Girl19 wrote:
LOL, you make it sound as if calling a recorder a flute is wrong. Guess what, it's not. Even in English, it's not wrong. I don't know which part of "a recorder is a type of flute" you still don't wanna get. And no, I wasn't wrong. Maybe I wasn't precise enough since I should have added "fipple" before "flute", but you are not precise at all when you say "a recorder is a recorder and a flute is a flute", that's just.. extremist, thus wrong.
this issue should actually be brought to someone who is more familiar with the english language. I don't mind to mail my english teacher from high school or my editor and ask them what they think.
Girl19 wrote:
1. When I google it, I get both types (and other types too). It's true that I get the type you play more, but that's because, as I said, the one you play is more common because it's modern, not because the one I play isn't a flute.
It has nothing to do with modernity. It's just more common. You will have a hard time to find the recorder in the orchestra, and I speculate that many music writers don't really know what to do with the Recorder. (I'm not trying to bash the Recorder btw. I actually respect people who try to play at it profecionally.)
Girl19 wrote:
2. Also, when I type "flute" in Wikipedia, I get this picture in
the main article:
The one I play is the second from the bottom.
Now I feel like you are trying to insult my intelligence. I played on the recorder too for 5 years (as part of the elementary school classes) but I always knew I wanted to play on the Flute, and after three years of playing both instruments, I had to stop with one.
Girl19 wrote:
2. You say that if I go and tell someone that I play the flute, he will assume I play the modern type? Then why did you say in
a previous post that you teacher thought you were playing the "recorder" when you told her you play the flute? You're contradicting yourself, since, according to your teacher, a recorder is more known to her than the modern types.
please reread Calid's post (which I quoted). I just commented that I know he is correct and even gave an example from my experience why in
german it's not obvious.
Girl19 wrote:
1. I don't see why you're getting mad? Are we fighting? I thought we were just discussing.. lol I didn't say that your flute was created yesterday, I only said it was more modern compared to the one I play. What's wrong with being modern? Nothing. There's no big difference between them, the shape and the materials are different, but it's almost the same principle when you wanna play them. But then again, you keep insisting that a recorder is not a flute which is absolutely wrong.
You're right, I
am getting mad over nothing, but every kind of instrument is individual and special, and to see back then that you called a Recorder, a (by what I'm used to) "Flute" just got me mad, because a flute is the instrument I'm playing on, and I'm used to think of "flute" as flute.
How would an Alto Saxophone player feel if someone commented on all the saxophones to be the same, when clearly they aren't? (I have to say though that every good saxophone player I know can play on every one of them.)
Or even better example - someone would say to a cornet player that he plays good on the "trumpet" - true, the two instruments are very similiar, but they are not the same thing.
EDIT: and about the "a recorder is a recorder and a flute is a flute" thing. What I meant is that the english language gave us a name for the recorder, thus in an english conversation, if one wants to say a Recorder, he should use the word which the english language has, and not simply say it as "flute" because as I said, that name would be used normally for the flute that I play on. It was none of my means to say that a recorder isn't a type of flute,