Hi Jim,
That was always the problem with the 1954 definion, there were other categories of music it could apply to.

I would argue that that in each community (travellers as one example, a village as another) there were people - but not everyone, who did this composing, performing, accepting, adapting, passing on, performing etc etc.

There are communities now (even if that is one of people - interested in/ making a profession from - folk singing) who go through that process.

Nowadays the songs appear to have no significance away from the point of performance.

I am not sure what you are saying here. To me a song only has a significance at the point of performance. (Or it is an academic study of course but I feel sure that is not what you meant).

I do include for lack of a better word "the folk community" as a community - and I am sure both of us could point to its generosity and humanity on numerous occasions - in the same way as we would expect any other community to be generous etc. - family, neighbours for example. Sometimes it/they aren't - but that is the way of the world.

Let's take an image we all must have - the old man/woman sat in a pub singing. Whatever they sang those who listened would I reckon hardly play any part in the process of ......etc .etc. They would be just as passive a consumer as people are nowadays.

Also I wonder if we substituted the word "tune" for "song" - if it would look so simple.