contextual understanding: mozart's k. 475 and...

Contextual understanding: Mozart's K. 475 and textuality

PyoungRyang Ko, Gesine Schröder, Claus-Steffen Mahnkopf Department of Composition/Music Theory, University of Music and Theatre Leipzig, Germany

[email protected] [email protected] - http://www.hmt-leipzig.de/index.php?id=505,0,0,1,0,0

[email protected] - http://www.claussteffenmahnkopf.de

Suk-yeong Mun Department of Korean Language and Literature, Seoul National University, Korea

[email protected]

Kian Geiselbrechtinger Department of Composition/Music Theory, Mannheim University of Music and Performing Arts, Germany

[email protected]

Proceedings of the fourth Conference on Interdisciplinary Musicology (CIM08) Thessaloniki, Greece, 2-6 July 2008, http://web.auth.gr/cim08/

Background in music theory/analysis. There have been some hermeneutic approaches to Mozart's Fantasy in c-minor K. 475 (1785). Among the most recent research, Williams (1991) interprets the bass line in the opening har-monies over its opening bars as 'a long, paraphrased or troped chromatic fourth down from tonic to dominant'. Raff (2002) shows how Mozart uses temporary tonal deviation as an artificial device. Polth (2006) describes bars 12 and 13 as 'Tonfelder' (Haas, 2004), which refers to Lendvai's pitch axis theory (1971).

Background in text linguistics. Text linguistics searches for structural and formal variants of textual entirety, for which separate descriptive models must be developed beyond the known apparatus of syntax (Heinemann/Viehweger, 1991). A text is defined as a communicative occurrence, which meets seven standards of textuality i.e. COHESION, COHERENCE, INTENTIONALITY, ACCEPTABILITY, INFORMATIVITY, SITUATIONALITY and INTERTEXTUALITY (Beaugrande/Dressler, 1981). All communicative fields can be examined by its methods (M. Heinemann/W. Heinemann, 2002).

Aims. Firstly, we aim to coherently analyse the compositional expression in the beginning of K. 475 by reflecting on musical syntax and context. Then, for interdisciplinary musicology, we will propose borrowing the concept of textuality from the perspective of text linguistics, in order to analyse the hermeneutic ambiguity, and then to attempt a sys-tematisation of contextual understanding of the composition.

Main contribution. The hermeneutic ambiguity in the first section of K. 475 arises in its highly complex harmony with much illogical enharmonic notation and garden path type phrases. It also arises in Mozart's ingenious manipulation and deviation from some topoi of his time. Examples include a deviation from chromatic fourths, deceptive cadences and voice-leading, evaded resolutions of Ger. 6, conventional modulation and underlying morphemes as well as the use of subtle remote tonal relationships at opposite poles in the harmonic structure. The relationship between c-minor, the tonal base of K. 475, and D-major in the second section is identified as a modulation from t to {{tp}g}P (c-minor

E -major), which is a manipulated alteration of the common modulation routine of the time, namely from t to tP. To understand this relationship, it is necessary not only to grasp general mediant relationships and Lendvai's pitch axis theory, but also the background awareness and integration of the aspects of each detail above. From an interdisciplinary perspective, the analytical result and the recipients' ambiguity can be crystallised in the seven standards of textuality: (a) the text itself [K. 475] as process and product, including harmonic relationships and voice-leading in COHESION and the relationships among underlying morphemes caused by the manipulated topoi in COHERENCE (including subtle remote tonal relationship at opposite poles in the harmonic structure); (b) the participants, i.e. the producer's [Mozart] INTENTIONALITY (manipulation and deviation from topoi and garden path type phrases) and the recipients' [listeners, musicologists and music theorists] ACCEPTABILITY concerning various approaching interests rather than contextual understanding (the reasons of hermeneutical ambiguity); (c) the broader context of INFORMATIVITY (including the musical events based on the simulation of resolutions, the deception instead of fulfilling of expectation and the compensation for the deception as well as unexpected deviation from usual topoi), the SITUATIONALITY of the title Fantasy concerning its genre (the background of the origin of K. 475 and topoi of Mozart's time) and INTERTEXTUALITY in substance kinships concerning the topoi mentioned above and typological similarities to Beethoven.

Implications. How to interpret a piece while playing should be decided not only by intuition but also by a contextual understanding of musical flow. An interpreter can gain clues to the use of rubato, the manipulation of expectation and deception in the management of musical time flows. Through the correspondence of temporal management to compo-sitional plot, the tension and relaxation of a composition might be more effectively presented. Text linguistics emerged with the necessity to extend the scope of research from the sentence-sequence unit to the communicative unit as a complete text from a pragmatic point of view. Even if this is already widespread in the music field, it has not yet been comprehensively studied. The adaptation primarily implies a systematizing of the under-standing of musical oeuvre not only from a structural point of view, but also within a contextual and historical frame-work. Secondly, it will be beneficial to the explanation of complicated musical constructions, the exchange of knowledge in composition, interpretation, research among musicians and musicologists and to educational purposes in general.

CIM08 - Conference on Interdisciplinary Musicology - Proceedings

2

Pan, as the son of Hermes (the interpreter, messenger, thief, cheater or bargainer, i.e. the contriver of speeches), is speech or the brother of speech, and is called Pan be-cause speech indicates everything. He has two forms, a true and a false, and is in the upper part smooth, and in the lower shaggy. He is the Goat of Tragedy, in which there are plenty of falsehoods. (Plato/Socrates)i

Combining the citation above with some her-meneutic arguments based on one particular composition, e.g. Mozart's Fantasy in c-minor K. 475, a series of questions springs to mind:

• Can a composition be understood only from the compositional perspective sui generis? • Or from the perspective of a personal interpretation? • Which method(s) should be applied to it? – Are new theories demanded?

• If a composed oeuvre is interpreted from a theo-retical or analytical perspective, do some interpreta-tions then revive the ancient Pan when hearing a composition?

• If a composed oeuvre is measured through common patterns or particular methodological apparatuses, is there not a risk in undermining its own artistry or traits?

• Is it then not necessary to understand a composition in itself as contextually as possible in the sense of understanding both the compositional and historical substance? Composition is not only a construct of compositional techniques, but also a complex of mu-sical expression of composers in history.

This series of questions could be regarded as addressing Schoenberg's thoughts 'on compre-hensibility, coherence and the audience' (Auner, 2003: 141-143). The definition comprehensibility can be interpreted as the producer's expectation of the recipient's apperception when composing. In general, the recipient's apperception is not taken into consideration. However, the questions mentioned above result from the matter of the recipient's inference of 'the producer's expecta-tion' when hearing. For comprehensibility to exist, it needs to form a counter partnership.

Even though most accept comprehensibility as a general principle of musical understanding, it has a specific connotation to the music of Schoen-berg and his school. Furthermore, the word comprehension has been used more and more in cognitive psychological research, which has in the last few decades become a distinguished neighbouring discipline of musicology and music theory.

The term comprehensibility is therefore polyse-mous and inadequate for use in the abovemen-tioned arguments. There is a need not only to bring the foregoing issues to a conclusion but also to differentiate among the conflicting ter-minologies.

In order to deal with the aforementioned ques-

tions in transparent terminology, a review of the beginningii of Mozart's K. 475 will lead to the kernel of the complexities in understanding composition regarding theoretical interpretation, analytical methods and the interdisciplinary ad-vantages of integrating text linguistics.

Hermeneutical ambiguity in the

beginning of Mozart's K. 475

Hermeneutical summary (selective)iii

Williams (1991: 223) interprets the bass line from bar 1 to 18iv, as "a long, paraphrased or troped chromatic fourth down from tonic to dominant". Raff (2002: 178-181) shows how Mozart uses temporary tonal deviation as an artificial device. Polth (2006) describes bars 12 and 13 as 'Tonfelder' (Haas, 2004), which refers to Lendvai's pitch axis theory (1971).

Figure 1. The first part of Mozart's Fantasy c-minor K. 475.

1 2 3 4

5 6 7

8 9 10

11 12 13

14 15 16

17 18

19 20

21 22 23

24 25 26


3

Factors of the ambiguity

Mozart's highly intriguing compositional

idea, based on the simulation of resolutions, deception instead of fulfilling the expectation and compensation for the deception, would be an initial cause of various conflicting interpretations. The shrewd and sophisticated chains of this simple principle of tension and relaxation entirely veil his ingenious compositional intention, devi-ating from the topoi of his time, i.e. the common tonal routine in the minor mode, the chromatic fourth, deceptive cadences etc.

Being led up the garden path is also a factor. Musical flow is linear, whilst the phrase reception is achieved non-linearly through short-term memory and hearing capacity, i.e. there are occasional ambiguous moments in which the listener is forced to backtrack and look for an-other suitable structure in order to grasp the syntax. For example, the recognition of the first chord as the secondary dominant to subdomi-nant in the beginning of Beethoven's Symphony No. 1 in C-major op. 21 (1799/1800) or the recognition of the first chord as a Neapolitan sixth in the beginning of Chopin's Ballade No. 1 in g-minor op. 23 (1831-1835) are unintelligible without the backtracking process, i.e. the garden path effect. The same phenomenon is found also in the process of text understanding:

The horse raced past the barn fell.

In the sentence given above, there is a sensation of being forced to reanalyse the initial sequence, this time equipped with the knowledge that fell occurs where it does.v The new understanding of the sentence reads as follows:

The horse, that was raced past the barn, fell.

We will later see that the beginning of Mozart's K. 475 is no exception to this phenomenon.

Further factors causing the ambiguity could be various individual approaching interests of the re-searchers. Contextual reading is in these cases not always necessary. Each author's contextual work with K. 475 is limited to the scope of the method involved, ranging from partial to none at all.

How to overcome the ambiguity

The first factor mentioned above is, however, immovable since K. 475 exists as a substantia constans. Whether or not the listener can fathom the expression of the composition as it is, de-pends on the capacity of her or his understand-abilityvi, i.e. as the composer intended. How can such ambiguity then be solved? Furthermore, will the performance be affected if the player them-selves understands the problem?

Contextual listening/reading lets us recog-nise the underlying coherence and allows us to hear between the sounds. However, if we use a particular analytical method, we can arrive only at the result filtered by the given method. Is there an analytical method that is capable of rendering back actively any code of reading be-tween the lines?

The garden path effect is thought of in psy-cholinguistics as a natural phenomenon that provides strategies for solving ambiguity (Gar-man, 1990: 315), while in the music field it seems to be treated not as a tool in the process of perception. The cause would be the following: the time required for backtracking is in music reception much longer than in speech reception. On this point, analysis is required to solve this kind of ambiguity, because its strongest advan-tage is in overcoming the individual capacity of short-term memory and the hearing capacity from a sensory and inferential aspect.

Interpreting the ambiguous factors is a fur-ther task on the part of the performer. If he or she can understand the cause of that ambiguity, an oeuvre could be played more convincingly.

A solution for the ambiguity

Scrutinising

Mozart's notation of the beginning of K. 475 is somewhat illogical. A summary of the entire harmonic progression with logical harmonic no-tation shows why he notated in this way – the harmonically cohesive notation is far more diffi-cult to read:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25


4

Figure 2's notation no longer disturbs the cohe-sive reading of the harmonic progression. How-ever, others (mainly lots of perfect pitch owners) would still hear the chord in bar 14 as dominant of c-minor. For the clarity of inner hearing while reading with cohesive notation, the notation transposed to one semitone higher follows:

Figure 3. Notation transposed one semitone higher.

The most difficult bars to understand are bars 12-13 and 14-15. Mozart notated bar 12 as a dominant seventh chord, which has an a in the bass. The relation from bar 12 to 13 (from A-major/minor seventh chord to f-minor) seems not to be cohesive. However, the chord in bar 12 is actually a Ger. 6 with the functional bass tone of e . Hence, the progression from bar 12 to 13 is an evasive resolution of a secondary Ger. 6, a kind of deceptive cadence (from E -major/minor seventh/minor ninth chord with fifth downward alteration to f-minor). Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure

6 show the cohesive principle of the resolution from bars 12 to 13. Bars 14-15 are essentially a transposed repetition of bars 12-13 (sequence).

Figure 4. Various treatments of a deceptive cadence.

Figure 5. Various treatments of the evasive resolution of Ger. 6.

Therefore, bars 12 and 14 lie in the secondary harmonic layer of B-major (bar 12: secondary Ger. 6 to Tp, bar 14: Ger. 6 to D) while bars 13 and 15 lie in the extended primary harmonic layer (bar 13: {Tp}p3, bar 15: Dp3). Furthermore, the major sixths instead of perfect fifths in bars 13 and 15 are a few examples of sixte ajoutée apart from subdominant. Hence, {Tp}p3 equals to Tp

6 and Dp3 to D

6. As a result, there is no direct harmonic progression from bar 13 to 14. It oc-curs from bar 13 to 15, namely within the pri-mary harmonic layer. The transitions from bars 12 to 13 and 14 to 15 are from the secondary to the primary harmonic layer:

Figure 7. Harmonic structure from bars 12-15, which causes the ambiguity. (Figure 7 is related to Figure 6 and Figure 3.)

Reception of the evasive resolutions of two sec-ondary Ger. 6 chords follow after three back-tracking processes: bar 13 backtracks to bar 12,

Figure 2. The juxtaposition between Mozart's notation and its transcription in a harmonic context summarises the first part of K. 475 – Each line encompasses one complete phrase. However, the fourth presents only the first bar from the second section.

Figure 6. Principle of the resolution in bars 12-13. (Figure 6 must be related to Figure 3 and not to Figure 2, due to the transposition.)


5

bar 15 to 14 as well as bars 16-17 back to bar 10. The most important backtracking point is the bars 21-22, in which the final tonality of b-minor is presented by a half cadence. The b-minor chord in bar 22, the only six-note-chord in the entire beginning and marked sf, emphasises this tonal pillar. The beginning's cohesive harmonic structure is as easily understandable as Figure 8 when transposed one semitone higher, as shown above in Figure 3.

Figure 8. Analysis of the beginning of K. 475. (related to Figure 3)

In Figure 8, analysed is also how the deceptive cadences, introduced as D6

4 instead of D5 3 or D7

(i.e. I6 4 instead of V or V7, however its function is

dominant), are chained with the elision, namely from bar 9 to 10, and from 17 to 18. The voice-leading in the altered deceptive cadences is notable. Two voices stay without moving to another note while the bass moves up, so that alteration of the basic deceptive cadence does

not lose cohesion, i.e. from bar 9 to 10 (e /d

and g /f ), and from bar 17 to 18 (b and d).

The dotted and drawn through lines in Figure 8 show how musical events based on the simula-tion of resolutions, the deception instead of ful-filling of expectation and the compensation for the deception are organised (bars: 9-10, 17-18; 13-14; 25-26) as well as how Mozart unexpect-edly deviates from the usual topoi (bars: 5-6).

The circled signs under the tonal keys in Figure 8 depict key relationships. The modulation from c-minor to D-major is in fact from c-minor to E -major. Their relationship is not that of a major second (supertonic), but of a diminished third (relative major of c-minor altered down by a semitone). It implies a modulation from t to {{tp}g}P instead of to tP, deviating from the common modulation routine. See Figure 9 for the summarised relationships based on the trans-

posed notation in Figure 3:

Figure 9. Key relationships altered by semitone shifting: diminished third (t to {{tp}g}P) instead of minor third (t to tP).

The following harmonic summary shows subtle remote tonal relationships and opposite poles in the harmonic structure (related to Figure 8):

Figure 10. Harmonic frame of the beginning of K. 475. (related

to Figure 3)

With this frame in mind, it becomes clear why the modulation from bar 9 to 21 is often not recognised because the remote relationships and opposite poles are not perceptible with harmonic and syntactic knowledge alone. Like the rela-tionships among underlying morphemesvii caused by the manipulated topoi (broken chromatic fourth: bars 1-9), the listener/analyser must discover and arrange the contents based on contextual listening/reading. There are also simpler morphemes such as the successive use of the motif from bar 1 (bars: 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15), the sequence in bars 12-13 and 14-15 as well as the figure with de-misemiquavers in bars 18, 19, 20 and 21.

In the last section of K. 475, the beginning is recapitulated, however shortened. There is also a deviation from the chromatic fourth, this time with the omission of its third and fourth notes (c–b–a –g instead of c–b–b –a–a –g). Astonish-ingly, the last g carries the only obviously E -major chord in K. 475, however very subtly. Furthermore, the minor second intervals of the two omitted notes are used several times in the bridge to the last section as a Schmerzmotiv in preparation for the final emergence of the chromatic fourth in K. 475:

- Dotted line with arrow to rectangle: elision of […]

- Double dotted line with arrow: emergence of the expected chord

- Red line with arrow: chromatic fourth

- Red dotted line with arrow: broken chromatic fourth


6

Figure 11. Recapitulation of the beginning of K. 475.

Due to much deviation from topoi, many mo-ments of K. 475 do not sound typically like Mo-zart (this non-typicality is sharply contrasted with its coupled Piano Sonata in c-minor K. 457 (1784)). Sometimes it sounds more like Bee-thoven's middle-period work. This is caused by typological similarities: see the following exam-ple from the Appassionata Sonata (1807):

Figure 12. Substance kinship with Beethoven's Op. 57.

A type of Schicksalsmotiv is used in the second theme of the first movement of Mozart's Piano Concerto No. 25 in C-major K. 503 (1784-86). However, Beethoven used it more intensively than Mozart as shown above in op. 57. It appears also as a dominant idea in the 4th Piano Concerto in G-major op. 58 (1805-06) and in the 5th Symphony in c-minor op. 67 (1804-08). Con-versely, this figure has a stronger connotation to Beethoven's music.

Interpreting the ambiguous factors while playing

The substantial musical ambiguity caused by the sophisticated chains of Mozart's simple but in-triguing principle should be interpreted by the performer in order to express musical tension and relaxation convincingly. One possible solu-tion is the use of rubato, a flexible temporal aberration, in which a deception instead of the

fulfilling of expectation is employed. This can be reasonably realised at moments such as from bars 5 to 6, due to the unexpectedly broken line of chromatic fourths, or in the harmonic pro-gressions of bars 11 to 16 (especially from bars 12 to 13 and 14 to 15). Bar 17, due to its un-expected change to minor, is another good ex-ample. To compensate for the deception, the lost tempo should be regained as quickly as possible, e.g. in bars 10 and 18. A temporal acceleration is also possible in bar 19, because the simple and trite harmony is prolonged by a short figuration. By bar 20, however, the base tempo and tem-poral delay should again be considered because of one more enharmonic surprise and the preparation for the final tonal goal of the end of the beginning section in bar 21. Thus the long term temporal stability, based on the beginning's tempo, should be established just after bar 22, and not before.

How much and how often one deviates from the base tempo is, of course, to the discretion of the individual performer, according to his or her proportional estimation and improvisational taste.

Reviewing the facts from another point of view

To interdisciplinary work: understanding text

In the section hermeneutical ambiguity in the

beginning of Mozart's K. 475, various receptions are listed. The phenomenon of these receptions is not particular only to the music field, but exists whenever there is a relationship between the event producer and the recipient. The most common case is the communication through written or spoken language. Let's observe the following lines:

So long as he on earth doth live, So long 'tis not forbidden thee.

From the citation, the reader can understand the syntax, the semantics of each single word except three pronouns (he, 't and thee), and so the approximate meaning of the cited sentence. From this information, and perhaps a back-ground in literature, one can guess the era, genre and citation. However, the reader, who reads only the sentence outside of its context, might not understand in which context it occurs, since the three pronouns, the speaker to thee, and the situation are not identified. If the citation stands alone like above, there must be an ade-quate context bridging it with others, e.g., an explanation for grammar in 18th century English literature, English orthography in the 18th cen-tury or something else. Isolated from the source


7

context, the reader is left with an expectation of further information and the intentions of the author. Let's see the next sentence from the source:

Man still must err, while he doth strive.

The sentences are an extract from the 'Prologue in Heaven' from Goethe's Faust I (1806), trans-lated by Taylor (1870-71). If one knows the famous theatrical scene, the quotes and all the pronouns, even background information can quickly be identified. If not, the reader would still be at a loss, and would have to read the scene from the beginning (at least by skimming) to make sense of it.

Syntax alone cannot stand as a complete text by itself, since it is only an apparatus for surface connection (the grammar). In order to get the meaning of the citation, the speaker (the Lord) and listener (Mephistopheles) in the situation (getting the admission to tempt Faust) must be identified and the concepts and relationships must be configured.

There can be no communication without a speaker and listener. The speaker has her or his intention, the listener her or his attitude, while the communication itself takes place in a par-ticular situation.

Furthermore, the utterances, intentions and situation can refer to yet other ones: for the reader with some knowledge of the Bible or the Koran, the following passage from the Book of Job may spring to mind:

And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD. (Job 1:12 from King James Version)

There is communication between Goethe (the libretto producer of Faust), theatre staffs and players (the intermediate recipients of the li-bretto and simultaneously the producers of the play), the audience and reader (the last recipient of Faust) and finally between the author and reader of this article. Clearly, there are more facets to comprehensive understanding than merely the relationship between producer and recipient.

Hence, the understanding of the surface connec-tion alone cannot be considered to be adequate enough to understand a sentence or a literary quote. A complete understanding of a text in context can be represented by the following sequence (Rickheit et al., 2002: 93-112):

1. Sensory perception - Listening - Reading

2. Syntactic reception - Often at first syntax then semantic

- Often interactive between them

3. Semantic reception - Conceptual reception - Referential process - Coherence process - Inference process

4. Pragmatic reception - Situation - Individual Factors

The communicative aspects described above come from the perspective of text linguistics while the text reception process from the per-spective of psycholinguistics. Concerning the thoughts introduced at the beginning of this article, there has been much notable discussion since the emergence of text linguistics.

Textuality from the text linguistic perspective

Text linguistics is yet a young discipline, hav-ing established itself only in the 1960s. It searches for structural and formal variants of textual entirety, for which separate descriptive models must be developed beyond the known apparatus of syntax (Heinemann & Viehweger, 1991: 15-16). Starting from structuralist ap-proaches and from a kind of text grammar in the sense of an extended sentence grammar, mod-ern text linguistics understands mostly the defi-nition of text not as a "sequence of sentences, thus a unit of the language system" but as "a communicative unit" with the inclusion of prag-matic aspects (Bußmann, 1990).

Textualityviii has seven standards that a se-

quence of sentences must meet in order to qualify as a text. The seven standards define and create the form of behaviour identifiable as tex-tual communication. If they are not met, that form of behaviour will break down:

Text is used in linguistics to refer to any passage, spoken or written and of whatever length, that forms a unified whole. A TEXT will be defined as a COMMUNICATIVE

OCCURRENCE which meets seven standards of TEXTUALITY.

Textuality can be summarized thus:

• Text-centred notions: designating operations di-rected at the text material.

1. COHESION: the ways in which the components of the SURFACE TEXT, i.e. the actual words we hear or see, are mutually connected within a sequence.

2. COHERENCE: the ways in which the components of the TEXTUAL WORLD, i.e., the configuration of CONCEPTS and RELATIONS which underlie the surface text, are mutually accessible and relevant.

• User-centred notions: being brought to bear on the activity of textual communication at large, both by producers and by receivers.

3. INTENTIONALITY: the text producer's attitude that


8

the set of occurrences should constitute a cohesive and coherent text instrumental in fulfilling the pro-ducer's intentions.

4. ACCEPTABILITY: the text receiver's attitude that the set of occurrences should constitute a cohesive and coherent text having some use or relevance for the receiver. This attitude is responsive to such factors as text type, social or cultural setting, and the de-sirability of goals.

5. INFORMATIVITY: the extent to which the occur-rences of the presented text are expected vs. un-expected or known vs. unknown/certain.

6. SITUATIONALITY: the factors which make a text RELEVANT to a SITUATION of occurrence. […], the sense and use of the text are decided via the situation.

7. INTERTEXTUALITY: the factors which make the utilization of one text dependent upon knowledge of one or more previously encountered texts, a double entendre.

Interdisciplinary suitability

Interdisciplinarity in text linguistics & tex-

tuality is an issue that has already been pointed out by text linguists.

All communicative fields can be examined by the methods of text linguistics.

(M. & W. Heinemann & W., 2002: 246)

We realized that textuality is not just a linguistic prop-erty or feature or a set of these, but a multiple mode of connectedness activated wherever communicative events occur. (Beaugrande, 1997: 61)

The problems involved in integrating text linguis-tics into music seem to lie with the question of whether a composition can be regarded as a text, a matter text linguistics has not yet approached.

Music as Text has been, however, suggested by musicologists.ix Since texts have been regarded as results of mental processes and cognitive principles (Beaugrande, 1981: 32-33)x and the character of a given text is accepted to be an unresolved and open problem (Heinemann & Viehweger, 1991: 13), there should be no fric-tion in accepting musical oeuvre as a text.xi

Interdisciplinary advantage

The seven standards are not new concepts

in the music field; only some of the termi-

nology is unfamiliar. There is also no super

ordinate concept for these terms in music. Terms like cohesion, coherence and intertextual-ity have already been used. Above all, coherence is an important factor in Schoenberg's compre-hensibility,xii and in Schoenberg's thought, cohe-sion seems to entirely serve coherence. The terms cohesion and coherence can be used more con-cretely to describe comprehensibility. The other terms are not so familiar, but their meanings are well known in the music field. A super ordinate

concept above these terms could be convenient indeed. Many methodological problems might be solved more easily: with the super ordinate con-cept 'textuality', one can unfold the seven stan-dards organically.

The introduction of the seven standards of

text linguistics extended the scope of re-

search from sentence-sequence unit to a

communicative unit as a complete text. Even if the music field experienced a similar extension, there has been much analysis which shows results only from particular analytical methods, regardless of the composers' original intensions. The cause of this would be the lack of systematised methods. Part of the systematisa-tion process would involve understanding com-position not only as a construction of composi-tional techniques, but also as a complex of mu-sical expression by a composer in history.

An interdisciplinary solution

In order to present the appropriateness and usefulness of an analysis based on the textuality in music, the result of a contextual analysis of the beginning of K. 475 will be presented within the structure of the seven standardsxiii:

• Text-centred notions: • Cohesion: all the practices of connecting units and

patterns for which the Lexicogrammar provides the theory.

- Harmonic relationship and voice-leading.

• Coherence: the means for connecting meanings and concepts.

- Relationships among underlying morphemes caused by the manipulated topoi. - Subtle remote tonal relationship. - Opposite poles in the harmonic structure.

• User-centred notions: • Intentionality: the conditions under which the

text producer intends to perform an event as a text.

(Mozart's intention) - The manipulation and deviation from the topoi of Mozart's time.

- Illogical enharmonic notation. - Unexpectedly broken line of 'chromatic fourth'. - Unusual deceptive cadences from D6

4 instead of D5

3 or D7 (I6 4 instead of V or V7).

- Modulation from t to {{tp}g}P instead of to tP. - More complicated garden path type phrases.

• Acceptability: the conditions under which the text receiver accepts the event as a text. (Reception attitude of listeners, musicologists and music theorists)

- Various individual interests rather than the understanding of cohesion and coherence.

• Broader context notions: • Situationality: the connections between the text

and the context of a given situation.


9

- The title Fantasy and its genre. - The background to the origin of K. 475: unusual post annexation to Sonata K. 457. - Topoi of Mozart's time.

• Informativity: the degrees to which the text or some of its aspects are unexpected, interesting, or stimulating.

- The musical events based on the simulation of resolutions, the deception instead of fulfilling of expectation and the compensation for the de-ception. - Unexpected deviation from usual topoi. - Elision.

• Intertextuality: connections between current and previously experienced texts.

- Substance kinships between the morphemes of K. 475 and the topoi of Mozart's time. - Typological similarities between K. 475, K. 503 and Beethoven's op. 57, op. 58 and op. 67.

As shown above, textuality offers a crystallised view of this article's analysis result of K. 475, i.e. of the composition itself (cohesion, coherence), Mozart's intentions and reception attitude (in-tentionality, acceptability) and extended context including historical background of the fantasy genre in Mozart's time (situationality, informa-tivity, intertextuality). The principle of textuality might be able to explain the causes of some hermeneutic arguments in that it draws attention to the attitudes of the recipients and the various interests in their approaches that conflict with contextual reading; the problem does not lie with the cohesion and coherence of K. 475.

Implications

Music in practice requires not only instrumental skill and intuition, but also a deep understanding of the oeuvres, i.e. grasping the musical flows achieved with contextual understanding. As shown in the Mozart's K. 475, a contextual un-derstanding can inspire at least temporal inter-pretational ideas, since each phrase achieves tension and relaxation related to deception and expectation. The contextual understanding of an oeuvre is an important base for performance.

Music education could be enriched by inte-grating textuality. Each standard can be used to explain compositional aspects in composi-tional/theoretical lessons. Particularly, intertex-tuality can be useful in the sense of a kind of applied style study: students can compare some works with similar ideas as in the cases of Mo-zart/Beethoven and perceive how diversely that similar musical idea can be unfolded. It inspires creativity more than the Stilkopie (model com-position).

The musicological/music theoretical inter-

disciplinary implications are similar to those

of text linguistics. Even though the seven stan-dards are partially known in the music field, they have not yet been comprehensively studied. The adaptation primarily implies a systematizing of the understanding of musical oeuvre not only from a structural point of view, but also within a contextual and historical framework. Secondly, a concise and economical explanation of a musical phenomenon often reveals itself to be the better one (novacula Occami). In the case of Mozart's K. 475, the adoption of textuality proves to be quite useful in explaining the highly complex tricks and surprises. Textuality in music provides an Oc-cam's Razor. It will be beneficial to the explana-tion of complicated musical constructions, the exchange of knowledge in composition, interpre-tation, research among musicians and musicolo-gists and to educational purposes in general.

Summary

In order to understand the beginning of Mozart's Fantasy K. 475, the basic premise is listen-ing/reading in context and not any particular analytical apparatus. The analytical methods applied in this article, e.g. enharmonic rewriting, transposition, synoptical representations, an extension into linguistics, hermeneutic investi-gation etc. arise only for the communication of the realisations gained through contextual lis-tening/reading. Generally speaking, musicolo-gists/music theorists and composers have enough expert knowledge of topoi and harmonic theory – so why is it not easy to shed light on Mozart's intentions in K. 475? As shown, the answer lies in the attitude of former analyses, i.e. stronger individual interest rather than con-textual listening/reading including text-centred aspects and historical background: a producer's intention can be ascertained only by the com-prehension of the occurred events and their respective backgrounds. There was, however, little persistence in attempting to understand the full technical compositional substance (almost exclusively harmonic), while simultaneously taking into account the piece's position in his-tory. In this article, the last section of K. 475 and the bridge into it have also been regarded, for they are needed in understanding the beginning. The clue to appreciating an oeuvre is a contex-tual approach in compositional and historical aspects. Textuality only serves the process of understanding effectively when one tries to ap-preciate an oeuvre in its complete context.

What is the raison d'être for analysis? Musical oeuvres are important pieces of artistic thought and expression in the context of social history.


10

Analysis of such work should serve in helping to appreciate it by overcoming our often limited capacities for memory and hearing.

Feedback

We would be pleased to receive any critique, further suggestions or feedback concerning this article. Please e-mail me at:

[email protected]

Acknowledgments. As the first author, I am very grateful to the other authors, to Mrs. Prof. Dr. Gesine Schröder for advising and cooperation, to Mr. Prof. Dr. Claus-Steffen Mahnkopf for advising and patronage through the Fellowship at Univer-sity of Music and Theatre Leipzig, and to Mrs. Dr. Mun and Kian for the friendly cooperation.

References

Auner, J. (2003). A Schoenberg Reader: Documents of a Life. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.

Beaugrande, R. de, & Dressler, W. U. (1981). Intro-duction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman.

Beaugrande, R. de (1997). New Foundations for a Science of Text and Discourse: Cognition, communication, and the freedom if access to knowledge and society. Norwood (N.J.): Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Beaugrande, R. de (2004). A new introduction to the study of text and discourse: Discursivism and Ecologism. http://www.beaugrande.com

Bußmann, H. (1990). Lexikon der Sprachwissenschaft. Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner Verlag.

Danuser, A. & Plebuch, T. (Eds.) (1993). Musik als Text: Bericht über den internationalen Kongreß der Gesellschaft für Musikforschung Freiburg im Breisgaus 1993, Bd. I & II. Kassel: Bärenreiter.

Garman, M. (1990). Psycholinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gruhn, W. (1993). Textualität der Musik und Textua-lität des Hörens von Musik. In: Danuser, A. & Plebuch, T. (Eds.) (1993). Musik als Text Bd. II. pp. 1-6

Heinemann, M., & Heinemann, W. (2002). Grundlagen der Textlinguistik. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Heinemann, W., & Viehweger, D. (1991). Textlinguis-tik. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Heringer, H.-J. (1983). Criteria of understanding and understandability. In: Rickheit, G. & Bock, M. (Eds.) Psycholinguistic Studies in Language Processing. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 259-265

Komlós, Katalin (1992). Fantasia and sonata K. 475/ 457 in contemporary context. In: Angermüller, R., Berke, D., Hofmann, U. & Rehm W. (Eds.) Mozart-Jahrbuch 1991 Teilband 2. Kassel: Bä-renreiter.

Kreyszig, Walter Kurt (1993). Der Begriff der Fantasie bei Mozart und dessen Beeinflussung durch Sonate, Praeludium und Toccata: Zur Wech-selbeziehung zwischen Satztechnik und Gattung

in der c-Moll-Fantasie KV 475. In: Fuchs, I. (Ed.) Internationaler Musikwissenschaftlicher Kongreß zum Mozartjahr 1991 Baden-Wien, Band II. Tutzing: Hans Schneider. pp. 693-715

Mahnkopf, C.-S. (1994). Gestalt und Stil: Arnold Schönbergs Erste Kammersymphonie und ihr Umfeld. Kassel: Bärenreiter.

Mauser, S. (1993). Text und Rezeption. In: Danuser, A. & Plebuch, T. (Eds.) (1993) Musik als Text Bd. I. pp. 67-68.

Polth, M. (2006). Tonalität der Tonfelder: Anmerkun-gen zu Bernhard Haas (2004), Die neue Tona-lität von Schubert bis Webern. Hören und Ana-lysieren nach Albert Simon, Wilhelmshaven: Noetzel. In: Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Mu-siktheorie 06/1. http://www.gmth.de/zeitschrift/artikel/0083/0083

Raff, G. (2002). »Ausweichungen« als Kunstmittel : Zu den Tonarten in W.A. Mozarts c-Moll-Fantasie KV 475. In: Schmid, M. H. (Ed.) Mozart Studien Bd. 11. Tutzing: Hans Schneider. pp. 165-187.

Rickheit, G., Sichelschmidt, L. & Strohner, H. (2002). Psycholinguistik. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.

Williams, P. (1991). Some thoughts on Mozart's use of the chromatic fourth. In: Todd, R. L. & Williams P. (Eds.) Perspectives on Mozart Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 204-227.

i Cited from Cratylus (ca. 393-388 B.C.), edited by the author based on the English translation of Benjamin Jowett. ii Usually the beginning is understood to be bars 1-25. This article, however, is treated until bar 26, including the reca-pitulated part of the beginning in order to understand it as an organic subordinate part of the whole piece. iii There are many articles from diverse perspectives (also concerning harmonic structural aspects, which are not treated in this article). For detailed references before 1992 on/about K. 475, see Kreyszig (1993). See also Komlós (1992). iv Williams might mean until bar 21. He defines no bar num-ber, but "in the opening harmonies […] over its opening bars". v Garman (1990: 315). vi For details on its criteria, see Heringer, H.-J. (1983). vii Morpheme is comprised of motive, theme, melody and phrase (Mahnkopf, 1994: 93). viii Extracts from Beaugrande & Dressler (1981) pp. 3-10. ix See Danuser, A. & Plebuch, T. (Eds.) (1993). x Cited from Heinemann, M., & Heinemann, W. (2002: 110). xi For some definitions of music as text, see:

Gruhn, W. (1993) and Mauser, S. (1993). xii See the following extracts from Schoenberg's sketch for Theory of Coherence:

"Coherence is based on repetition […] Comprehensibility is a requirement of those in need of communication. […] The limits of comprehensibility are not the limits of coherence, which can be present even where comprehensibility has ceased. […] Understanding = Recognition of Similarity".

– Cited from Auner (2003:142) xiii The supplementary description for each standard is quoted from Beaugrande (2004).