新艺术 翻译.doc

新艺术在最一般术语中新艺术作为同义词的14世纪复调”正如古艺术代表“13世纪复调”。新艺术的概念是基于巨大的新范围的音乐表达使其可以通过标记技术在菲利普德维特里解释的论述新艺术(c1322)。这个术语最初作为一个历史的口号,约翰内斯沃尔夫在他的度量历史的符号(1904)的论文被视为一个主要的拐点在历史上的符号,这也许是这个章节的标题,而不是具体的内容的狼的工作所带来的使用“新艺术”来包含所有14世纪法国音乐的工作中随后的学者。一些早期的14世纪的理论家提到的古罗马艺术的想法，主要代表由佛朗哥的古艺术提起菲利普维特里（见，例如，CoussemakerS，三，371，408），但在历史术语的用处支持的想法是由论文音乐艺术新星约翰内斯德缪里斯（C1320），1324-5牛市的教皇约翰二十二谴责音乐家“就像学校年轻的学生和雅各布的反光镜”现代一些新的歌手。这是一些有意识的音乐技术和前景在约1320年度变动的建议也的最早的音乐，以体现在符号菲利普的维特里的论文中所描述的，在罗马的福韦尔将经文歌复制到1316年F-Pn的FR 0.146手稿上，其中一些广泛的作品长数倍，比上一代的经文歌的和显示的符号值的范围远远大于有可能对前法兰克和后法兰克与以前的技术的比较。法国音乐的来源相对存活了几年的罗马德福韦尔手稿，和那几个片段的日期和出处有重大分歧，所以有极少数的来源于被菲利普德维特里描述为最纯粹的新艺术里。因此,这个词几乎不可避免的被马肖应用(由沃尔夫和后来的许多学者)工作,因为马肖的几个手稿是15世纪初的，所以有法国14世纪的音乐，尽管有施赖德的坚持，但是1330年后的风格不再是新的。事实上，这样方便来标签所有代表罗马福韦尔和文艺复兴时期之间的音乐，新牛津音乐史第三卷的标题为新艺术和文艺复兴时期,主要是13001540年（伦敦，1960年）重要的历史调查，它的序列是“古艺术”、“新艺术”、“文艺复兴”。在这样的调查中表明新艺术可以包括欧洲所有地区，一直延伸到大约1420年(见中世纪)的音乐。14世纪意大利音乐现在更经常的分离与名称“十四世纪的;但是有一个合理的(和强)学校的意见,自从幸存的剧目绵延约在1325到1425这是历史上误导称它的名字暗示部门1400年,和地理上分裂使用这样一个只意大利的名字。主要考虑支持不包括意大利的想法,而新艺术是:直到1370年,意大利的音乐是在文体上和notationally完全不同的音乐,从法国意大利符号逐渐进化和一个精确的分界点之间的一个新艺术古艺术和在意大利无法建立在任何历史上有用的感觉(参见Clercx)。在14世纪的意大利音乐，现在更多的是与的名称“trecento分离出来，但有一个合理的（强）学校的意见，因为幸存的保留剧目，从1325年至1425年，它是历史上误导调用它的的名称意味着一个部门在1400年，使用一个专门的意大利名字和地理上的分裂。的主要考虑因素支持不包括意大利ARS NOVA的想法是，意大利的音乐，直到约1370年的曲风和来自法国的音乐符号的完全不同的，意大利的符号逐渐进化和精确的分界点之间的ARS古罗马和ARS新星在意大利不能建立在任何历史上的有用感（见Clercx）。Italian music of the 14th century is now more often separated off with the name trecento; but there is a reasonable (and strong) school of opinion that since the surviving repertory stretches from about 1325 to 1425 it is historically misleading to call it by a name that implies a division at the year 1400, and geographically separatist to use such an exclusively Italian name. Major considerations in support of excluding Italy from the idea of Ars Nova are: that Italian music until about 1370 was stylistically and notationally entirely different from French music; and that Italian notation evolved more gradually and a precise demarcation point between an Ars Antiqua and an Ars Nova in Italy cannot be established in any historically useful sense (see Clercx).另一方面它是难以抗拒的主张尼诺Pirrotta(1966),根本变化在两个法国和意大利在1320年左右的是相同的:在第一次“它要求每一个声音的长度是精确地确定,这样不同的声音能如期进行,秋天精确到组合的声音和节奏由作曲家”。虽然这只是过程的高潮,已经在前半个世纪的手,但它仍是其中最令人吃惊和历史上的重要时刻的音乐。没有历史学家曾经否认法国和意大利音乐在第一一半的14世纪,总的来说,在文体上完全不同;但它太容易忽视了范围的风格在每个传统,征收灵巧的边界。此外,Pirrotta的分析允许房间看到不可否认的音乐进化之间的联系在欧洲所有地区,包括英国和东部地区的帝国。在另一方面，它是难以抗拒的索赔的：尼诺Pirrotta（1966年），在法国和意大利在1320年左右，是从根本上改变：第一次，它要求每一个声音的长度是准确地确定不同的声音可以如期进行，下跌正是由作曲家的声音和节奏的组合。虽然这仅仅是高潮的过程已经在手的前半世纪，它仍然是音乐史上最令人吃惊的和重要的时刻之一。从来没有历史学家否认，在一般情况下，在上半年的14世纪的法国和意大利的音乐风格上完全不同的，但实在是太容易被人忽视的每一个传统风格的范围内，实施简便的边界。此外，Pirrotta的分析，可以看到不可否认的音乐在欧洲各地，包括英国和东部地区的帝国发展之间的联系空间。 On the other hand it is hard to resist the claims of Nino Pirrotta (1966) that the fundamental change in both France and Italy in the years around 1320 was the same: that for the first time it required that the length of every sound be precisely determined so that the different voices could proceed on schedule and fall precisely into the combinations of sound and rhythm determined by the composer. While that was just the culmination of processes that had been in hand for the preceding half-century, it remains one of the most startling and important moments in the history of music. No historian has ever denied that French and Italian music in the first half of the 14th century are, in general, stylistically quite different; but it is too easy to overlook the range of styles within each tradition, to impose facile boundaries. Moreover, Pirrottas analysis allows room for seeing the undeniable links between musical evolution in all parts of Europe, including England and the eastern parts of the empire. 进一步缩小的术语已经被影响,冈瑟那些制定术语Ars Subtilior指定音乐的帖子马肖一代的作曲家,这些音乐家的国际哥特式的风格的法国和意大利,为简单的风格的15世纪。在某种意义上,这个术语是再一次企图转移的描述符号样式(称为-奥托阿佩尔的manneristic符号”)来表示一个音乐风格。在此分析的困难是,许多简单的风格在法国音乐共存的复杂的音乐的Ars Subtilior;也就是说,Ars Subtilior没有取代现有的样式,它的技术没有从根本上不同于以前就已存在,只是更复杂的。但由于这一区别已被普遍接受,并导致法国新艺术被认为对1370年结束,当时法国和意大利的风格仍清晰地分离了,随后更少的力量的观点来支持任何引用一个意大利新艺术。 进一步收窄的术语已生效铺平了道路，为半滑舌鳎制定了长期的ARS Subtilior到指定后马肖一代作曲家，那些音乐家的国际哥特式，融合了法国和意大利风格的音乐，简单的风格在15世纪。从某种意义上说，这又是一个术语是企图转移一个符号式的（称为阿佩尔的manneristic符号“）的描述来表示一种音乐风格。在此分析的困难是，许多简单的合作的复杂的音乐的ARS Subtilior的存在与法国音乐风格;，为Ars Subtilior并不能取代现有的样式，它的技术是没有根本的区别是什么之前就已存在，只是更加复杂。但是，由于这种区别已经被普遍接受，并导致法国ARS NOVA正在考虑结束约1370年，在法国和意大利风格的时候，仍然清楚地分开，但一直支持任何引用到随后较小的力的意见意大利ARS NOVA。A further narrowing down of the terminology has been effected by Gnther who formulated the term Ars Subtilior to designate music of the post-Machaut generation of composers, those musicians of an International Gothic who fused the styles of France and Italy, paving the way for the simpler styles of the 15th century. In a sense this terminology is again an attempt to transfer a description of a notational style (called by Apel manneristic notation) to denote a musical style. The difficulty in this analysis is that many simpler styles in French music co-existed with the intricate music of the Ars Subtilior; that is, the Ars Subtilior did not replace existing styles, and its techniques were not fundamentally different from what had existed before, merely more elaborate. But since this distinction has been generally accepted and has led to the French Ars Nova being considered to end about 1370, at a time when French and Italian styles were still clearly separated, there has been subsequently less force of opinion to support any references to an Italian Ars Nova.因此，习惯性地使用“新艺术”法国音乐的罗马福韦尔、马肖的死亡，虽然这不是历史上最精确的方法使用的术语，它是史学上最有用的。同时，它是值得观察的新艺术、就如文艺复兴一样，是一个长期，多次出现在历史的长河中的（见Schrade）。也是14世纪最有名的使用外，克托里（CoussemakerS，IV，154），所描述得经文歌（D1453）可以这么说，是艺术新星的起点。Ars Nova(Lat.: new art).In the most general terms Ars Nova is used as a synonym for 14th-century polyphony just as Ars Antiqua stands for 13th-century polyphony. The concept of Ars Nova is based on the enormous new range of musical expression made possible by the notational techniques explained in Philippe de Vitrys treatise Ars nova (c1322). The term was first used as a historical slogan by Johannes Wolf in his Geschichte der Mensural-Notation (1904) in which the treatise was seen as one of the major turning-points in the history of notation; and it was perhaps the chapter titles rather than the specific content of Wolfs work that brought about the use of Ars Nova to include all 14th-century French music in the work of subsequent scholars.Several early 14th-century theorists referred to the idea of an Ars Antiqua, represented primarily by Franco, and an Ars Nova instituted by Philippe de Vitry (see, for instance, CoussemakerS, iii, 371, 408); but in historical terms the usefulness of the idea is supported more by the treatise Ars novae musicae (c1320) of Johannes de Muris, the 13245 bull of Pope John XXII decrying the musicians who were novellae scholae discipuli and the reference in Jacobus of Liges Speculum musice to moderni cantores and to aliqui nunc novi. That there was some awareness of a change in musical techniques and outlook in the years around 1320 is suggested also by the earliest music to exemplify the notation described in Philippe de Vitrys treatise, the motets for the Roman de Fauvel copied into manuscript F-Pn fr.146 in 1316, some of them extensive works several times longer than the motets of the previous generation and displaying a range of notational values far greater than it was possible to notate with the previous Franconian and post-Franconian techniques.Relatively few French musical sources survive from the years immediately following the Roman de Fauvel manuscript, and those few are fragments whose dating and provenance are subject to substantial disagreement, so there remain very few sources in the purest Ars Nova notation as described by Philippe de Vitry. The term was therefore almost inevitably applied (by Wolf and many later scholars) to the work of Machaut and, since several Machaut manuscripts are from the early 15th century, to all French 14th-century music in spite of Schrades insistence that after 1330 the style was no longer new. Indeed, so convenient was the label that it came to stand for all music between the Roman de Fauvel and the Renaissance: thus volume iii of the New Oxford History of Music is entitled Ars Nova and the Renaissance, 13001540 (London, 1960) and the major historical surveys in MGG follow the sequence Ars Antiqua, Ars Nova, Renaissance. In such surveys Ars Nova can include music from all parts of Europe and stretch to about 1420 (see Medieval).Italian music of the 14th century is now more often separated off with the name trecento; but there is a reasonable (and strong) school of opinion that since the surviving repertory stretches from about 1325 to 1425 it is historically misleading to call it by a name that implies a division at the year 1400, and geographically separatist to use such an exclusively Italian name. Major considerations in support of excluding Italy from the idea of Ars Nova are: that Italian music until about 1370 was stylistically and notationally entirely different from French music; and that Italian notation evolved more gradually and a precise demarcation point between an Ars Antiqua and an Ars Nova in Italy cannot be established in any historically useful sense (see Clercx).On the other hand it is hard to resist the claims of Nino Pirrotta (1966) that the fundamental change in both France and Italy in the years around 1320 was the same: that for the first time it required that the length of every sound be precisely determined so that the different voices could proceed on schedule and fall precisely into the combinations of sound and rhythm determined by the composer. While that was just the culmination of processes that had been in hand for the preceding half-century, it remains one of the most startling and important moments in the history of music. No historian has ever denied that French and Italian music in the first half of the 14th century are, in general, stylistically quite different; but it is too easy to overlook the range of styles within each tradition, to impose facile boundaries. Moreover, Pirrottas analysis allows room for seeing the undeniable links between musical evolution in all parts of Europe, including England and the eastern parts of the empire.A further narrowing down of the terminology has been effected by Gnther who formulated the term Ars Subtilior to designate music of the post-Machaut generation of composers, those musicians of an International Gothic who fused the styles of France and Italy, paving the way for the simpler styles of the 15th century. In a sense this terminology is again an attempt to transfer a description of a notational style (called by Apel manneristi