<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Calibri">Dear Ildar and the list,<br>
<br>
I did not mention Schenker in this context (and I agree with you
that Schenkerian theory probably would not be much help for
teaching elementary tonal writing). My question concerned the </font><font
face="Calibri"> root progression theory of the </font><font
face="Calibri">Sechter/Bruckner tradition, of which another
important representative is Schœnberg. <br>
I feel that the problem with German Funktionstheorie is its
dualism: the function is viewed as a relation between two chords
(say, between dominant and tonic, or between subdominant and
tonic), but the theory has little to say of the direction of the
relation: Riemann makes little difference between I–V and V–I (or
between I–IV and IV–I) and, above all, does not see the relation
of similitude between V–I and I–IV, for instance. (This problem
exists also in neo-Riemannian theory.)<br>
The cycle TSDT that you describe seems to me much better
accounted for in root progression theory. Besides, Riemann himself
seems to have had some problems with it, especially with the
progression from S to D.<br>
I must confess that while I have read a lot of Riemann, I am
less informed about later forms of the theory, e.g. Louis and
Thuille or, more recently, Diether de la Motte. The question that
I have, to put it otherwise, is about the point of keeping to
three functions only, if dualism is abandoned. It has been said
that root progression theory is a theory of six or seven
functions: why not?<br>
<br>
</font>Nicolas Meeùs<br>
Université Paris-Sorbonne<br>
<font face="Calibri"><br>
<br>
<br>
</font><br>
Le 1/05/2012 19:19, Ildar Khannanov a écrit :
<blockquote
cite="mid:1335892749.84358.YahooMailClassic@web45013.mail.sp1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="font: inherit;" valign="top">
<div>Dear Nicolas and the List,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I have studied both (German Funktionstheorie in
Russia and Schenkerian theory of scale-degrees in the
United States). Both sides propose statements but they
do not necessarily adequately translate into pedagogic
practice.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I noticed that when students realize figured bass,
they count notes from each given bass up. I have seen
some of them using fingres to count. So, practically, on
the undergraduate level, realization of a figured bass
presents calculating of the notes of each chord from a
bass up and adjustments made in response to schoolbook
requirements of voce leading (such as "resolve the
seventh by step down). Ears may not participate in this
activity.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I do not know of any compositional technique for
building harmonic progression using Schenkerian theory.
Analysis--yes, actual composing of a 4-part
progression--no. There are some suggestions concerning
prolongation but they refer mostly to analysis of a
given score. As such, Schenkerian fundamtenal line is
inaudible. It is purely graphic phenomenon. If to
reconstruct a harmonic progression from a given
fundamental line, we will receive one and the same
harmonic progression, a standard school-book harmony
which has nothing to do with actual endless variety of
harmonic progressions in music.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>When a student builds a harmonic progression using
functional theory, he or she must hear the functions
underlying an unfigured melody or unfigured bass. It is
impossible to simply calculate the possible chords under
a given note: this will not lead to a meaningful
progression. The only way to harmonize a given melody in
functional style is to hear the flow of functions in
cycles of TSDT. This method cannot promise a student the
understanding of the structure of the whole Beethoven' s
symphony in one grasp, but can lead to knowledge of
shorter chord progressions, cycles, phrases, breathing
curves of harmony.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Tonal-harmonic function is a quality of a chord which
connects it to other chords and places it in a syntactic
whole. Functional hearing, based upon congnitive
mechanisms of tension, attraction and resolution,
regulates horizontal dimension of a harmonic
progression.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Tonal-hamonic function is used not to separate chords
into pure verticalities, but to connect them in
horizontal dimension. The only agency which makes
harmonic progression meaningful is its coordination with
the tonal-harmonic functional syntax. Of course, threre
are exeptions and licences which composers take, but
they only make the rule more meaningful and useful.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ildar Khannanov</div>
<div>Peabody Conservatory</div>
<div>Johns Hopkins University</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:solfeggio7@yahoo.com">solfeggio7@yahoo.com</a><br>
<br>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>