A compilation of information about Solresol, the universal musical language

Solresol-1866 Vs Solresol-1902

Discussions regarding Solresol as a whole, including tutorials/guides, special events, and other resources.
As I know, nobody wrote, that there were some noticeable differences between Solresol-1866 & Solresol-1902, e.g.: farethat (1866), with, together (1902); soldonothing (1866), but (1902); sisolman, married and non-married (1866), married male and female (1902), silawoman (1866), non-married male and female (1902), etc.
Another difference — word-formation and meanings of note’s emphasis. In the 1902 variant emphasis only transpose a word from one part of speech to another (if 2-nd note is marked, this serves as analogue of suffix “-or”, “-er”). We can say, that order of notes is root with certain meaning; by emphasis 1,2-nd and other notes we transform root into word (noun, adjective, adverb; for verb emphasis is not needed). According to the book of 1866, there are many words in Solresol, in which marked syllables signifies not different parts of speech, but different ideas, words (nouns), especially hyponyms, e.g.: dolaresi — vin ordinaire (ordinary wine); d’olaresi — vin de Bordeaux; dol’aresi — vin de Bourgogne; dolar’esi — vin de Madere; dolares’i — vin de Champagne. You can see that in the alphabetical list of words. Alphabetical dictionary correlates with ideographical: in ideographical part 1-st French equivalent corresponds with word without emphasis, 2-nd corresponds to word with 1-st marked note, etc. (Of course, there are many misprints, which obscure the situation.) In Solresol-1902 emphasis not distinguishes ideas, like in the example with root “dlrs”, which means, that Gajewsky changed Sudre’s project.
Simi Shido! Welcome to the forum :D
Shido wrote:As I know, nobody wrote, that there were some noticeable differences between Solresol-1866 & Solresol-1902, e.g.: fare — that (1866), with, together (1902); soldo — nothing (1866), but (1902); sisol — man, married and non-married (1866), married male and female (1902), sila — woman (1866), non-married male and female (1902), etc.
Actually, this topic has been brought up before. Like here. And I think it's been discussed here on the site too (or maybe the google group?) Just not sure where... :?
Shido wrote:Another difference — word-formation and meanings of note’s emphasis. In the 1902 variant emphasis only transpose a word from one part of speech to another (if 2-nd note is marked, this serves as analogue of suffix “-or”, “-er”). We can say, that order of notes is root with certain meaning; by emphasis 1,2-nd and other notes we transform root into word (noun, adjective, adverb; for verb emphasis is not needed). According to the book of 1866, there are many words in Solresol, in which marked syllables signifies not different parts of speech, but different ideas, words (nouns), especially hyponyms, e.g.: dolaresi — vin ordinaire (ordinary wine); d’olaresi — vin de Bordeaux; dol’aresi — vin de Bourgogne; dolar’esi — vin de Madere; dolares’i — vin de Champagne. You can see that in the alphabetical list of words. Alphabetical dictionary correlates with ideographical: in ideographical part 1-st French equivalent corresponds with word without emphasis, 2-nd corresponds to word with 1-st marked note, etc. (Of course, there are many misprints, which obscure the situation.) In Solresol-1902 emphasis not distinguishes ideas, like in the example with root “dlrs”, which means, that Gajewsky changed Sudre’s project.
Hmmm...I just checked the pdf and I don't see any distinction made by stress for the different types of wine. What copy are you using? For me, the 1866 version just lists "dolaresi" and
"Vin ordinaire
-de Bordeaux
-de Bourgogne
-de Madère
-de Champagne"

in the section listed by Solresol words, and in the glossary where the French words are listed first, I don't see any difference by stress; they're all "dolaresi." Anyway, other discrepancies between the two sections have been found in the 1866 book, so I feel your pain :) And I think it's more important to note that the use of stress to mark different parts of speech is described towards the beginning of the 1866 book (on page 25 of the pdf, under "DU SUBSTANTIF ou NOM").
Simi!
Doresifado wrote:Hmmm...I just checked the pdf and I don't see any distinction made by stress for the different types of wine. What copy are you using?
I am using the PDF-document, downloaded from “Solresol Revival Project”. Also I use self-made djvu-document, converted from that PDF: Solresol 1866.djvu
Doresifado wrote:in the section listed by Solresol words, and in the glossary where the French words are listed first, I don't see any difference by stress; they're all "dolaresi."
In the 1866 book, at section with French-Solresol dictionary, in the column with Solresol words, we can see something like apostrophe under some letters (for word “Vin” see page 287 of the pdf). Commonly this apostrophe marked different parts of speech in accordance with general scheme (1st stressed note — noun, 2nd — actor, 3rd — adjective, 4th — adverb or preposition), like in case with mfls ‘violer – violation – violateur’ below (on the same page). And there are many words, in which this apostrophe of French-Solresol dictionary distinguishes not parts of speech, but different nouns (ideas, or variations of idea in case with hyponyms). We have nice example with iconic sense of morphologic terms (solmireverb, s’olmirenoun, solm’ireadjective, solmir’eadverb, pp. 286, 276, 131, 132 of the pdf). The position of the apostrophe obviously corresponds with the order of French equivalents in the ideographic dictionary.
So, I think, in 1866 book we have at least two types of Solresol roots: grammatical (like doladore, resolmire, misollasol, fasolfare, etc.) and non-grammatical (doremire, famidofa, famidosol, soldomido, etc.). In second type accent on certain musical note signifies differences between miscellaneous lexical meanings. Gajewski, apparently, disliked these non-grammatical features, and deleted them from Solresol.
Doresifado wrote:Anyway, other discrepancies between the two sections have been found in the 1866 book, so I feel your pain
Oh yea, I had been comparing these two sections for 2 years, and have felt a lot of pain... :D
I made a list of differences between variants of Solresol of 1866 and 1902 years. I used English translations of dictionaries from books of 1866 and 1902 years.

farethat (1866) — with, together (1902)
fasolhere is, this is (1866) — why (1902)
soldonothing (1866) — but (1902)
solrewhy? what for? (1866) — in (1902)
ladoyesterday (1866) — no one, nothing (1902)
laretoday (1866) — by (1902)
lamitomorrow (1866) — here, there (1902)
sidohow (1866) — same (1902)
sisolsir, Mr (1866) — Mr; Mrs (1902)
silalady, Mrs (1866) — unmarried (1902)
dosoldopray (1866) — hungry (1902)
dosolrebelieve (1866) — eat (1902)
dosolmiJesus Christ (1866) — bread (1902)
dosolfaHoly Virgin (1866) — thirsty (1902)
dosollareligion (1866) — drink (1902)
dosolsisanctify (1866) — water (1902)
redosolcustoms (1866) — acquainted with, know (1902)
refadonotability, significant, fame (1866) — look at (1902)
refaredignities, honors (1866) — pass/cross over (1902)
refasolindelible (uneraseable) (1866) — encounter, meet (1902)
refalaprivilege, prerogative (1866) — ask [question] (1902)
refasirights (1866) — reply, answer (1902)
resoldoskepticism (1866) — listen (1902)
resolmiheresy (1866) — leave, come/go out of (1902)
resolfaatheism (1866) — return [n/v], later [see you -] (1902)
resollamaterialism (1866) — pay (1902)
reladomisanthropy (1866) — sleepy (1902)
midosolTrinity (1866) — admire (1902)
misoldoThe Holy Spirit (1866) — come (1902)
misolreThe grace of God (1866) — enter (1902)
famiremaleficence (1866) — serve (1902)
fasolretheism, deism (1866) — leave (1902)
lasoldoirreligion (1866) — pencil (1902)
solrerepast (1866) — yesterday (1902)
solmimithe present (1866) — today (1902)
solfafathe future (1866) — tomorrow (1902)
domirelasmell (1866) — sense [v] (1902)
dosoldosolenter (1866) — open [v] (1902)
dolafasolmacaroni (1866) — soup, broth (1902)
dosiresifruit, grapes, peaches, pears, apples, plums (1866) — bakery; pastry (1902)
dodosoldoproselytism (1866) — gospel, bible (1902)
refasolfapacify, calme (1866) — equal, peer (1902)
milasirenote, annotate (1866) — play (1902)
fasolrelafire, shooting (1866) — pull (1902)
falarelacoast, seashore (1866) — heal [vt/i] (1902; misprint? There is word “farerela” with such meaning in the book of 1866)
soldosoldoexit, come out (1866) — close [v] (1902)
lafadoreconcordat (1866) — numbering (1902)
lalaresiedit, edition (1866) — hardware store (1902)

So, what does this demonstrate?
1. Gajewski eliminated from 3-syllable words (roots) those, which referred to Christianity. This was something like “secularization” of Solresol: for Sudre Christianity was the main religion (3-syllable words belong to the group of words for most valuable and frequent ideas), for Gajewski Christianity was a religion, like other.
2. Gajewski offered some very useful prepositions among 2-syllable words, and also took some ideas (prepositions) from group of 4-syllable units.