Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2006 :: April ::
History of RINGS?
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0303  Monday, 10 April 2006

From: 		Joseph Egert <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Friday, 07 Apr 2006 17:24:16 +0000
Subject: 17.0291 History of RINGS?
Comment: 	RE: SHK 17.0291 History of RINGS?

Alan Jones explains:

 >If the "first finger" is the one next to the thumb, the "ring
 >finger" should be the third, next to the little finger; but people
 >seem usually to say "fourth". Compare the finger notation of piano
 >music, where nowadays 1 means thumb and so on to 5 for the little
 >finger, but in my youth + was used for the thumb, and the little
 >finger was 4.

Swinburne (TREATISE OF SPOUSALS) voted "fourth" finger, or did he mean 
pinkie?

Digitally befuddled,
Joe Egert

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the 
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the 
editor assumes no responsibility for them.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.