As defi ned at the opening of this chapter, the second half of the 8-m. sentence combines continuation and cadential functions into one 4-m. phrase. Th e pres-ence of two diff erent functions in a single group can more technically be termed form-functional fusion .
Fusion poses a problem of terminology because formal units are prefer-ably labeled according to their primary functional expression. Th e decision EXAMPLE 2.23 Beethoven, Piano Sonata in C, Op. 2, No. 3, i, 1–8
Example 2.23: the L& – K motion from m. 3 to m. 4 raises the possibility of seeing the presentation phrase being closed with an IAC. Countering this view is the way in which Beethoven keeps the melody active with the fi nal leap up to C; we recog-nize no “falling” line typical of a cadence.
course, the end of a presentation has no capacity to create cadence because of the lack of any cadential progression.
Occasionally, however, the presentation closes with a root-position domi-nant resolving to a root-position tonic, a progression that has obvious cadential potential (though such a progression can also be seen as prolongational).
02_WilliamECaplin_C02.indd 60 8/27/2013 2:55:07 PM
2 THE SENTENCE
61
normally to call the second half of a sentence a continuation phrase refl ects the fact that in the majority of cases continuation function is more prominently displayed than cadential function. Not only does the phrase begin with contin-uation function, but also the processes of fragmentation, harmonic accelera-tion, and increased surface rhythm oft en carry on into the cadential material.
In some cases, however, the cadential component vies for equal expression with the continuation function, or even surpasses it. Cadential function acquires this greater status when a single cadential progression begins in m. 5 of the theme and is stretched out to support the entire 4-m. phrase. Th is expanded cadential progression (ECP) thus brings a more emphatic expression of caden-tial function to the phrase than is usually the case (as when the cadencaden-tial pro-gression fi rst arises in m. 7 of the theme).
Even though cadential function is present from the very start of the phrase, characteristics of continuation function, such as fragmentation and harmonic acceleration, are usually found within the phrase as well.
In order to indicate the striking presence of both functions, the term continuation ⇒ cadential is employed here, where the symbol ⇒ stands for
“becomes” (thus “continuation becomes cadential”) and denotes a retrospective reinterpretation of formal function. In other words, what we expect to be a con-tinuation phrase (following, as it does, a presentation) is understood retrospec-tively to be a cadential phrase based on an expanded cadential progression, a phrase that nevertheless contains continuational characteristics.
A tip on analytical notation: as an exception to the practice of indicating all cadential progressions with a horizontal square bracket, an expanded cadential progression is identifi ed instead with the abbreviation ECP placed at the lower right of the initial harmony of the progression (this, to avoid an overly long bracket).
Because of how listeners perceive music, we sometimes fi nd ourselves in situations where our initial interpretation of formal functionality needs to be revised as the music moves forward in time.
In other words, as we fi rst hear a passage, we may believe that it expresses such and such a function; but as the music continues, and we perceive more information, we may change our opinion and come to believe that a different formal function is more appropriately at hand.
This kind of retrospective reinterpretation plays itself out in a num-ber of contexts in classical form. It is thus useful to have a shortcut symbol to represent such situations. Following its introduction by theorist Janet Schmalfeldt, the double arrow ( ⇒ ), which is read as “becomes,” has been adopted by many scholars and is employed often in this text. 4
The notion of retrospective reinterpretation strongly relates to that of form-functional fusion , yet the two ideas are not identical. The former con-cerns a dynamic process of listening, whereby we change our interpretation
RETROSPECTIVE REINTERPRETATION ( ⇒ )
(continued)
02_WilliamECaplin_C02.indd 61 8/27/2013 2:55:08 PM
ANALYZING CLASSICAL FORM
Example 2.24: following a regular 4-m. presentation featuring a statement-response repetition of the basic idea, the expected continuation phrase brings obvious frag-mentation (in two stages lasting through the end of m. 7) and an increased rate of harmonic change.
Th e entire 4-m. phrase is supported by a single expanded cadential progression. Cadential function is thus prominent within the phrase as a whole, though continuational characteristics are evident as well. Th e term continuation ⇒ cadential aptly describes the functional situation. (Th e harmony in m. 5 could alternatively be analyzed as tonic in root position, because the viola note lies literally below that of the cello; yet the sonority of the latter probably projects the real bass of the harmony.)
Note that when the abbreviation ECP is placed aft er the fi rst harmony of the cadential progression, it is unnecessary (and would overly clutter the analysis) to use horizontal brackets for the rest of the harmonies of the cadential progression.
Here are some sentences featuring an expanded cadential progression supporting the entire second phrase.
Here are some sentences featuring an expanded cadential progression of a functional situation in light of our hearing new musical material; the latter refers more generally to the presence of two formal functions occur-ring within the same grouping unit (such as a phrase). The symbol ⇒ is restricted to cases of retrospective reinterpretation, not to all situations involving fusion. In fact, a “slash” (/) is used in later chapters to indicate thematic fusion, such as the fusion of main theme and transition functions (see Chap. 14, p. 502).
Retrospective Reinterpretation continued:
02_WilliamECaplin_C02.indd 62 8/27/2013 2:55:09 PM
2 THE SENTENCE