[Bell Historians] Carillonneur vs. carillonist

[edward martin]

"Of French derivation, the term "carillonneur" has long been used in the
English language, and obviously forms the basis for the name of The Guild of
Carillonneurs of North America (GCNA).  It is found in most unabridged
English dictionaries, is unambiguous, and is understood by all
English-speaking aficionados of the carillon.

However, some carillon players prefer the term "carillonist" as being more
appropriate in the English language.  This is analogous to flute players
preferring "flutist" over the French/Italian "flautist".  There is
historical evidence for the term "carilloner" having been used by some
American *chime* players in the 19th century, but that seems to modern ears
to be as awkward as "fluter".  This may be because of the way that
specialized words for instrumental musicians are related to their respective
root words."

Can't really argue with that; However, your noting that "there are a number
of carillon aficionados (myself included) who regard the word "carillonneur"
as an accident of history, and the word "carillonist" as more appropriate
for the English language." certainly should remind us all  that every word
used in the English language cxould be said to be 'an accident of history'!
and if enough  use the word 'carrilonist' or even 'carilloner' then either
one may well take precedence over the (I would have thought very well)
established 'carillonneur'

It's sort ve like preferring to spell bell cannons with only one n dispite
the historical evidence that to me suggests that it really ought to have
two! or yet again of spelling 'gravy'  which by all accounts was introduced
to the English language by a scribe who probably misread  the word  'grane'
or 'graue' and wrote 'gravy'  Oddly enough, just adding 'ist' on the end of
the word 'carillon' doesn't make it any more English than ''carillonneur''
because both forms exist in the French, even though the Fr would pronunce
'ist' to sound as if spelt 'eeest'   :-)

mew


On 9/25/06, Carl S Zimmerman <csz_stl at izxE76eHChuh7mgW2N_xTHw4pWVeewU8QWQhrm8qQcBC-zjKAd88M0AomqpN1kQ-GdZcIcnTNJ8.yahoo.invalid> wrote:
>
>   At 06:32 +0000 06/09/22, Richard Offen wrote (subject "[Bell
> Historians] Re: Call for papers on ... bell-casting?"):
> >--- In
> ><mailto:bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com>bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com<bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com>,
>
> >Carl S Zimmerman <csz_stl at ...>
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> A fellow carillonist has drawn my attention to a forthcoming series
> >> of conferences, to be held annually in Oxford from 2007 to 2010.
> >
> >Why have you all suddenly become 'carillonists'? What was wrong
> >with 'carillonneurs'?
> >
> >R
> _____
>
> "All" is too much of a generalization. The GCNA remains The Guild of
> Carillonneurs in North America, and I remain a Carillonneur Member of
> the GCNA. However, there are a number of carillon aficionados
> (myself included) who regard the word "carillonneur" as an accident
> of history, and the word "carillonist" as more appropriate for the
> English language. For more details, see
> http://www.gcna.org/data/Glossary.html
>
> Carl
>  
>
           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20060925/9a9f032f/attachment.html>