Elision ligatures in Dorico?

Currently my method for handling this is to add the elision symbol at the end of the word where I wish them to occur, properly align the text (ignoring the elision character) and then I take a pdf of the score to affinity publisher and nudge it after the fact. It’s really the easiest way it can be done now (imho), unless you want to try and hunt down the character and add it as floating text objects. I suppose you could also define a new playing technique and save it as default, but you’d run into issues if your font ever changes between projects.

Thank you Romanos401,
I used your suggestion with creating a playing technique - using the [Lyrics] wide elision glyph from the SMuFL web page, and it is fine for this one occasion:

I’ve made a little font (I mean really little) called Liturgico that incorporates a few of these sorts of symbols used in hymn engraving. I add it as a text item and drag it into place.

I didn’t realize you’d included the elision glyph in that font, Dan. Good to know.

I hadn’t, at least not in the last iteration… I doubt the font would be much good to others. I assigned curly brackets to two-lyric-line-tall brackets for hymn purposes, and a few other things.

I do feel I have to point out once again that what’s being discussed here is liaison not elision (see Documentation: misuse of the word elision - Dorico - Steinberg Forums).

It’s amazing how often the word elision is misused (and I don’t just mean here).

1 Like

Hmm… I’m not sure that’s correct. I know you feel quite certain of your claim, and while I’m not 100% sure who constitutes “the usual suspects” or what research you think they ought to do first, I’m fairly certain that it is entirely appropriate to call both the glyph and the linguistic phenomenon an elision, at least in most cases relevant to us here (at least in lyrics; if we’re talking about IPA, that’s a different story).

Now, I’ve not ever heard liaison defined as merely the linking of two words; I’d be curious where you’re getting that. I’ve always understood it as requiring some sort of linking consonant (e.g. “vous avez”) or a semivowel. Whereas, an elision is the dropping of a sound or syllable (be it apheresis, syncope, or apocope, that is, not just between words, but also within them). To sort out the first example in this thread, we’d definitely need to know whose definition of liaison is more accurate. However, while I know a bunch of the pictures in this thread didn’t survive the forum move, I’d wager that the picture that I had posted a few years back was one in which a single two-syllable word was pronounced as one syllable on a single note, which is to say, it’s definitely not liaison as it’s only one word. Honestly, if my definition of liaison is the better one and we’re talking about lyrics and not IPA, the only times I can think of where this glyph is used for something other than some sort of synalepha is when it’s used to indicate not breathing.

And to be clear, I’m certainly open to correction on any of that, but if I am incorrect, I think I’m in fairly good company, as our Lord and Savior, the one true Elaine Gould, doth indeed also call it an elision sign and doth as well imply it could also be called an elision slur (see p. 436 and p. 446). I feel like if she’s got it wrong (along with just about every other musician I know), I’m happy just being wrong, and I’d be glad if Dorico did the same :slight_smile:

2 Likes


There’s some nuance here, but ultimately both terms have a seat at the table in this discussion. I definitely have lyrics with elisions, especially mid word when there are multiple consecutive vowels.

The omitting of syllables also happens frequently in the poetry of hymns, so elision is correct be it mid word or between notes.

It appears, based on these definitions, that some elisions may also be liaisons. Regardless, this glyph can be used in both ways.

And, as I wrote in another thread, any attempt I made to use that glyph was not accepted by my fellow singers who commissioned me for a work… We opera singers don’t use it, plain and simple :wink:

1 Like

Liaison and elision have specialized meanings in linguistics but etymologically, liaison will always imply binding (from the Latin ligare) and elision will always imply deletion (e- out + laedere to dash).

In the UK, some people have begun to think (perhaps recalling childhood French lessons) that elision simply means joining (or in more generalized contexts, conflating – the Oxford English Dictionary actually gives this sense without comment). The phonetician John Wells described this use in a 2010 blog post (John Wells – elision (not!)) and the author of The Guardian’s style guide (Wells had identified the problem in this British left-wing newspaper) is quoted as follows: ‘In answer to your question, it is the journalist (and editors/subeditors) who don’t know the meaning of the word, which still means (or should mean) what you understand it to mean’.

The word liaison doesn’t have to be used but it’s certainly preferable to the use of elision in this context (the discussion has been about binding). The Unicode symbol is called an undertie (see Unicode Utilities: Character Properties) and I would suggest that in Dorico, such a symbol could usefully be referred to as a lyric tie.

It’s not clever to be wrong! This is the kind of attitude that’s getting the western world into a mess at the moment.

Tristis, you’re getting a little dogmatic here.

My screenshots were from the Oxford dictionary.

Elision, according to them, not me, means “the omission of a sound or syllable” which is precisely how I use the “lyric tie” in hymnody. At any rate, this is hardly the hill to die on.

I don’t want to pass judgment on the use of the words elision and liaison in relation to music, but isn’t language a living thing? I am Dutch and in the Dutch language the meaning of words changes continuously over a long period of time. Often due to misuse by large crowds of people. I don’t think it will be any different in other languages. The integration of wrong use of words can hardly be prevented, but also does not cause degradation of our society…I think…

1 Like

I would suggest that language is a dying thing.

No it isn’t. You will sometimes use it in this way but not always.

I don’t understand why anyone is objecting to precision and the avoidance of error.

I keep telling people that ‘meat’ means any food, and ‘silly’ mean blessed.

Everyone has just been wrong these last four hundred years.

4 Likes

I’m not objecting to precision. I said above:

You’re the one who keeps insisting that “elision” is wrong, and I’m telling you, I use this symbol for elisions, as I have seen in countless examples of published hymnals. Thus, I’m pointing out the fact that to use the term elision in this context is not an error as you insist it to be.

That aside, I completely agree with you that liaisons also occur and can be indicated with this symbol, and that “lyric tie” is a good, neutral term that encompasses both.

It is meet and just that you should tell them so, and silly of them not to listen to you. :laughing:

All I’ve done is suggest that an elision is a specific thing, that people are sometimes misusing the word, that it’s unfortunate that the word elision is used for underties in SMuFL, and that the term ‘lyric tie’ might be useful.

I’ve also suggested that civilisation is in decline but that’s another matter…

I use the full Oxford English Dictionary online (Oxford English Dictionary (oed.com)) but it’s not what it was. Unfortunately there’s been a woke purge of some of the language.