THE term "musikalisch" (musical) is used by the Germans in a sense foreign to that in which any other language employs it.[I] It is a conception belonging to the Germans, and not to culture in general; the expression is incorrect and untranslatable. "Musical" is derived from _music_, like "poetical" from _poetry_, or "physical" from _physic(s)_. When I say, "Schubert was one of the most musical among men," it is the same as if I should say, "Helmholtz was one of the most physical among men." That is musical, which _sounds_ in rhythms and intervals. A cupboard can be "musical," if "music-works" be enclosed in it.[J] In a comparative sense, "musical" may have the further signification of "euphonious."--"My verses are too musical to bear setting to music," a noted poet once remarked to me. [I] The author probably had in mind the languages of southern Europe; the word is employed in English, and in the tongues of the Scandinavian group, with precisely the same meaning as in German. [Translator's Note.] [J] The only kind of people one might properly call _musical_, are the singers; for they themselves can sound. Similarly, a clown who by some trick produces tones when he is touched, might be called a _pseudo-musical_ person. "Spirits moving musically To a lute's well-tuned law," writes Edgar Allan Poe. Lastly, one may speak quite correctly of "musical laughter," because it _sounds_ like music. Taking the signification in which the term is applied and almost exclusively employed in German, a musical person is one who manifests an inclination for music by a nice discrimination and sensitiveness with regard to the _technical aspects_ of the art. By "technics" I mean rhythm, harmony, intonation, part-leading, and the treatment of themes. The more subtleties he is capable of hearing or reproducing in these, the more "musical" he is held to be. In view of the great importance attached to these elements of the art, this "musical" temperament has naturally become of the highest consequence. And so an artist who plays with perfect technical finish should be deemed the most musical player. But as we mean by "technics" only the mechanical mastery of the instrument, the terms "technical" and "musical" have been turned into opposites. The matter has been carried so far as to call a composition itself "musical,"[K] or even to assert of a great composer like Berlioz that he was not sufficiently musical.[L] "Unmusical" conveys the strongest reproach; branded thus, its object becomes an outlaw.[M] [K] "But these pieces are so musical," a violinist once remarked to me of a four-hand worklet which I had characterized as trivial. [L] "My dog is _very_ musical," I have heard said in all seriousness. Should the dog take precedence of Berlioz? [M] Such has been my own fate.