""WE"?!!"? Boldface, italics, two exclamation points? No need to start shouting here, I hope....
Touché! Yes, I guess that was a shout. In part, a shout of surprise, but also more, so I won't retract it.
By the use of the word "we" you have, however unintentionally, attributed to me
a belief which I in fact oppose. I don't take that lightly.
I think that the term hybrid as generally used on c.net refers to the points in common of Herrington, Norman, Marcus, Tedrow, Morse, Edgley and Geuns concertinas:
- Anglo or English key layout
- British-style wire action
- laid-flat accordion reeds
- size and shape similar to traditional British concertinas
I disagree, so I hope that others will weigh in with their views. Or maybe we should start a poll?
I do agree that the term "hybrid" as commonly used here does include instruments which exhibit all those characteristics. What I don't accept is that it is restricted
those instruments which exhibit all
of those characteristics.
In particular, I feel that "laid-flat" is an unnecessary and artificial constraint. If one of the current makers of "hybrids" started using perpendicular reed blocks to accommodate more notes, while retaining all the other characteristics of their current instruments, are you claiming that "we" wouldn't consider the new instrument to be as much a "hybrid" as the current offerings?
And "wire" action is just plain wrong, since many of the best vintage English-made concertinas had actions that appear to be cut from metal sheet, not formed from wire
. I suspect that with that point you were simply trying to exclude wooden actions, but that you were careless in your description.
Also, your first criterion declares that Bob Tedrow's duets are not
"hybrids". I doubt that you really believe that, nor that you believe "we" believe it.
Of course the word "hybrid" in a generic sense can also be used to decribe other types of hybrid as well, including plants and animals as well as concertinas. I'm using the term as I believe it's generally used here and as I believed Dan intended when he first used it in the thread that started this discussion.
I think only he (Dan Worrall) can answer that last assumption, so I hope he'll respond. As for how the term "hybrid" is "generally used", as I've stated above I think that it's use is more inclusive than exclusive.
Good definitions reflect usage, not just logical possibilities.
Agreed. But I would add that most good definitions are flexible enough to include future possibilities, not just examples of prior