Intrathematic Formal Functions According to William Caplin
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article introduces to the Russian readers the work of one of the
most prominent western theorist of musical form of the past two decades,
professor of McGill University, the winner of Wallace Berry award, Dr.
William Caplin. His book Classical Form: A Theory of Formal Functions
for the Instrumental Music of Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven is given an
introductory evaluation together with its historical background and the
timeline of its conceptual evolution. Dr. Caplin’s ideas are placed in the
context of western history of music theory and compared with the Soviet
tradition of functional analysis. Special attention is given to the formal
functions on a local, intrathematic level. The author finds that this level
has been analyzed more thoroughly in Caplin’s terms than in traditional
Russian. The author suggests adopting the terms, such as basic idea,
contrasting idea, continuation/fragmentation and cadential function as
parts of instruction in musical form at the Russian conservatories.
Keywords: formal functions, intrathematic formal functions,
Schoenberg-Ratz’s concept of formal functions, theory of formal
functions of William Caplin, phrase, grouping, basic idea, Grundgestalt,
liquidation, droblenie s zamykaniem, Asafiev, Sposobin, Bobrovsky
Article Details
Copyright
The rights on the results of intellectual activity and equated means of individualization are protected in accordance with Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The authorship, author's name, executor’s name, inviolability of the work and result of execution are protected by the rules of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation of the author or executor, regardless of providing legal protection of such results of intellectual activity at the time of their forming.
Copyright laws regulate the civil legal relations for using works of science, literature and art. Such relationships are formed as the result of the author’s writing his or her texts. In this case the author can rightfully claim copyright of the work.
The author has certain rights to reuse the work (see: “Ethical Aspects in Terms of Multifold Publications).
Licenses
All copyrights on the articles belong to their authors. The author transfers the rights on using the article the publisher.
PDF versions of scholarly articles of the journal PMN are published by using the license Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives cc by-nc-nd, allowing loading and distributing works on the assumption of indicating the authorship. The works may not be changed in any way or used for commercial interests.
Criteria for Authorship, Co-authorship
The term “author” refers to all persons (co-authors) who have made a substantial contribution to conducting the research and creation of the manuscript and responsible for its content. The person (author) who has submitted the manuscript to the editorial board shall bear responsibility for the complete list of the group of authors and the changes made to the manuscript in accordance with the results of the peer reviewing and editing.
1. Authorship is based on the following criteria:
1) The author made a substantial contribution to the research activity and development of concept, collected the data, made analysis and interpretation of the data.
2) The author carried out the writing of the text of draft articles and edited it attentively and substantially.
3) The author approved the final version of the article prior to its submission.
4) The author bears responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript.
2. The authors shall guarantee that the submitted manuscript is the original work.
3. Scholarly reviews for some issue or other should be objective, present material in a wide range and at the same time take into account the views of the author of the review.
4. The authorship of scholarly publications is obligated to reflect accurately the contribution of individuals to the research activity, with specific information about the authors.
5. The authors may not mislead the readers by publishing acknowledgements of gratitude to people who were not actually involved in writing the work. Other persons who made contribution to the work, but are nevertheless not the authors, may be listed in the rubric of “Acknowledgements,” with indications of the type and extent of their activities.
6. Authors are obligated to provide a description of their contribution to the publication.
7. The order of authorship must be a joint resolution of co-authors. The authors should be ready to explain the order of their enumeration and listing.
8. The authors shall be entirely responsible for the correct definition of authorship acting in accordance with the rules adopted in their institution.
9. Investigators must ensure that only those persons who meet the criteria for authorship (that made a significant contribution to the work), shall be considered the authors, and the researchers who do not merit authorship will be excluded from the list of authors.
References
2. North American Approaches to Musical Form // Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft fur Musiktheorie. — 2, no. 2 (2005) [Electronic resource]. — URL: http://www.gmth.de/www/artikel/2005-04-10_11-04-06_7/.
3. The Classical Cadence: Conceptions and Misconceptions // Journal of the American Musicological Society.—57/1 (Spring, 2004). — P. 51–117 [Winner of 2006 Prix Opus for “Article of the Year,” Conseil quebecois de la musique].
4. The Classical Sonata Exposition: Cadential Goals and Form-Functional Plans // Tijdschrift voor Muziektheorie.—6/3 (2001). — P. 195–209.
5. Hybrid Themes: Toward a Refinement in the Classification of Classical Theme Types // Beethoven Forum 3. —1994. — P. 151–65.
6. History of Theory in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries: A Survey of Recent Research // Music Theory Spectrum. — 11/1 (1989). — P. 29–34.
7. The ‘Expanded Cadential Progression’: A Category for the Analysis of Classical Form // Journal of Musicological Research 7. — 1987. — P. 215–57.
8. Funktionale Komponenten im achttaktigen Satz // Musiktheorie.—1/3(1986). — P. 239–60.
9. Riemann’s Theory of Dynamic Shading: A Theory of Meter? // Theorea. —1 (1985). — P. 1–24.
10. Moritz Hauptmann and the Theory of Suspensions // Journal of Music Theory.—28/2 (1984). — P. 251–69.
11. Tonal Function and Metrical Accent: A Historical Perspective // Music Theory Spectrum. — 5 (1983).— P. 1–14.
12. Harmony and Meter in the Theories of Simon Sechter // Music Theory Spectrum.—2 (1980). — P. 74–89.
13. Der Akzent des Anfangs: Zur Theorie des musikalischen Taktes // Zeitschrift für Musiktheorie.—9/1 (1978). — P. 17–28.
14. Galand J. Formenlehre Revisited: Review-Essay on William Caplin’s Classical Form // Intégral. — 13 (2001). — P. 143–200.
15. Marston N. Review of Classical Form // Music Analysis.—20/1 (March 2001). — P. 143–49.
16. Bergé P. In de sporen van Schönberg: Caplins theorie van de “Classical Form” // Tijdschrift voor Muziektheorie. — 5/3 (November 2000). — P. 204–210.
17. Check J. Review of Classical Form // Notes (September 2000). — P. 101–103.
18. Darcy W. Review of Classical Form // Music Theory Spectrum. — 22/1 (Spring 2000). — P. 122–25.
19. Spitzer M. Review of Classical Form // Music and Letters. — 81/1 (February 2000). — P. 110–115.
20. Bey H. Review of Classical Form // Mozart-Jahrbuch. — 1999. — P. 117-119.
21. de Médicis F. Review of Classical Form // Revue de musique des universités canadiennes. — 2 0/1 (1999). — P. 107–13.
22. Grave F. Review of Classical Form // Music Theory Online. — 4/6 (1999).
23. Neff S. Review of Classical Form // Indiana Theory Review. — 20/2 (1999). — P . 41–55.
24. Stroh P. Review of Classical Form // The Beethoven Journal.—13/1 (1998). — P. 39.
25. Asaf'ev B. Muzykal'naya forma kak protsess. — M., 1930. — T. 1; M., 1947. — T. 2.
26. Bobrovskiy V. Funktsional'nye osnovy muzykal'no formy. — M., 1978.
27. Sposobin I. Muzykal'naya forma. — 1-e izd. — L., 1945; 7-e izd. — M., 1984.
28. Beethoven’s Tempest Sonata: Contexts of Analysis and Performance / ed. Pieter Bergé, co-eds. William E. Caplin and Jeroen D’hoe. — Leuven, 2009.
29. Caplin W. Classical Form: A Theory of Formal Functions for the Instrumental Music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven (Winner of the 1999 Wallace Berry Award from the Society for Music Theory). — Oxford, 1998.
30. William Caplin, James Hepokoski, and James Webster. Musical Form, Forms & Formenlehre: Three Methodological Reflections / ed. Pieter Bergé. — Leuven, 2009.
31. Carpenter P. Grundgestalt as tonal function // Music Theory Spectrum.—Vοl 5.—Spring 1983. — P. 15–38.
32. Cohn R. Neo-Riemannian Operations, Parsimonious Trichords, and their Tonnetz Representations // Journal of Music Theory. — 41/1 (1997). — P. 1–66.
33. Hatten R. Interpreting Musical Gestures, Topics and Tropes: Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert. — Bloomington, 2004
34. Hatten R. Musical Meaning in Beethoven: Markedness, Correlation, and Interpretation. — Bloomington, 1994.
35. Khannanov I. Revisiting Russian Music Theory: Victor Bobrovsky’s Functional Foundation of Musical Form (1978) // Theoria.—Vol. 16. — Houston, 2009.
36. Khannanov I. Russian Methodology of Music Theory and Analysis (Ph.D. diss.). — Santa Barbara, 2003.
37. Lehrdal F., Jackendoff R. A Generative Theory of Tonal Music.—Cambridge, 1983.
38. Lewin D. Generalized Musical Intervals and Transformations. — New Haven, 1987.
39. Ratz E. Einführung in die musikalisches Formenlehre. — Vienna, 1968 (1953).
40. Schoenberg A. Fundamentals of Musical Composition / Ed. by Gerald Strang, with an introduction by Leonard Stein. — New York, 1985 (1967).
41. Schoenberg A. Structural Functions of Harmony / Translated by Leonard Stein. — London, 1969 (1959).