Hi hi! Hopefully we'll be able to sort
out some of the confusion.

> Are you saying that you randomly pronounced identical
> letters in different ways within your speach - if so -
> I did not catch that.

No I didn't and I didn't mean to suggest that.

> It appeared to me that you were
> doing two things:
> 1) utilizing uniform pronounciation and
> 2) pronouncing all letters.
> I'm I mistaken?

Yes, but I think that's besides the point (if there is a point).
I was pronouncing the text as if it were Icelandic. That doesn't imply
pronouncing each letter the same everywhere it occurs. For example
'n' is sometimes voiced and sometimes not.

> Finally, what you're saying about Sequentia is confusing - so -
> .
> .
> .
> Going back - way back in time ...
>

[quotes from mine and Óskar's original Seq. review]

>
> The only thing I'm seeing in these snippets are that Oskar says "Their
> vowel qualities weren't always consistent between singers..." Therefore,
> why are you now claiming that:
> "Randomly pronouncing what should be the same phone in different ways
> is not some "difference of opinion" or "dialect variation".
> It's just plain wrong;"
>
> You sound like someone FIXING something - but I can't quite tell.

I was actually thinking about something Konrad said:

"The pronunciation is poor. Whatever pronunciation system is adopted for a
sung language, the same sounds sound always be pronounced the same.
This is also true as regards vowal and consonantal length. In the Sequentian
recording, one can hear the same sounds and sequences pronounced with
various articulations, a feature highly uncharacteristic of native speech."

But it doesn't really matter - I could just as well have emphasized the
points from Óskar's review, or mine.

> Dan's idea about being dragged down to earth is interesting because -
> your present arguments are sounding excessively bouyant - but then
> again - It may simply be some kind of misunderstanding - right?

Exactly.

> Also - I don't get the comment:
> "Weewee or not the truth is that no-one here is being dogmatic."
> What does this weewee character have to do with it? Does it
> refer to my hick-speak for "getting upset"?

Yeah :-)

Now, let me try to summarize my position.

- - -

The pronunciation of Old Norse of the Sequentia musicians as
it appears on their "Mythic Edda" CD is historically inaccurate
in a non-trivial way that can not be put down to anything like
"dialect variation".

This is the studied opinion of three different reviewers; Óskar,
Konrad and myself. All of us are fluent in Old Norse. You can say
we're biased if you want to but it's hard to tell why all of us
should be biased in the same way. For one thing, Óskar and I are
Icelandic while Konrad is Norwegian-American.

We have all offered specific objections to the Seq. pronunciation.
If anyone wants to discuss the particulars in a down-to-earth way
then by all means let's do so. But suggesting that we're being
dogmatic, stodgy or closed-minded without offering an alternative
pronunciation position (beyond, perhaps, "anything goes") doesn't
carry much weight.

- - -

And the usual disclaimers: I'm not on a crusade against Sequentia;
they're certainly talented musicians and I have no objections to
their work. I don't think they would even *claim* to pronounce Old
Norse accurately - my guess is that to them the words are very much
secondary to the music.

The reason I originally reviewed their pronunciation is that I was
asked to do so. The reason I reposted that review is that the topic
seemed to have surfaced again.

I gather that Sequentia has published a new CD since their Mythic Edda.
I have not listened to it and nothing I've said should be taken to
refer to that work or any other Sequentia work besides Mythic Edda.

Kveðja,
Haukur