I do not understand the meaning of a question and a comment that I have read.

The writer of the question and the added comment used word "WRITTEN" either as emphasis or for clarification, but it is the repeating of the word in the comment that is confusing me.

Following are the question and the comment.


"What do you think is the best all-time country song ever WRITTEN? Notice I said WRITTEN.

I am NOT interested in trying to answer the question about country songs.
My ONLY interest is to understand exactly what the writter wants to know.
With the word "WRITTEN" repeated in the comment, what was the writer trying to tell those who might read the question?


I am asking for clarification as directly as I know how.
Does the word "BEST" modify, or apply to, the word "SONG", or to the word "WRITTEN'? As I see it, there are two possibilities with different meanings:

1. What..... is the best ... song ever written?
or
2. What is the best written ... song, ever?

Best song, or best written song?

The writer of the question has NOT offered an explanation, and doesn't understand why I would ask the meaning.

Language can sometimes be ambiguous, resulting in a disconnect between speaker and listener. In this case, I would interpret the question to mean: bearing in mind the words and music of songs in this category, which one is the best? This instead of what version of a given song is the best. For example, a great song can be ruined by a lousy version of it.

In this topic, I believe the writer asked about words rather than music.

With regard to being best, I asked myself, "Best in what way?

I am not referring to the merits or faults of musical arrangements, perfomances or renditions.

Best song for ? reason, or best written song?

quote:

In this topic, I believe the writer asked about words rather than music.

Could be. But I'm tempted to believe by "written" he meant "composed." That is, both words and music. Although, as I said above, language can be ambiguous, and I could be wrong. Song lyrics are poetry, and even the best poetry can be ruined by lousy music.

I agree that poetry can be ruined by lousy music. So let's separate poetry (words) from music and discus only the poetry.

"Best" poetry for X reason? or, "best" WRITTEN poetry? Not particularilly how well it rhymes, but how well it flows and tells the story.

quote:

Language can sometimes be ambiguous, resulting in a disconnect between speaker and listener. In this case, I would interpret the question to mean: bearing in mind the words and music of songs in this category, which one is the best? This instead of what version of a given song is the best. For example, a great song can be ruined by a lousy version of it.

Yes, I agree with jr on this, and I too believe that this is the very point the questioner was getting at.

I read that as it's written

Of course 'written' can mean both words and music together, the work as a whole; Cole Porter wrote great songs; but here the writer has emphasised and specified 'written'. They haven't said 'composed'; Richard Rodgers composed great music and his partner Lorenz Hart wrote great lyrics for it; but written.

It follows that the writer means to ask which song had the best lyrics, the best words. If the writer means the best words and music together, the best song in that sense, the words ' Notice I said written' add nothing to what has just been asked.Why else would the writer feel the need to specify 'written' after the question at all? They mean the best words, the best lyrics.

But the writer said song, not lyrics. A song is words and music. Without the music it isn't a song.

Let me follow up. For example, Schiller's "Ode to Joy" is a poem, not a song. It became a song when Beethoven set it to music.

Yes, JR. And Schubert composed song cycles for which the words were not his own.He also wrote 'Songs without words' We may use 'compose' for a song of music and words together as we do 'write' for a piece of music on its own.However,it's submitted that we tend to use 'composed' when we are thinking primarily of musical qualities and 'written' when thinking primarily of verbal ones.(It's only a tendency, not a strict rule)

If the writer means 'song' as 'words and music', his question is in short 'What is the best song? I mean 'best song'' Why would he put that? (What else could 'notice' mean than that?)

In the given text, the only alternative is that the writer distinguishes between the song on the page and the song performed. He would be insulting the readers' intelligence to be emphasising that he does not mean 'best performed' since there are myriad performances and myriad ways of interpreting and performing one song, some very bad, some very good, some neither.Why then would he make that distinction? Yet otherwise he is saying 'What is the best song on the page? Note I mean 'best song on the page'

It follows, giving the writer some credit, that he is thinking primarily of words and wants us to judge by lyrics .

{I now claim the Maiku Memorial Prize for Pedantic Exegesis ]

quote:

He also wrote 'Songs without words'

I believe that was Medelssohn, but Ritz can be arbiter on that. Perhaps all of this could have been avoided if the OP had just asked the guy for a clarification.

As for the Maiku Prize, I hearily endorse the award, even though a pale copy of the original.

quote:

Originally posted by juanruiz:

quote:

He also wrote 'Songs without words'

I believe that was Medelssohn, but Ritz can be arbiter on that..

They both wrote works known as 'Songs without Words' Schubert's sonata D 821 'Arpeggione' is one of several so listed, as a collection.That one seems to have been written without any voice part at all.

Mendlessohn's 'Songs without words' are well known and popular. I had to research whether Schubert wrote any, just to make the neat line. Until then I'd never encountered the name in connection with Schubert.

If you can have songs without words, then perhaps he meant the music in his original query.

No, I still can't see any other acceptable interpretation to this other than JR's first response - based on what people say, that is. Sentence-analysis wise, OK, there is ambiguity, but if I wanted someone to distinguish the lyrics contributed by me from the other guy's music, well I for one just wouldn't have "written" ("composed"?) my sentence like that
I mean, would you? ("Which country-music song has the best lyrics?" is one obvious alternative).
I still agree with the view that it's the value of the song per se that the writer's trying to get us to evaluate here. 'Cos even though you you may not like Garth Brooks, well, the song may be OK. Or to put it another way, the partiular version of "Stand By Your Man' one may so dislike may not be too bad a song after all if it were sung by someone else . Or well, if only Hank Williams had been able to record his stuff with all of these technical advance that nowadays prevail.