[Smt-talk] Seeking deceptively resolving applied dominants.

[John Cuciurean]

Hello Frank (and all),

First, thank you to all who have replied thus far. I would also like to 
add, for the record, that I am sympathetic to those who regard III as a 
modal variant of iii rather than V/vi (particularly in tonic expansions 
which follow the chord succession I - III - IV -I), and I would be 
delighted to hear all views concerning this matter. (privately or 
otherwise) It was not my intention to suggest that the applied dominant 
reading I offered was preferred to other possibilities--especially in 
popular music usage.

Frank, my response to your revised analysis below is that I agree with 
your reading (and it's derivation). Indeed, my impulse to normalize the 
harmonic rhythm to quarter/eighth throughout the excerpt is at odds with 
how the surface is actually unfolded. I can not defend my reading, other 
than to say that the actual performance tempo was a factor for me. One 
of the recordings I listened to was sufficiently fast--perhaps too fast 
to be considered an 'Andante con moto'--to warrant treating all of the 
notes on the last eighth of m3 as a ii6/5 rather than IV - ii6; but the 
issues you've drawn to my attention are well received.
> Doesn't the Schubert given below actually go first to a pure tonic, then
> added flat seventh, and also to a pure IV, then through 5-6 exchange to
> ii6/5. Thus:
>
> V7 - (4/2) - I6 -V6/5/IV - IV -ii6/5 - V6/4-7/5/3 - I
>
> Derived from:
>
> V7 - (4/2) - I6-b5 - IV5-6 - V6/4-7/5/3 - I
>
> I can certainly see why you would read it your way, but the difference may
> be significant in this case (and it may point to some difficulties in
> compiling statistical data through roman numeral analysis).
>   

Respectfully,
John

John Cuciurean
Assistant Professor of Music Theory
Don Wright Faculty of Music
University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario, Canada
519-661-2111, ext. 85198
jcuciure at uwo.ca