[quote author=ophadece link=topic=10986.msg133260#msg133260 date=1300392686] This is where Cantor Wagdy made a mistake. The refrain should refer to God: praise God in all His saints, Jesus Christ WHO fasted (was crucified, rose, etc); praise HIm ... Oujai
now that i thought about, it doesn't matter as much. in the refrain is separate. I know Remenkimi discussed this once in a post (maybe the one during lent) where the refrain can be a continuation to a psalm 150 verse. but i don't believe that. I just looked through m.Farag's khidmit shamas and saw that all the responses (without lent which he doesn't have in there) are: aumacf> afsep `erof> af[iwmc> af`cmou> afse `eqoun> af[icarx> aftwnf> afsenaf> afouwrp> af`i> afsobtf...
They all translate to: Jesus Christ..., (He) [did this]. you never say "Jesus Christ..., who [did this]. All i get out of this is that the response is fully separate from a psalm 150 verse. it is a declaration rather than a definition. So the response can be different and far from the psalm 150 verses without ambiguity. Now this really doesn't defend what Wagdi choose (who you can always pm to understand) but it is about your comments ophadece.
It was me who started that discussion and Remenkimi expanded on it. That's improper usage of Coptic and an unnecessary addition to the words of the Psalm. If we want it to stay this way we should do things with understanding, and not just willy nilly. Oujai
[quote author=ophadece link=topic=10986.msg133264#msg133264 date=1300395494] It was me who started that discussion and Remenkimi expanded on it. That's improper usage of Coptic and an unnecessary addition to the words of the Psalm. If we want it to stay this way we should do things with understanding, and not just willy nilly. Oujai
well....we can debate on something that is not in the Church books and not recorded by any cantors.....but this is what handed down in books and by cantors. i don't think there is anything wrong. we have far more problems in other ambiguous things than this.
That's right Mina but in my view that doesn't exonerate us from correcting the mistakes however small. Some books mention Jesus Christ fasted for us wrongly in Coptic... some say bekhrestos analemebsis, rather than khristos. Others are full of spelling and grammatical mistakes which are basic and not related to expression usage. I may write more when I'm on a computer Oujai
[quote author=ophadece link=topic=10986.msg133270#msg133270 date=1300400050] That's right Mina but in my view that doesn't exonerate us from correcting the mistakes however small. Some books mention Jesus Christ fasted for us wrongly in Coptic... some say bekhrestos analemebsis, rather than khristos. Others are full of spelling and grammatical mistakes which are basic and not related to expression usage. I may write more when I'm on a computer Oujai
but almost all of those problems are problems with the language. That is not the problem in what we are talking about. The text is there, it makes sense (understanding-wise), it's written right (language) and is chanted with ease (hymnody). i don't see what else may be the problem.
The problem is that almost all the books I have which are translated into English are also usually full of very elementary spelling mistakes. I picked up one recent volume of the rites for Holy Week and just opening it at random saw that the word commentary had been spelled COMMENTRY throughout the book, and obviously the word appears a lot.
More care needs to be taken with liturgical texts.
[quote author=Father Peter link=topic=10986.msg133275#msg133275 date=1300401844] The problem is that almost all the books I have which are translated into English are also usually full of very elementary spelling mistakes. I picked up one recent volume of the rites for Holy Week and just opening it at random saw that the word commentary had been spelled COMMENTRY throughout the book, and obviously the word appears a lot.
More care needs to be taken with liturgical texts.
actually those are not as bad as the coptic mistakes. atleast people know the english language enough to know the error. but in coptic, not much ppl know coptic that well as a language to not similar errors.
Comments
This is where Cantor Wagdy made a mistake. The refrain should refer to God: praise God in all His saints, Jesus Christ WHO fasted (was crucified, rose, etc); praise HIm ...
Oujai
now that i thought about, it doesn't matter as much. in the refrain is separate. I know Remenkimi discussed this once in a post (maybe the one during lent) where the refrain can be a continuation to a psalm 150 verse. but i don't believe that.
I just looked through m.Farag's khidmit shamas and saw that all the responses (without lent which he doesn't have in there) are: aumacf> afsep `erof> af[iwmc> af`cmou> afse `eqoun> af[icarx> aftwnf> afsenaf> afouwrp> af`i> afsobtf...
They all translate to: Jesus Christ..., (He) [did this]. you never say "Jesus Christ..., who [did this]. All i get out of this is that the response is fully separate from a psalm 150 verse. it is a declaration rather than a definition. So the response can be different and far from the psalm 150 verses without ambiguity.
Now this really doesn't defend what Wagdi choose (who you can always pm to understand) but it is about your comments ophadece.
Oujai
It was me who started that discussion and Remenkimi expanded on it. That's improper usage of Coptic and an unnecessary addition to the words of the Psalm. If we want it to stay this way we should do things with understanding, and not just willy nilly.
Oujai
well....we can debate on something that is not in the Church books and not recorded by any cantors.....but this is what handed down in books and by cantors. i don't think there is anything wrong. we have far more problems in other ambiguous things than this.
Oujai
That's right Mina but in my view that doesn't exonerate us from correcting the mistakes however small. Some books mention Jesus Christ fasted for us wrongly in Coptic... some say bekhrestos analemebsis, rather than khristos. Others are full of spelling and grammatical mistakes which are basic and not related to expression usage. I may write more when I'm on a computer
Oujai
but almost all of those problems are problems with the language. That is not the problem in what we are talking about. The text is there, it makes sense (understanding-wise), it's written right (language) and is chanted with ease (hymnody). i don't see what else may be the problem.
More care needs to be taken with liturgical texts.
The problem is that almost all the books I have which are translated into English are also usually full of very elementary spelling mistakes. I picked up one recent volume of the rites for Holy Week and just opening it at random saw that the word commentary had been spelled COMMENTRY throughout the book, and obviously the word appears a lot.
More care needs to be taken with liturgical texts.
actually those are not as bad as the coptic mistakes. atleast people know the english language enough to know the error. but in coptic, not much ppl know coptic that well as a language to not similar errors.