Talk:Garklein recorder

The German name
The article says: Although some modern German makers use the single-word form Garkleinflötlein, this is without historical precedent and grammatically suspect. The correct modern German form is gar kleines Flötlein (Bär 2002, 152n1) Well, fine, but the German Wikipedia article is titled Garkleinblockflöte. -- Evertype·✆ 17:06, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, to start with, Wikipedia is not a reliable source (not even the German Wikipedia), whereas Bär 2002 is. Secondly, the German Wikipedia article is not titled "Garkleinflötlein" but rather "Garkleinblockflöte". Third, Wikipedia has not been around long enough to consitute historical precedent (which, in this context, means the 18th century or earlier). And fourth, the German language has other recent coinages that may be regarded as "grammatically suspect". The bottom line is that anybody who uses this name and believes by so doing is authenticating this instrument as "ye aktuall medieval relicke" is flat wrong.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 19:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * POV: I've never heard "gar kleines Flötlein", ever. Google only returns results based on this article. In my experience, the common term is "Garkleinflöte", sometimes "Garkleinblockflöte". For the former, see Küng, Steinbach, Mollenhauer. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Right. But what term are you accustomed to reading in sources from the 18th century or earlier, and what instrument is that term used to describe? I'll bet good money it is not a flûte à neuf trous (i.e., a recorder). I don't believe that Bär claims that "gar kleines Flötlein" has ever been used—only that it would be the grammatically correct form, and the term used by Küng and Mollenhauer for this modernistic musical abomination is not the one denounced by Bär, either.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 06:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * My reading of 18th-century sources amounts to almost none. I was just responding to Evertype's question from a native German speaker's perspective. Apparently, the article's discussion about the name confused . Maybe it's better to omit that hypothetical point on German grammar. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:06, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I cannot myself claim to have read every surviving source from the 18th century, but I can confidently predict that this name will not be found in any source from that time and, where it is found (in Praetorius, in the early 17th century) refers to another kind of instrument entirely. The recorder of this size is an 18th century invention, but the name was applied to it only in the 20th century, partly through a misunderstanding of the caption to a plate in Praetorius's Theatrum Instrumentarum, which never would have happened had the "scholars" in question bothered to read Praetorius's text, instead of just looking at the pictures. I think the article already makes this point well enough without the confusing grammatical issue raised by Bär. I do like the first sentence, though, which makes the emphatic point of "no historical precedent".—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:30, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Addition by a German: First, Garkleinflöte, its diminuitive Garkleinflötlein, and the more exact Garkleinblockflöte are compound words that can serve as names. A gar kleine Flöte (“very small flute”) could be any very small flute. By dropping the adjective ending and pushing it together into one word, the very-small-flute can become the name of this instrument. Second, Flöte is any flute, also the Indian Bansuri and the Peruvian Qena, but in the world of classical music, it is usually the concert flute. Blockflöte (“block flute”) is the word for “recorder”. The recorder makers therefore advertise the instrument as “the very-small-recorder”, die Garklein'block'flöte, to avoid confusion. However, this word is too long to pronounce even for an average German, so they drop the block in speech. Those who have seen the recorder know it anyway. Third, gar in the meaning of “very” is antiquated and invokes a feel of knights and minstrels, or at least of the time when Handel was young. --Curryfranke (talk) 16:22, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * And not surprising, then, that the term is taken from a book published in the early 17th century, when Handel was not yet even born.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 17:19, 23 September 2019 (UTC)