that. I can't be rude towards those people today. I can, however, be rude to my contemporaries - if I don't adhere to the spelling rules they respect. Ha! ;D

Quotethey might be "right,"

Do the scare quotes imply that in fact "they" are wrong? ::)

Anyway, there's no point in continuing the discussion, since we've all agreed on the proper English spelling of Rachmaninoff (in case no one noticed: I conceded that according to the principles I use it turns out that Rachmaninoff is the "proper" spelling after all). What remains are principles, and I think GMG is not the best place to discuss them, so I suggest we lay down our arms before there are Wittgensteins and Strawsons flying about, and the forum stops serving its primary purpose: that of a place of relaxation before, after or in-between work. ;D 8)

Bowing out.
Title: Re: Rachmaninoff or Rachmaninov?
Post by: Maciek on June 20, 2008, 02:24:11 AM
Sorry, missed the part that you added into the quote:

Quote from: PSmith08 on June 20, 2008, 12:43:52 AM
[There is a discrete criterion for proper nouns, and capitalization is the accident, not the substance.]

If what you have in mind is the behavior of proper nouns in conjunction with articles, then Polish has analogous mechanisms, and it wouldn't be irrational to infer that all languages do. So I withdraw what I said about there being no grammatical differences between nomina propria and appellativa (thereby shattering a large but unnecessary part of my earlier argument ;D). Still, the analogy between, say, Polish and English still holds - either there are criteria in both the languages or in neither of them. And I still stand by my more general statement: namely that inflection has nothing to do with this. And, of course, whether there is an easy way to isolate proper names in a text/lexicon or not has little consequence for the matter at hand (which is why I say it was an unnecessary part of my argument).

OK, sorry for this. From now on, I promise to keep out and/or stick to matters strictly musical. 0:)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: MDL on June 20, 2008, 02:51:13 AM
In Russian, Rachmaninov/ff is Рахманинов. B = v. Ф = f. Rachmaninov/ff didn't spell his name РахманиноФ. That would support the spelling Rachmaninov. However, the pronunciation of the Russian letter B varies. At the beginning of a word, it's normally a hard v, whereas at the end, it's a softer f. If Rachmaninov/ff chose a spelling that reflected the actual pronunciation of his name, rather than its original Russian spelling, then we should respect his wishes. It's a bit like Stravinsky adopting the spelling Strawinsky in Germany to stop Germans calling him Strafinsky.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: DavidRoss on June 20, 2008, 04:49:43 AM
Just call him "Dwayne" and get it over with:

(http://www.celebrityvalues.com/images/the_rock_300.jpg)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 05:10:24 AM
Quote from: MDL on June 20, 2008, 02:51:13 AM
. . . Рахманинов  . . . would support the spelling Rachmaninov.

This detail was not a part of Dave's original question, but one key issue is Cyrillic letters for which there is no single Roman letter equivalent, such as х.  The letter combination "ch" works very naturally for German speakers, but in English (viz. church) that sound just isn't how we use that combination of letters . . . else we would spell the name of the fellow who banged his shoe at the UN Chruschstchev.

The larger point being, that Western transliterations of Cyrillic into Roman letters tend to differ according to the orthography of the various languages.

QuoteHowever, the pronunciation of the Russian letter B varies. At the beginning of a word, it's normally a hard v, whereas at the end, it's a softer f.

That description is (begging your pardon) a little variety of quite confused.  To quote John Cleese from The Meaning of Life, "it's perfectly simple" . . . .  ;)

1.  Normally, в is simply a voiced v sound (Bера = Vera).

2.  When it precedes a voiceless consonant, or ends a word, the в is "devoiced," and becomes an f sound (Bторник [Tuesday] = "ftornik";  разлив [flood] = "razlif").
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: mn dave on June 20, 2008, 05:22:15 AM
Man, I start new threads without even trying.  8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Christo on June 20, 2008, 05:31:08 AM
All very correct, but I think I miss one other key issue, still.

This one. `Rachmaninoff' was the transcription favoured by R. himself in his life-time, since it was according to the FRENCH transcription of his name. And before WWII, French used to be the dominant international language, especially in Europe.

Later transcriptions, since WWII especially, tend to follow practices in the Anglo-Saxon parts of this world. But many other languages - like e.g. German, Swedish, Dutch, Lithuanian, Portuguese, &c. - all have their own transcriptions systems and traditions for Russian names.

Btw, that's the reason why many in this forum, me included, are often not so sure about the correct English spelling of a name: Stravinski, Strawinsky, Strawinski, Stravinsky? (All correct, in some of the languages that I use to read ...  :P ).
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on June 20, 2008, 05:42:39 AM
One also sees Rakhmaninov and Rakhmaninoff at times.

And let's not get started on all the variants for Serge: Sergey, Serguei, Sergei, probably others.  :D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: MDL on June 20, 2008, 05:47:54 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 05:10:24 AM

That description is (begging your pardon) a little variety of quite confused.  To quote John Cleese from The Meaning of Life, "it's perfectly simple" . . . .  ;)

1.  Normally, в is simply a voiced v sound (Bера = Vera).

2.  When it precedes a voiceless consonant, or ends a word, the в is "devoiced," and becomes an f sound (Bторник [Tuesday] = "ftornik";  разлив [flood] = "razlif").

Now come on, that's hardly a million miles away from what I said, is it? Yours is obviously the more detailed analysis, and I am happy to defer to any Russian speakers since my Russian is absolute underpants. But regarding the pronuncation of the Russian letter в, I was simply paraphrasing my Russian for beginners book, which obviously simplifies things for simple folk like me; but that doesn't make it completely incorrect.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 05:48:13 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on June 20, 2008, 05:42:39 AM
One also sees Rakhmaninov and Rakhmaninoff at times.

I've never seen the latter;  only speaking for my own eyes, you understand.

Current English-language scholarly transliteration appears to be favoring the former, as most clearly indicating the source spelling in Cyrillic.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: MDL on June 20, 2008, 05:52:24 AM
I want to know why Mussorgsky is being replaced by Musorgsky. The BBC have been using Musorgsky for years and now everybody else seems to be following suit.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 05:56:15 AM
Quote from: MDL on June 20, 2008, 05:47:54 AM
Now come on, that's hardly a million miles away from what I said, is it?

No, perhaps only a few hundred thousand miles  8)

My issue isn't so much detail, as clarity; your paraphrase was confused.  One specific instance is your "hard v" / "softer f" comment.  I have spoken Russian for a decade and a half now, but I honestly have no inkling what you're after, there, especially because the adjectives soft/hard have very specific applications to vowels (and the consonants they may affect) . . . every consonant at the end of a Russian word is a hard consonant, unless it is followed by a soft sign (мягкий знак).

Quote from: MDL on June 20, 2008, 05:52:24 AM
I want to know why Mussorgsky is being replaced by Musorgsky. The BBC have been using Musorgsky for years and now everybody else seems to be following suit.

Because in Russian there is only one с after the у in Мусоргский.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: MDL on June 20, 2008, 06:13:55 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 05:56:15 AM

I have spoken Russian for a decade and a half now, but I honestly have no inkling what you're after, there, especially because the adjectives soft/hard have very specific applications to vowels (and the consonants they may affect) . . . every consonant at the end of a Russian word is a hard consonant, unless it is followed by a soft sign (мягкий знак).

Because in Russian there is only one с after the у in Мусоргский.


OK, using the words "hard" and "soft" was a mistake because, yes, of course, they do have very specific meanings in Russian. I was merely trying to describe how the sound would be to a layman with absolutely no understanding of Russian pronunciation, and wasn't expecting to be hauled over the coals by a snotty pedant.

A quote from lesson one in my Ruslan Russian for Beginners:

This sounds like the V in "vary" but can sound like the F at the end of a word.

pdf file should you need to look it up:

http://www.ruslan.co.uk/r1intro.pdf

Seems fairly obvious to me, but feel free to carry on point-scoring.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 06:19:09 AM
Quote from: MDL on June 20, 2008, 06:13:55 AM
Seems fairly obvious to me, but feel free to carry on point-scoring.

You looking in a mirror, fellow?  My posts have been entirely about clarity and what is the case.  Seems fairly obvious to me, but feel free to carry on your hissy-fit.

And, by the way, you are welcome (viz. Musorgsky).
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on June 20, 2008, 08:07:39 AM
I am still puzzled why some people find it so hard to understand that spelling rules do not apply to names. Which is why we have such a wide variety of different versions of the same or similar names. These variations often tell a story. My name is fairly rare and I have never met anyone outside my family who had the same name (although it's not that extremely rare), but I can think of two well known persons with the same name, Peter Shaffer (who wrote "Amadeus") and Paul Shaffer (band leader of the Letterman show). In both cases, the anglicized spelling of their names without the C reflects both where their families came from originally but also where these people live today. Technically, from Maciek's point of view, their names are misspelled though. But I don't think it would occur to anyone to make them change the spelling of their own names, would it?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 08:10:10 AM
Quote from: M forever on June 20, 2008, 08:07:39 AM
I am still puzzled why some people find it so hard to understand that spelling rules do not apply to names.

For English speakers, it's not so very hard.  After all, Shakespeare spelled his own name three different ways, on three different documents, on (IIRC) the same day.

(Bet you can't say that about Goethe  ;)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: pjme on June 20, 2008, 08:13:47 AM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61M0GS6YJBL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)


(http://www.emusic.com/img/album/109/452/10945282_155_155.jpeg)

AFAIK, I see "Rakhmaninov" also quite often in German publications.

P.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on June 20, 2008, 08:17:03 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 08:10:10 AM
For English speakers, it's not so very hard.  After all, Shakespeare spelled his own name three different ways, on three different documents, on (IIRC) the same day.

In case you didn't know, WS lived several hundred years ago. A lot of people did that back then. Today, no one who isn't dyslexic spells his name randomly.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 08:23:28 AM
Quote from: M forever on June 20, 2008, 08:17:03 AM
In case you didn't know, WS lived several hundred years ago.

Well, that is a surprise  ;D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 08:24:40 AM
Quote from: M forever on June 20, 2008, 08:17:03 AM
Today, no one who isn't dyslexic spells his name randomly.

Shakespeare spelt his name in various ways, but never randomly.  He never signed his name Luxury-Yacht, for instance.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 20, 2008, 08:25:04 AM
Quote from: M forever on June 20, 2008, 08:07:39 AM
...My name is fairly rare and I have never met anyone outside my family who had the same name (although it's not that extremely rare),

But there are a limited number of way to spell "M". I suppose you could write it as "Em"... :D

But in any case, all kidding aside, I agree with your argument. My own last name is accompanied by at least 3 different spellings also, the 2 incorrect ones have haunted me for a lifetime. Although they aren't wrong at all, merely not the way my particular ancestors chose to spell it. :)

8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 20, 2008, 08:25:52 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 08:24:40 AM
Shakespeare spelt his name in various ways, but never randomly.  He never signed his name Luxury-Yacht, for instance.

No, but he did use Throat-Warbler Mangrove once... :)

8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 08:29:54 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 20, 2008, 08:25:04 AM
But there are a limited number of way to spell "M". I suppose you could write it as "Em"... :D

Or Emm, or even (with just a slight stretch of the vowel) Æm(m) . . . .
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: mn dave on June 20, 2008, 08:32:00 AM
It's not "AheM?"  :o
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 08:32:59 AM
Quote from: mn dave on June 20, 2008, 08:32:00 AM
It's not "AheM?"  :o

In which case, it might also be AcheM, or even AkheM . . . .
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on June 20, 2008, 08:59:14 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 05:48:13 AM
I've never seen the latter;  only speaking for my own eyes, you understand.

Plenty of examples if you Google this spelling.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 09:04:44 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on June 20, 2008, 08:59:14 AM
Plenty of examples if you Google this spelling.

Oh, tush! Plenty examples of anything on the Internet, accuracy be damned.

You need better filters, man!  8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 09:58:30 AM
In a frank and unapologetic tangent . . . Washington Irving preferred the spelling Don Quijote (for "Quixote," I mean — not for Washington Irving).  And Walt Whitman enjoyed an exotic diacritical mark in spelling the geographical formation cañon.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 20, 2008, 10:02:20 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 09:58:30 AM
In a frank and unapologetic tangent . . . Washington Irving preferred the spelling Don Quijote (for "Quixote," I mean — not for Washington Irving).  And Walt Whitman enjoyed an exotic diacritical mark in spelling the geographical formation cañon.

The exotic diacritical mark in no more than a tilde, placed over the "n" in canyon. Cañon is a Spanish word meaning canyon. A tilde in Spanish makes the letter "n" pronounce as the English dipthong "ny". Thus, there is no difference in pronunciation, and Whitman's preference here is to merely spell the word in its native language. Rather like Rakh.... oh, never mind. ::)  :D

8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 10:06:38 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 20, 2008, 10:02:20 AM
The exotic diacritical mark in no more than a tilde, placed over the "n" in canyon. Cañon is a Spanish word meaning canyon. A tilde in Spanish makes the letter "n" pronounce as the English dipthong "ny". Thus, there is no difference in pronunciation, and Whitman's preference here is to merely spell the word in its native language. Rather like Rakh.... oh, never mind. ::)  :D

;D

To be sure, here was one of those instances where there was no English word for a thing, and we just borrowed from a language which did.

Same as with Detroit  8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 20, 2008, 10:08:57 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 10:06:38 AM
;D

To be sure, here was one of those instances where there was no English word for a thing, and we just borrowed from a language which did.

Same as with Detroit  8)

??? There's no English word for Detroit? Yet there are so very many that would apply, how could we have missed the opportunity?   ;)

8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 10:29:34 AM
As Churchill once neglected to say, I don't have to be able to spell something, to know to avoid it.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: scarpia on June 20, 2008, 11:36:45 AM
The issue may be that Russian documents used to have the french transliteration of Cyrillic, which can employ f or ff to translate the last character of Rachmaninoff's name.  Non-french transliteration schemes seem to use 'v' without exception.  What is proper is interesting.  If the work was published with Roman characters then you have to use what Rach used.   But if something was published in Russian with Cyrillic characters, you could argue for using the standard transliteration of the name in its native Cyrillic form.

Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: jochanaan on June 20, 2008, 01:01:45 PM
Well, we could always do as a rural friend of mine and call him Rock-Knock'emoff. ;D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: MDL on June 20, 2008, 01:14:58 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 06:19:09 AM
You looking in a mirror, fellow?  My posts have been entirely about clarity and what is the case.  Seems fairly obvious to me, but feel free to carry on your hissy-fit.

And, by the way, you are welcome (viz. Musorgsky).


Sorry, I didn't realise that you were a troll.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

Jeez, almost 10,000 posts on this forum? Get out and get some fresh air! Seriously.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Brian on June 20, 2008, 02:59:58 PM
Quote from: Maciek on June 19, 2008, 11:42:06 PMI may decide I want everyone to call me "QUDSIYA ZAHER",
Please do. That sounds like a truly awesome name.  8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Maciek on June 20, 2008, 03:08:34 PM
Hmmm...


;D


Will think about it. ;)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Brian on June 20, 2008, 03:13:07 PM
Quote from: QUDSIYA ZAHER on June 20, 2008, 03:08:34 PM
Hmmm...


;D


Will think about it. ;)
(http://www.fijilive.com/ecards/icons/Love.jpg)

;D ;D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Maciek on June 20, 2008, 03:19:51 PM
Wheeeee! This is fun! I have to do this sort of thing more often! It's like I'm getting to know GMG for the first time all over again! 8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Brian on June 20, 2008, 03:21:18 PM
Quote from: QUDSIYA ZAHER on June 20, 2008, 03:19:51 PM
Wheeeee! This is fun! I have to do this sort of thing more often! It's like I'm getting to know GMG for the first time all over again! 8)
Wait till you start looking at "Who's Online" and the lists of who's reading the threads you're in. When I was "That's Hedley!", it was so bizarre and disorienting ;D

Oh, and welcome to GMG  8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Don on June 20, 2008, 03:44:22 PM
Has anyone noticed that Rachmaninov's music sounds different than Rachmaninoff's?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 03:56:24 PM
Quote from: MDL on June 20, 2008, 01:14:58 PM
Sorry, I didn't realise that you were a troll.

That piddling attempt at personal remark is genuinely funny, coming as it does from a dilettante who tried to offer half-baked insight on Russian phonology, and directed at someone who offered knowledgable information as a corrective.

I applaud you as a comedian!
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: jochanaan on June 20, 2008, 06:24:34 PM
Quote from: Don on June 20, 2008, 03:44:22 PM
Has anyone noticed that Rachmaninov's music sounds different than Rachmaninoff's?
I hadn't noticed. ;) I also hadn't noticed Prokofieff's music sounding different than Prokofiev's. ;D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on June 20, 2008, 09:44:33 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 20, 2008, 08:25:04 AM
My own last name is accompanied by at least 3 different spellings also, the 2 incorrect ones have haunted me for a lifetime. Although they aren't wrong at all, merely not the way my particular ancestors chose to spell it. :)

Or maybe the immigration officers on Ellis Island did..."Vito Andolini...di Corleone" - "What? OK, Vito Corleone."

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 20, 2008, 10:08:57 AM
??? There's no English word for Detroit?

Sure there is. And yes, I know that you know that. But Karl apparently doesn't. Hmmm...why are there so many places and regions in the US, a predominantly English speaking country, that look like they come from the French, and the further north you get, the more you find (e.g. "Vermont", the capital of which is "Montpelier")? Hmmm...I guess it's time for Karl to google some American history!
The anglicized French names, and in some cases the anglicized French versions of originally "Indian" or "native American" names ("Illinois") tell a story, reflect a historical situation...just like the spelling version "Rachmaninoff" does. So "Detroit" is actually a really good example for what we are talking about, although that obvoiusly wasn't what Karl intended. But thanks anyway.

Oh, BTW, "Karl" is the historical form of a German word which means "strong guy". But - the correct modern form is "Kerl". I would say that the form "Karl" reflects what an old name it is, and since it is a name, it should be spelled in that traditional way. Karl, however, will insist on the linguistically correct modern form.

So, Karl - have you filed the paperwork yet to change your name to "Kerl"? While you are at it, also change your last name to "Heinrich", OK? Because "Henning" is an old north German dialect form of "Heinrich". But since you insist on everything being analy linguistically correct, your corrected name will from now on be "Kerl Heinrich".
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Brian on June 20, 2008, 09:47:54 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 20, 2008, 08:25:04 AMMy own last name is accompanied by at least 3 different spellings also, the 2 incorrect ones have haunted me for a lifetime. Although they aren't wrong at all, merely not the way my particular ancestors chose to spell it. :)

8)
Mine too - actually, now that I think of it, at least five.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 20, 2008, 09:49:54 PM
Quote from: Don on June 20, 2008, 03:44:22 PM
Has anyone noticed that Rachmaninov's music sounds different than Rachmaninoff's?

Wow, what a nice coincidence, the 2nd mv't of PC3 in the background on Mezzo and finding out I was not too much out of the loop all this time since this orthographical discussion is still going on. Now that the Piano Lit and Music History exams are typed up and read to go for Thursday, now I can sit back and enjoy real musical discussion without bothering to tell students to shut off their mobile phones or refrain from eating in the class. I was really looking forward to getting my internet life back!!

Now, what would really clinch the argument for me if the last consonant is voiced or not. If in Russian if it is somewhere in between, I guess either spelling is OK.

See ya around,
ZB

Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on June 20, 2008, 09:56:41 PM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 20, 2008, 09:49:54 PM
Now, what would really clinch the argument for me if the last consonant is voiced or not. If in Russian if it is somewhere in between, I guess either spelling is OK.

That is a completely irrelevant question in this context. We aren't talking about how Russian words and names in general can be transliterated, what options there are, what systems there exist in various languages. That has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. We are talking about how the composer himself decided his name should be spelled in Western script, and the ignorance reflected by people who a) don't know that and b) find it beyond themselves to accept the man's decision.

Quote from: Brian on June 20, 2008, 09:47:54 PM
Mine too - actually, now that I think of it, at least five.

Isn't your last name "Reinhart" or something like that?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 20, 2008, 10:35:21 PM
Quote from: M forever on June 20, 2008, 09:56:41 PM
That is a completely irrelevant question in this context. We aren't talking about how Russian words and names in general can be transliterated, what options there are, what systems there exist in various languages. That has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. We are talking about how the composer himself decided his name should be spelled in Western script, and the ignorance reflected by people who a) don't know that and b) find it beyond themselves to accept the man's decision.

Excuse me, isn't it being a more than a little Quixotic to defend the allegedly wounded sensibilities of someone for whom this may have been a non-issue. I have personal experience with this. You wouldn't believe how chopped up my name gets in Japanese, for instance. But in general since good intentions are behind the attempt to pronouce or write my name, I don't mind it. And I'm sure I mispronounce others' names as well. So even-steven.

I more or less insist upon the right English spelling of my name (since English speakers are more hung up about spelling issues, it seems) but approximations can't be helped in other systems and scripts.

Also, I pronounce my own name differently when speaking other languages just to fit into the sound pattern. Most of the time I answer the phone as Zhan-net.

ZB

PS By the way do you roll the initial "r" in Rachmaninoff, or use the improper English "r"?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on June 21, 2008, 03:54:16 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on June 20, 2008, 06:24:34 PM
I hadn't noticed. ;) I also hadn't noticed Prokofieff's music sounding different than Prokofiev's. ;D

But I trust you will acknowledge that the German spelling "Prokofjew" gives an entirely fresh perspective to the Overture on Hebrew Themes.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Lethevich on June 21, 2008, 07:19:36 AM
Quote from: M forever on June 19, 2008, 06:19:58 PM
Because it's the version he decided for

How about Handel? I think that a while after the move he stopped using it.*

*Err, the umlaut, that is :)
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on June 21, 2008, 07:56:06 AM
Quote from: Lethe on June 21, 2008, 07:19:36 AM
How about Handel? I think that a while after the move he stopped using it.*

*Err, the umlaut, that is :)

Many thanks for that footnote.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Lethevich on June 21, 2008, 07:59:53 AM
Quote from: Jezetha on June 21, 2008, 07:56:06 AM
Many thanks for that footnote.

Indeed, a ridiculous omission... Proofreading is too much to expect from someone so lazy and tired as me ;D
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on June 21, 2008, 08:02:52 AM
Quote from: Lethe on June 21, 2008, 07:59:53 AM
Indeed, a ridiculous omission... Proofreading is too much to expect from someone so lazy and tired as me ;D

If laziness and tiredness lead to a broad grin on my face, you won't get any complaint from me.  ;D
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on June 21, 2008, 08:06:42 AM
Quote from: Lethe on June 21, 2008, 07:19:36 AM
How about Handel? I think that a while after the move he stopped using it.*

*Err, the umlaut, that is :)

He adopted the spelling George Frideric Handel when he became a British citizen, but was born as Georg Friedrich Händel.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Maciek on June 21, 2008, 08:48:00 AM
Quote from: M forever on June 20, 2008, 09:44:33 PM
Oh, BTW, "Karl" is the historical form of a German word which means "strong guy". But - the correct modern form is "Kerl". I would say that the form "Karl" reflects what an old name it is, and since it is a name, it should be spelled in that traditional way. Karl, however, will insist on the linguistically correct modern form.

So, Karl - have you filed the paperwork yet to change your name to "Kerl"? While you are at it, also change your last name to "Heinrich", OK? Because "Henning" is an old north German dialect form of "Heinrich". But since you insist on everything being analy linguistically correct, your corrected name will from now on be "Kerl Heinrich".

M, you're inconsistent, which probably means you didn't understand my argumentation. First you champion sticking to old forms of spelling (such as "Rachmaninoff"). And then... you mock precisely the approach you championed?! :o ::) (Which, at least in relation to what Karl has said so far, is neither here nor there.)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Brian on June 21, 2008, 10:59:02 AM
Quote from: M forever on June 20, 2008, 09:56:41 PM
Isn't your last name "Reinhart" or something like that?
Reinhart (http://www.reinhartrealtors.com/), Reinhardt, Rheinhardt, Rinehardt (http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~jwheat/rinehardt.html), Rinehart (http://www.hrw.com/), Rhinehart (http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080620&content_id=420706&vkey=news_t436&fext=.jsp&sid=t436) ... we're all the same.  ;D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Wanderer on June 21, 2008, 11:30:46 AM
Quote from: Brian on June 21, 2008, 10:59:02 AM
Reinhart (http://www.reinhartrealtors.com/), Reinhardt, Rheinhardt, Rinehardt (http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~jwheat/rinehardt.html), Rinehart (http://www.hrw.com/), Rhinehart (http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080620&content_id=420706&vkey=news_t436&fext=.jsp&sid=t436) ...

...on a Rheinfahrt.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: M forever on June 21, 2008, 11:37:58 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on June 21, 2008, 08:06:42 AM
He adopted the spelling George Frideric Handel when he became a British citizen, but was born as Georg Friedrich Händel.

Händel/Handel never became a British citizen.

Quote from: Brian on June 21, 2008, 10:59:02 AM
Reinhart (http://www.reinhartrealtors.com/), Reinhardt, Rheinhardt, Rinehardt (http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~jwheat/rinehardt.html), Rinehart (http://www.hrw.com/), Rhinehart (http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080620&content_id=420706&vkey=news_t436&fext=.jsp&sid=t436) ... we're all the same.  ;D

The last couple of versions are obviously already aglicized though. Variations like "rine..." or "rhine..." don't exist in German. "Rain" (which would be pronounced like "rine", not like water falling from the sky), "reyn" or even "rayn" would be possible and kind of look like some really old names look, but I don't think I have ever seen them. As you probably know, the name is actually a first name although it is not so uncommon as a family name either.

Quote from: QUDSIYA ZAHER on June 21, 2008, 08:48:00 AM
M, you're inconsistent, which probably means you didn't understand my argumentation. First you champion sticking to old forms of spelling (such as "Rachmaninoff"). And then... you mock precisely the approach you championed?! :o ::) (Which, at least in relation to what Karl has said so far, is neither here nor there.)

That's called "being sarcastic" or "beating someone with his own weapons".
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Maciek on June 21, 2008, 11:52:38 AM
Quote from: M forever on June 21, 2008, 11:37:58 AM
That's called "being sarcastic" or "beating someone with his own weapons".

But what you're doing is beating yourself with someone else's weapon! :o
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: BachQ on June 21, 2008, 12:18:39 PM
Quote from: M forever on June 19, 2008, 11:28:10 PM
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/findagrave/photos/2001/222/rachmaninoff1.jpg)

That's really odd that the cemetery misspelled Rach's headstone ......... you'd think someone would have noticed .......
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: DavidRoss on June 21, 2008, 12:50:14 PM
(http://www.the-turds.co.uk/turds/ShowPicture.aspx?filename=ShitStirrer.jpg&size=fullsize)
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on June 21, 2008, 02:08:22 PM
Quote from: M forever on June 21, 2008, 11:37:58 AM
Händel/Handel never became a British citizen.

Oh, really?

http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_publications_and_archives/parliamentary_archives/handel_and_naturalisation.cfm (http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_publications_and_archives/parliamentary_archives/handel_and_naturalisation.cfm)

(http://www.parliament.uk/images/upload/27583.jpg)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on June 21, 2008, 02:09:50 PM
Without materially affecting Sforz's point . . . in those days, Britons would have been subjects (of the monarch) rather than citizens (of a state).
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on June 21, 2008, 02:11:58 PM
Yes, really. Because he didn't become a British citizen, he became a subject of the English Crown. I don't think they had something like citizenship at that time.

Just wanted to be a smartass! Ha!

;D

What does that mean: "The House was adjourned during Pleasure, to unrobe." Does that mean after the ceremony they all got naked together?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on June 21, 2008, 02:14:14 PM
Quote from: M forever on June 21, 2008, 02:11:58 PM
Yes, really. Because he didn't become a British citizen, he became a subject of the English Crown. I don't think they had something like citizenship at that time.

Just wanted to be a smartass! Ha!

;D

What does that mean: "The House was adjourned during Pleasure, to unrobe." Does that mean after the ceremony they all got naked together?

Only the citizens did that.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on June 21, 2008, 02:47:34 PM
It would actually be interesting to know more about how citizenship and stuff like that was defined and händled, I mean, handled at the time when most people probably didn't have papers and rarely traveled across borders anyway. Unless they were invited into the king's army to take part in invading some other king's territory when they obviously didn't need papers either.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Brian on June 21, 2008, 08:24:56 PM
Quote from: M forever on June 21, 2008, 11:37:58 AMAs you probably know, the name is actually a first name although it is not so uncommon as a family name either.
This doesn't surprise me, though the only such name I know of is the rather obscure (perhaps deservedly) conductor Reinhard Seifried. And, yes, a couple of those spellings are clearly Anglicized; it particularly irritates me when the name is misspelled to include "Rhine", as if we are named after the river.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: PSmith08 on June 21, 2008, 08:41:52 PM
Quote from: Brian on June 21, 2008, 08:24:56 PM
This doesn't surprise me, though the only such name I know of is the rather obscure (perhaps deservedly) conductor Reinhard Seifried. And, yes, a couple of those spellings are clearly Anglicized; it particularly irritates me when the name is misspelled to include "Rhine", as if we are named after the river.

There's at least one historical figure of whom I can think whose first name was Reinhard, though he is hardly an advertisement for naming one's child Reinhard.
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on June 22, 2008, 12:44:50 AM
Quote from: PSmith08 on June 21, 2008, 08:41:52 PM
There's at least one historical figure of whom I can think whose first name was Reinhard, though he is hardly an advertisement for naming one's child Reinhard.

Exactly. And returning to things musical: the father of this infamous Reinhard Eugen Tristan * was a singer and composer, Bruno *...
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on June 22, 2008, 12:56:12 AM
Reinhart (or the short version Reiner) is not such a rare first name. Unlike a lot of other old German names which have gone out of fashion and now sound silly as a modern name (I have never met anyone named Siegfried or Brünhilde and it may be hard for people who don't speak German to understand why these and many other old German names would sound ridiculous in connection with a modern person, but they do) it is somehow still OK. I can think of quite a few guys I know with that name without thinking very hard.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Brian on June 22, 2008, 01:39:52 PM
Quote from: M forever on June 22, 2008, 12:56:12 AM
Reinhart (or the short version Reiner) is not such a rare first name. Unlike a lot of other old German names which have gone out of fashion and now sound silly as a modern name (I have never met anyone named Siegfried or Brünhilde and it may be hard for people who don't speak German to understand why these and many other old German names would sound ridiculous in connection with a modern person, but they do) it is somehow still OK. I can think of quite a few guys I know with that name without thinking very hard.
Interesting, thanks.  :)  Incidentally, I do know a fellow named Siegfried, and his family is not exactly German (they're from Peru).  :D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Lilas Pastia on June 23, 2008, 05:50:54 PM
In French and Italian (and maybe other latin-derived languages?) most ancient Greek names have a different spelling and pronunciation than in English (and presumably other anglo-saxon languages?).

For example: Ulysses, Hercules, Patrocles, Achilles, Oedipus: the 's' is omitted and the name ends with the final vowel. Which, in French, is usually mute, so the pronunciation is based on the penultimate consonant: Ulysse = Ülyss, Hercule = Hercül, Achille = Achill, Oedipe = Édip (but not Patrocle, where the full last syllable is pronounced). I added tremas (umlauts) to indicate how the u is pronounced, but it's written without.

The French have little regard for things such as transliteration. It's seen as a tool among others when it comes to adapting names originating from a different alphabet. Usage predominates, so you'll look in vain for names to reflect the logical spelling and pronunciation. Some names like Charles do end with es but are pronounced with just a mute e (Charl). In all logic they should also allow the es spelling for the Greek names, but no, they don't.

I guess local usage rules, even if it's against logic or usage in other cultures. Most geographical names have a different spelling depending on where you hear it. Although Belgium has three official languages, you will not find it written like that in any of them: it's België (Flemish), Belgique (French) and Belgien (German). And yet, it's known around the English speaking world as Belgium.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Christo on June 23, 2008, 07:50:37 PM
Anyhow, this thread is about Rachmaninov's habit of spelling his name in the French manner, so I'll leave it here ...  8)

And this is the reason I deleted a lot of previous posts which had nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of how to pronounce the name Rachmaninoff - whichever! -  $:)

uffeviking
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Maciek on June 25, 2008, 09:05:26 AM
This is entirely off topic, but hopefully it won't start a flame war... ::)

Quote from: M forever on June 21, 2008, 02:47:34 PM
It would actually be interesting to know more about how citizenship and stuff like that was defined and händled, I mean, handled at the time when most people probably didn't have papers and rarely traveled across borders anyway. Unless they were invited into the king's army to take part in invading some other king's territory when they obviously didn't need papers either.

In the 16th and 17th centuries you needed a "passport" to cross a border. Only, in those days a passport was something different: it was a permit from the authorities of the country you were entering. Sometimes, a second "passport" was needed - a permit to leave the country. So, basically, we're talking about "entry visas" and "exit visas". Apart from that, to enter certain Italian states you also needed a certificate from a doctor, attesting that you are healthy (or at least don't have anything contagious). Sometimes, a letter of recommendation from somebody important was also useful. Often, the customs officials were very susceptible to bribery - sometimes they were only susceptible to bribery, and on principle ignored all documents altogether.

I'm taking the info from Antoni Mączak's excellent Życie codzienne w podróżach po Europie w XVI i XVII wieku. Also available in English translation (Travel in Early Modern Europe (http://www.amazon.com/Travel-Modern-Europe-Antoni-Maczak/dp/074560840X/)):
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51YSD0JGA4L._SL500_BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45,-64_OU01_AA240_SH20_.jpg) (http://www.amazon.com/Travel-Modern-Europe-Antoni-Maczak/dp/074560840X/)

It's a great read!

EDIT:
Ummm... Belatedly noticed the price tag. But hey! it comes with FREE Super Saver Shipping!

EDIT 2:
But thanks to the "Search Inside..." function you can actually get some idea of the book without buying it or even going to a library. 8) A title it most reminds me of is probably Elias's History of Manners.
Title: RRAKKHMANINOPH!
Post by: Xenophanes on June 25, 2008, 03:25:35 PM
I like my way better.
Title: Barachmaninoff
Post by: Brian on June 26, 2008, 10:22:07 PM
Slate.com has the answer!

Barachmaninoff (buh-rahkh-MAH-nuh-nawf) n. A celebrated Russian composer hired by Obama to pen expansive, masterful campaign songs.

Example: Although critically acclaimed, Barachmaninoff's first concerto struck many Americans as unnecessarily complex and inaccessible.


[I wonder how many GMGers consider the Rach "unnecessarily complex and inaccessible"...]
Title: Re: GMG Wishlist: OOP or rare recordings you want reissued
Post by: Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich on July 31, 2008, 03:18:47 AM
Quote from: Brian on June 21, 2008, 08:24:56 PMAnd, yes, a couple of those spellings are clearly Anglicized
The (non english speaking) mob anglicizes and language is done by the mob (as it is the majority). It's that simple. Best regards to Woschinkten, Liwwerpuhl and Nujork! Like in the 19th century, when it was fashionable to have it all in french. Today it's a more worldwide phenomenon. For the case of germany I can say, it's a clear case of brownnosing. It's about telling the world how open and international we are.
BTW, speaking of New York, I think at post WW2 times they said "Neujork" here.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on July 31, 2008, 03:25:19 AM
New York is still simply Nieuw Amsterdam for me.  >:D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Christo on July 31, 2008, 11:41:23 AM
Quote from: Jezetha on July 31, 2008, 03:25:19 AM
New York is still simply Nieuw Amsterdam for me.  >:D

Did anything happen to Nieuw Amsterdam?? Are those colonials calling it Nieuw Jork or Nieuw Kantelberg or so, nowadays? Who imagines changing Amsterdam for Jork?  ???
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on July 31, 2008, 11:50:08 AM
Oh, the grand old Mijnheer of Jork, he had a thousand men . . . .
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 12, 2008, 09:27:07 PM
So, what's the forum convention? Do we go with "Rachmaninoff" or "Rachmaninov"?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Lethevich on August 12, 2008, 09:33:09 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 12, 2008, 09:27:07 PM
So, what's the forum convention? Do we go with "Rachmaninoff" or "Rachmaninov"?

I think that M has already established how wrong everybody else is ;D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on August 12, 2008, 09:43:30 PM
I haven't. Rachmaninoff himself has.

(http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/8554/rachmaninoff2ca3.jpg)

I challenge other members to find a single pic of Rachmaninoff signing his name in any other way in Roman script than this or else simply accept and respect how the man chose to spell his own name.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 12, 2008, 09:51:53 PM
I actually do not mind, as it is in another language; that's just a matter of searching.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 12, 2008, 10:08:06 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 20, 2008, 05:10:24 AM
That description is (begging your pardon) a little variety of quite confused.  To quote John Cleese from The Meaning of Life, "it's perfectly simple" . . . .  ;)

1.  Normally, в is simply a voiced v sound (Bера = Vera).

2.  When it precedes a voiceless consonant, or ends a word, the в is "devoiced," and becomes an f sound (Bторник [Tuesday] = "ftornik";  разлив [flood] = "razlif").

But declining the name into different cases makes the "v" at the ending become a hard "v": Rachmaninov, Rachmaninova, Rachmaninovu, Rachmaninova, Rachmaninovym, o Rachmaninove, and the feminine form "Rachmanova," and the possessive form for both genders.
In his case there is also a special adjective that brings "f" back, just preceded by a voiceless consonant, Rachmaninoffskiy. :D

What bothers me more is Rachmaninoff's sounding like Rakmaninoff. It is a very hard "h," like Hvorostovsky.


PS: The dictionary says the following:  ;D

  general   Rachmaninoff
  musical   Rachmaninov; Rakhmaninov
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich on August 13, 2008, 07:19:24 AM
(http://www.idiomsbykids.com/taylor/mrtaylor/class20022003/idioms/idioms2003/idioms3/add%20fuel%20to%20the%20fire.jpg)

BTW, useful site www.idiomsbykids.com :D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: DavidRoss on August 13, 2008, 07:39:17 AM
(http://www.bittermancircle.com/my%20images/BeatDeadHorse.gif)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sergeant Rock on August 13, 2008, 08:12:37 AM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 12, 2008, 09:27:07 PM
So, what's the forum convention? Do we go with "Rachmaninoff" or "Rachmaninov"?

I'm going to start using Rac(K)hmanino(ff)v

Sarge
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: ChamberNut on August 13, 2008, 08:15:10 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 13, 2008, 07:39:17 AM
(http://www.bittermancircle.com/my%20images/BeatDeadHorse.gif)

Exactly.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Opus106 on August 13, 2008, 08:31:57 AM
Quote from: Wurstwasser on August 13, 2008, 07:19:24 AM
BTW, useful site www.idiomsbykids.com :D

At least some good came from this thread.

Thanks for the link. :D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on August 13, 2008, 01:42:09 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 12, 2008, 10:08:06 PM
But declining the name into different cases makes the "v" at the ending become a hard "v": Rachmaninov, Rachmaninova, Rachmaninovu, Rachmaninova, Rachmaninovym, o Rachmaninove, and the feminine form "Rachmanova," and the possessive form for both genders.
In his case there is also a special adjective that brings "f" back, just preceded by a voiceless consonant, Rachmaninoffskiy. :D

What bothers me more is Rachmaninoff's sounding like Rakmaninoff. It is a very hard "h," like Hvorostovsky.


PS: The dictionary says the following:  ;D

  general   Rachmaninoff
  musical   Rachmaninov; Rakhmaninov

All that is highly interesting but plays absolutely no role. In this case, the correct spelling is defined by the way Rachmaninoff himself chose to - and did consistently - spell his own name when he permanently emigrated to the West and later became an US citizen. It doesn't matter why and what form of his name he chose (namely the common French transliteration). He just did. From that point on, this spelling became the only correct from of his name.

As a parallel example - since this seem so incredibly difficult for a lot of people to get into their small heads -, my own last name is Schaffer. I currently live in the US like Rachmaninoff did in the last phase of his life. If I became an US citizen and chose to anglicize my name by dropping the C (Shaffer) - which the Americans do for me all the time anyway, even when I specifically say s-C-h-a-f-f-e-r (but in return, I often get a bonus E since SchaEfer is a much more common name) - then from that point on, Shaffer would be the only correct way to spell my name. As is the case for the many Americans with names like Fisher, Shulz, Shulman (actually sChulmanN) etcetcetc. Who would want to "correct" their names? That would be pretty idiotic.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 13, 2008, 04:57:59 PM
Quote from: M forever on August 13, 2008, 01:42:09 PM
All that is highly interesting but plays absolutely no role. In this case, the correct spelling is defined by the way Rachmaninoff himself chose to - and did consistently - spell his own name when he permanently emigrated to the West and later became an US citizen. It doesn't matter why and what form of his name he chose (namely the common French transliteration). He just did. From that point on, this spelling became the only correct from of his name.

I understand and do not mind. My last name has never been pronounced correctly even in transliteration, with constantly confused consonants around a vowel. I am more concerned about performing search. Anyway it's more useful to try both variants.

And, after all, I just replied to karlhenning's post about the pronunciation rule and referred to the dictionary. Also, the board itself thinks he is... ;D

(http://s43.radikal.ru/i099/0808/58/9c1315c87549.gif)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 04:41:24 AM
Quote from: Chap who has no sense of other points of view on a question
In this case, the correct spelling is defined by the way Rachmaninoff himself chose to - and did consistently - spell his own name when he permanently emigrated to the West and later became an US citizen. It doesn't matter why and what form of his name he chose (namely the common French transliteration). He just did. From that point on, this spelling became the only correct from of his name.

Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: DavidRoss on August 14, 2008, 05:04:39 AM
Heard it before, eh?  I was convinced when Michael first brought it to our attention a couple of years ago and subsequently I've chosen to spell it, "Rachmaninoff."  Others I respect have a different view on the matter. 
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 11:28:24 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 14, 2008, 05:04:39 AM
a couple of years ago  

My sincere apologies for not being registered here a couple of years ago and being absent in June.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Henk on August 14, 2008, 11:37:11 AM
Rachmaninoff. Looks better.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: DavidRoss on August 14, 2008, 11:37:52 AM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 11:28:24 AM
My sincere apologies for not being registered here a couple of years ago and being absent in June.
???

Why would you think that my response to Karl had anything to do with you?

Guess the atmosphere around here these days is making everyone rather prickly--again!
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 11:38:36 AM
Here's a new angle!

Quote from: Henk on August 14, 2008, 11:37:11 AM
Rachmaninoff. Looks better.

I don't think so, though.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Henk on August 14, 2008, 11:45:37 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 11:38:36 AM
Here's a new angle!

I don't think so, though.

I really think it does, in contradary to "Prokofieff", which looks awfull. "Rachmaninov" looks like he made old-fashioned, bad music :).
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 11:49:37 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 14, 2008, 11:37:52 AM
???

Why would you think that my response to Karl had anything to do with you?

Guess the atmosphere around here these days is making everyone rather prickly--again!

This is about the dead horse you posted earlier. I just raised the topic because it interested me. I didn't know it was discussed here so many times that you are fed up. :)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 11:51:37 AM
I certainly share your distaste, Henk, for Prokofieff . . . although, I suspect that the composer used that transliteration himself.

Quote from: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 11:49:37 AM
This is about the dead horse you posted earlier. I just raised the topic because it interested me. I didn't know it was discussed here so many times that you are fed up. :)

I don't think it's so much a matter of being fed up with the topic, as with mulish intractibility  0:)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 11:52:25 AM
Quote from: Henk on August 14, 2008, 11:45:37 AM
"Rachmaninov" looks like he made old-fashioned, bad music :).

A valid argument! :D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 11:55:03 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 11:51:37 AM
mulish intractibility 

That is life. :D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 11:57:12 AM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 11:55:03 AM
That is life. :D

Thankfully, I prefer to engage much less disagreeable facets of life  ;)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: DavidRoss on August 14, 2008, 12:00:26 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 11:49:37 AMI didn't know it was discussed here so many times that you are fed up. :)
Not really fed up, more bemused.  ;)  8)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: orbital on August 14, 2008, 12:04:05 PM
Quote from: Henk on August 14, 2008, 11:45:37 AM
"Rachmaninov" [looks like he] made old-fashioned, bad music :).

A statement a lot of classical music enthusiasts swear by  >:D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 12:05:49 PM
Quote from: orbital on August 14, 2008, 12:04:05 PM
A statement a lot of classical music enthusiasts swear by  >:D

Quite a robust industry, really.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: orbital on August 14, 2008, 12:23:49 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 12:05:49 PM
Quite a robust industry, really.
Coplanders!
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Wendell_E on August 14, 2008, 01:06:43 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 11:51:37 AM
I certainly share your distaste, Henk, for Prokofieff . . . although, I suspect that the composer used that transliteration himself.

You suspect correctly, sir!

http://home.comcast.net/~thomas.o.lee/Prokofieff.jpg

As for Ra-whathisname, I'm so confused and upset, I just won't type his name, or listen to his music.   ;D
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 01:20:52 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 14, 2008, 12:00:26 PM
Not really fed up, more bemused.  ;)  8)

I am a child and can be bemusing.

This argument resembles me another never ending one on Russian opera forums on how to spell "Villazón" in Cyrillic. But it is done in a gentle manner with no rudeness and aggression.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 02:51:45 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 01:20:52 PM
But it is done in a gentle manner with no rudeness and aggression.

That's the style I like.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 02:53:25 PM
Quote from: Wendell_E on August 14, 2008, 01:06:43 PM
You suspect correctly, sir!

http://home.comcast.net/~thomas.o.lee/Prokofieff.jpg

I've seen that facsimile before, though I had forgotten about when I made my comment earlier today.

Oh, boy: right again!
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: scarpia on August 14, 2008, 03:25:51 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 14, 2008, 02:51:45 PM
That's the style I like.
One line at a time?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on August 14, 2008, 04:26:05 PM
Quote from: scarpia on August 14, 2008, 03:25:51 PM
One line at a time?



(http://www.bittermancircle.com/my%20images/BeatDeadHorse.gif)




Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on August 14, 2008, 04:34:43 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 01:20:52 PM
This argument resembles me another never ending one on Russian opera forums on how to spell "Villazón" in Cyrillic.

You still don't get it. There is no argument here. The question is not how the name Рахманинов can be spelled in English or other languages using Roman letters. The question is how he himself chose to spell his name.

What's your first name again?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: scarpia on August 14, 2008, 04:53:28 PM
Quote from: M forever on August 14, 2008, 04:34:43 PM
You still don't get it. There is no argument here. The question is not how the name Рахманинов can be spelled in English or other languages using Roman letters. The question is how he himself chose to spell his name.

We get it.  There is no doubt that in referring to the person the Roman form must be Rachmaninoff, as he himself indicated. 

However, if you refer to one of his works that was published in Russia under the name Рахманинов, that could be considered a bibliographic citation to a publication, not to the person.  The citation is to the name as it appeared in the publication; if the printer misspelled the authors name, the citation is to the misspelled name, not to the correct name.  In referring to such a work one could make a case for Rachmaninov, which is the standard English transliteration of the Cyrillic form of the name that appeared in the cited document.

Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on August 14, 2008, 05:21:45 PM
Sounds good, but unfortunately, his Russian publisher also transliterated the name in the -ff form for publication in the West. Sorry! That may actually be why SR stuck with it for the rest of his life.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 05:51:11 PM
Quote from: M forever on August 14, 2008, 04:34:43 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 01:20:52 PM
This argument resembles me another never ending one on Russian opera forums on how to spell "Villazón" in Cyrillic.

You still don't get it.

I get it. But I thought of a different kind of resemblance. The argument has lasted for seven pages, and we never came to an agreement on how to spell the name. Will it ever end?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on August 14, 2008, 06:13:41 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 05:51:11 PM
I get it. But I thought of a different kind of resemblance. The argument has lasted for seven pages, and we never came to an agreement on how to spell the name. Will it ever end?

Aparently not. You still don't get it. We don't have to come to an agreement on how to spell the name. That decision was made a very long time ago, by the bearer of the name himself.

Do you have an American passport now? If so, it will say your name there in Roman letters. Whatever form of spelling it uses, is the only correct form. If I decide that I like the German standard for Cyrilic transliteration better (or the French, or the Italian, or the Norwegian, if they even have one), it plays no role. Because the Westernized spelling has already been decided on. What is your name again, BTW?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 07:01:22 PM
Quote from: M forever on August 14, 2008, 06:13:41 PM
You still don't get it.

Once again: I do not mind. Moreover, my music text-book referred to him as Rachmaninoff. But when it comes to ordering from Deutsche Grammophon, I will not find Rachmaninoff. And there are many places where there is no Rachmaninoff to be found, only Rachmaninov. Like Schönberg and Schoenberg...
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: eyeresist on August 14, 2008, 07:03:50 PM
Quote from: Wendell_E on August 14, 2008, 01:06:43 PM
You suspect correctly, sir!

http://home.comcast.net/~thomas.o.lee/Prokofieff.jpg
Very interesting. Although, according to this evidence, we should be writing it "ProKoFieff".


I think ff looks effete.

Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: M forever on August 14, 2008, 07:13:39 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 07:01:22 PM
But when it comes to ordering from Deutsche Grammophon, I will not find Rachmaninoff.

I know. I find that embarassing and unacceptable. In Germany, such things do matter. So I emailed DG and gave them shit for that. They deserved it.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Sarastro on August 14, 2008, 07:31:23 PM
Quote from: M forever on August 14, 2008, 07:13:39 PM
So I emailed DG and gave them shit for that.

Did they change the spelling? :D

It is also a good idea to mail DECCA, Naxos, EMI, and to inform Amazon, too.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: vandermolen on May 18, 2010, 01:09:10 PM
Favourite recording of 'The Bells'? His masterpiece IMHO.

My vote=Kondrashin
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: False_Dmitry on May 18, 2010, 01:53:29 PM
Actually the correct orthography of his name is Сергей Васильевич Рахманинов    ;)

In general the transliteration of Russian composer names was "regularised" by whomever was that composer's publisher - since signing with a "Western" publisher was of critical importance to international fame (and, err, earnings).  For example the composer of Лебеденое Озеро (SWAN LAKE) was published in Germany.  Germans needed to add the initial "t" to get an "explosive ch" at the beginning of his name - and so he became Tchaikowksi.  But he has no "t" in Russian, which has a specific letter (ч) to deal with that "tch-" sound.  In Russian he is Чайковский which would be written-out Chaíkovskií if transliterated letter-for-letter (which is very close to how the French spell him, in fact).   Similarly Medtner was published in Germany, and they added that additional "d" into the middle of his name - in Russian he is Метнер.

In point of fact Russian composers have generally been a lot more laid-back about this than, errr, some of you have been here :) 

If it makes you feel any better about things, Russians have not always been consistent about transliterating foreign names into their language, and in fact they've been downright cavalier about it sometimes  :o   Poor old Handel turns up usually as Гэндель (Gendyel') although for his anniversary last year a few Early Music groups at least turned him into Хэндель (Khendyel') although I'm not sure it was necessarily much better.  And I've seen Ponchielli russified as Понкиелли, Панхиелли or even the charming semi-georgianised Понхьельи

By the way, I ought to mention there are no grounds whatsoever for more than one "s" in Musorgsky's name.

Worse still is when they take their spelling of a composer's name and try to turn him back into the latin alphabet without checking how he was originally spelt :(   [Concert-promoters chasing the "foreign tourist in town" market are keen to meet their guests in some new made-up midway language).  Can you recognise composers like Von Uillyams, Bakh, de Biussé, Veber, or Shimannovsky ?  Since I was proof-reading the Festival brochure concerned myself, I managed to save readers from Piter Makswheel Devis

And we leave for another time the evils which have been produced by "computer translation software"...  save for a a single mention of the plot-summary in the programme for a Moscow performance of Poulenc's DIALOGUES OF THE CARMELITES... ("The runaway Blanche returns to her sisters as they go to the guillotine")

QuoteBlansh is absenting, all female monks are going on a death. They go on a death each one. Blansh is unwanted back to returning, and joyfull mingle with her sisters in a way to a construction site.
(in fact the production concerned was breathtaking and terrifying - the programme sold it sadly short)  
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on May 18, 2010, 09:48:43 PM
Quote from: False_Dmitry on May 18, 2010, 01:53:29 PM
Worse still is when they take their spelling of a composer's name and try to turn him back into the latin alphabet without checking how he was originally spelt :(   [Concert-promoters chasing the "foreign tourist in town" market are keen to meet their guests in some new made-up midway language).  Can you recognise composers like Von Uillyams, Bakh, de Biussé, Veber, or Shimannovsky ?  Since I was proof-reading the Festival brochure concerned myself, I managed to save readers from Piter Makswheel Devis

LOL. This annoys the crap out of me. It's mystifying because so many people do it, yet they've all studied a foreign language or two and must realize that different languages spell things different ways. Especially in the Internet age, there is no excuse for such a thing.

There are also transliteration issues around Russian names of non-Russian origin; e.g. should Шварц be rendered as "Schwarz" or "Shvarts"? Personally I think they should be spelled as in their language of origin. But again there are exceptions - Шостакович for instance is a Polish name and should be spelled Szostakowicz, but we've gotten used to Shostakovich and this isn't going to change. (Though curiously, when his works were first performed in the US, the Polish spelling was used in programs.)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Christo on May 18, 2010, 11:03:10 PM
Quote from: False_Dmitry on May 18, 2010, 01:53:29 PMBlansh is absenting, all female monks are going on a death. They go on a death each one. Blansh is unwanted back to returning, and joyfull mingle with her sisters in a way to a construction site.
Hahaha.   ;D Great story, don't hesitate to tell more!
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: False_Dmitry on May 19, 2010, 03:10:34 AM
Quote from: Christo on May 18, 2010, 11:03:10 PM
Hahaha.   ;D Great story, don't hesitate to tell more!

I guess the "construction site" emerged from the two alternative meanings of "scaffold"  ;)

Quoteand should be spelled Szostakowicz

Hmmm, a lovely idea - but I think, as with "Tchaikovsky", we are too far entrenched with the version we know and love to make a change now :)   (Rather like the attempt to correct "Bartok" to "Bartyk", which hasn't really caught on... except among Bartyk-heads ;) )
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: karlhenning on May 19, 2010, 07:38:56 AM
Quote from: False_Dmitry on May 18, 2010, 01:53:29 PM
Germans needed to add the initial "t" to get an "explosive ch" at the beginning of his name - and so he became Tchaikowksi.

Actually, Tchaikovsky is French orthography. German would be Tschaikowski
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Scarpia on May 19, 2010, 08:08:11 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 19, 2010, 07:38:56 AM
Actually, Tchaikovsky is French orthography. German would be Tschaikowski

And I believe "off" for "ов" is also French.  Russian passports customarily have had French transliteration to latin text, which is probably why Rachmaninoff chose the version he did.  As far as I am concerned, it is bibliographic issue.  If you are citing the person or something published under Latin characters, then you follow the source, Rachmaninoff.  If you are citing an document published in Cyrillic, you should follow standard transliteration for the language in question, which is "ov" for all English based schemes, as far as I know.  But Rach published most of his stuff outside Russia so that would be a rare instance.

Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: False_Dmitry on May 19, 2010, 08:26:28 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on May 19, 2010, 08:08:11 AM
And I believe "off" for "ов" is also French. 

There's an inherent mismatch between attempts to transliterate "the printed word" and "the sound it makes".  For example, both of these letters occur in Prokofiev's name in Russian  (Прокофьев) and they are clearly different letters. 

Russian pronunciation has some reasonably established conventions about "softening-off", which means that unstressed vowel-sounds, and the consonants adjacent to them, "mutate".  The last syllable of Prokofiev's name "softens-off" in this fashion (because the stress is on "-ko-"), and so the final letter "v" sounds like an "f" even if it's not written as one.

So it's a choice between rendering the printed letters, or rendering the sound usually made :)  Which can be different things..
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Moonfish on May 31, 2018, 10:40:10 PM
*bump*   

Eight years since the last post? Probably for a reason!  ;D

Still, this is a fun topic - it is similar to the one word thread, but with a more vigorous approach! 
It is almost like a public debate in Congress!

So....

Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff (or Rachmaninow or Rakhmaninov or Rakhmaninoff)?

>:D



(http://www.bittermancircle.com/my%20images/BeatDeadHorse.gif)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Moonfish on May 31, 2018, 10:53:26 PM
From another board:

"The current style of romanization of Russian surnames is "-ov" (transliteration), while in the past it used to be "-off" (quasi-phonetic). See this paper in French (https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/file/index/docid/131413/filename/sakhno_nompropre_version_meta_2_.pdf) (with English abstract) on the subject. Note, that until recently when Russians were issued travel documents, their names were romanized in French style, i.e. "-ow" would have been acceptable too. You could encounter funny endings like "-oukine" etc. Now they switched to English transliteration. If he were issued a passport today I bet it would have been Rakhmaninov, note kh instead of ch."
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Moonfish on May 31, 2018, 11:04:09 PM
As I'm pondering this question I think I will have to go for Rachmaninoff as the proper way to honor this masterful composer - after all that is how he wanted his name spelled and how he used it throughout his life. It is not a matter of transliteration (which is a fascinating topic on its own). Rachmaninoff made his choice when he moved to the West.
What bothers me is how the media (especially the recording labels) propagated his name in a different form. It is bizarre. What gives the media/labels the right?  >:(

(https://www.moscovery.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/header-19.jpg)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: mc ukrneal on May 31, 2018, 11:12:04 PM
We need a poll!

One question - a lot of arguments in this thread say that Rachmaninov 'chose' the spelling. Now, clearly he used the -off, but did he choose it? Many immigrants had their names bastardized or changed when they arrived in the US (meaning, it was chosen for them, and they just accepted that). Another thought is that this is what he used in France and so he just went along with it and continued with it in the US. I am curious - is there is any evidence in his hand (or someone near to him) that he ever gave this any thought whatsoever.

Personally, I find the -off spelling inelegant and inefficient, but that is not evidence of any sort! :)
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Christo on June 01, 2018, 01:15:02 AM
It's simple: 'Tchaikovsky', 'Rimsky-Korsakoff', 'Rachmaninoff', 'Glière' etc. are transliterations in French, the standard before WWII - and hardly a matter of choice by these individual composers themselves. Since then, more English oriented transliterations have become more common. But every language has a different transliteration style, and all of these names are spelled very differently in e.g. German (Tschaikowski, Rachmaninow, etc.), Spanish, Romanian, Italian, or Dutch. Hence the mistakes that many of us make in the spelling of these composers names: we're used to other word patterns.
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: aleazk on June 01, 2018, 09:22:59 AM
I thought the "f" came from the english transliteration of how the germans pronounce the v in the transliteration from the russian!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: Mookalafalas on June 02, 2018, 05:47:32 PM
I don't think the variations have to do with culture or language at all, but rather one's view of his testosterone level. It is best thought of as a question, is "RockManEnough"?
Title: Re: Rachmaninov or Rachmaninoff?
Post by: André on June 02, 2018, 06:23:16 PM
I spell it both ways, it doesn't realy matter. He signed his name with ff, not v. Same with Prokofieff(v). Interestingly, both examples below date from the same year (1933):

(https://www.historyinink.com/1431418_Rachmaninoff_signature%20-%20watermarked.jpg)
(https://i1.wp.com/rrauction.k2imgs.com/content/images/scans/3247/3247891.jpg?zoom=2)