Society for Music Theory

When Functions Collide: Aspects of Plural Function in Chromatic Music

Author(s): Kevin J. Swinden
Source: Music Theory Spectrum, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Autumn, 2005), pp. 249-282
Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society for Music Theory
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4499838
Accessed: 15/11/2009 22:56

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of California Press and Society for Music Theory are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Music Theory Spectrum.

http://www.jstor.org
 When Functions Collide:Aspects of Plural Function
in ChromaticMusic
KEVIN J. SWINDEN

Daniel Harrison's 1994 study, Harmonic Function in Chromatic Music, questions the traditional
mapping of chords onto function, and instead suggests that scale steps embody the source of har-
monic function. His reformulation creates a new one-to-one mapping of scale steps onto harmonic
function, which may be, at times, problematic. This article examines aspects of Harrison's theory
and advancesa differentmechanismforthe evaluationof harmonicfunctionbasedon the Tonnetz.
It examinesa particularset of chromaticharmoniesthat displaypluralfunction,which may be or-
ganizedaccordingto a genusand speciesmode of classification.

INTRODUCTION tionship between G4 minor and E minor at once suspends

The study of nineteenth century harmony abounds with
rich chords and striking relationships. Sadly, many of these
elude clear understanding. Our existing theories, though ele-
gant and expressive, have not penetrated the moments in
chromatic music about which we most care. The best-known
theories give a tidy and systematic picture of diatonic har-
mony, but often finesse so many of these wonderful chords as
exceptions to their harmonic principles, or simply fail to ex-
plore fully the functional effect of these chords. Such treat-
ment, however, highlights shortcomings of theories that can-
not explain such configurations within their systems of rules
and structures. We would be well served to search for a mode
of understanding that values these moments for what they
are, rather than for being warped versions of something else.
Consider Wagner's "Tarnhelm" motive from scene three
of Das Rheingold, shown in Example 1(a). The repetition of
the G#-minor triad invites us to hear this chord as a tempo-
rary tonic, alternating with an E-minor triad whose relation-
ship to this tonic is far from clear. The chromatic-third rela-
tonality, and yet the passage somehow holds together. At
the end of the passage cited, the phrase comes to rest on
B major, recasting E minor as the new tonic of the modulat-
ing phrase.1
What is so spectacular about the alternation of E minor
and G# minor? Such an uncommon progression may well
attract attention, but if we want to know how it works, the
answer lies in the particular contrapuntal and functional
association between the chromatically-related G#-minor and
E-minor triads.
The essential counterpoint that governs the G# minor/
E minor alternation is fairly straightforward. The upper
I The passagecited follows a fermataover a rest that was precededby a
half-cadencein C major.The mysteryof the "Tarnhelm" motive is cer-
tainly intensifiedby the relationshipof the G#-minortriad following so
closely on the heels of V of C major,and a fullerstudy of the passage
would need to considerthe harmonicrelationshipin this largercontext.
For presentpurposes,I am concernedwith the verylocal tonicity of G#
minor within the key scheme of descending major thirds (from C,
throughG# minor,to E at the end of the passagecited).

249
 250 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
(a) Wagner,Der Ring des Nibelungen, "Tarnhelm"motive.
(b) Wagner,Der Ring des Nibelungen, "Tarnhelm"voice leading.
EXAMPLE I
voice, 5, is embellished with an upper neighbor, ?b; the lower
voice begins on G# (i) and moves in chromatic contrary mo-
tion through a lower neighbor G?.2 Against this counter-
point, a stationary B? stabilizes the progression. Finally, E? is
added to the bass, presumably to add color and emphasis,
thus harmonizing the first inversion triad with its own root.
While this explanation delineates the contrapuntal associa-
tion of the two chords, it does not adequately address their
functional relationship.3 If the E-minor triad were merely a
2 As modal mixture is a fundamental principle of chromatic harmony,
throughout the article all scale-step numbers and Roman numerals are
based on a fixed notation in relation to the tonic pitch, regardless of
modality. That is, in relation to A major-minor, F and an F-major triad
are notated as k6 and VI respectively. The modality of a local key area
may be inferred by the quality of the tonic chord (I or i) should the
reader wish to take special note of instances of mixture.
3 Other authors have considered this passage from the perspective of
transformational theories (Lewin 1992) and mediant relations in the
linear phenomenon embellishing G# minor, there would be
no need to add an emphasizing bass note E? to the Klang.
There is something more to be said about this progression.
Functionally, there are competing elements within the
progression. If one overlooks the E? in the bass for a mo-
ment, the counterpoint might suggest that G? is a clever
disguise for Fx, the leading tone. In this situation, the con-
trapuntal motion would be governed by a tonic 1 and 5 ex-
panding outward to a Dominant-functioning 7 and b6. The
BTwould be an inner-voice pedal tone, stabilizing the func-
tion of the passage in the orbit of G# minor, as shown in
Example 1(b). This interpretation grows out of the condition
already agreed upon that E minor is a chord that is subordi-
nate to-and in some way prolongs-G# minor. With re-
spect to the presumed Tonic, 7 and kb are dissonant neigh-
bors. But there is that slippery k6 in the bass. A lesser
composer might well have left us this hypothetical version
with 7 in the bass, or perhaps have put 5 in the bass to
emphasize the Dominant function of the middle chord.
Wagner, instead, created an ambiguity by placing E? in the
bass, leaving a plagal bass line to support an otherwise au-
thentic counterpoint, and changing the effect of the har-
mony altogether.
What I find fascinating is the existence of an entire fam-
ily of chords in the literature that have common elements
and functional behaviors, lending themselves to a genus-
and-species mode of organization. In this paper, I provide a
way of thinking that groups many of these chords into a
larger network of relations. This essay explores collisions of
context of a theory based on common-tone voice leading (Kopp 2002,
182f). Harmony texts typically describe this relationship as a chro-
matic mediant relation or "Coloristic Chord Succession" (Kostka and
Payne 1995) without further comment on the harmonic function that
may be present in the progression. Indeed, Kostka and Payne 1995,
439-40 go so far as to advise the student to abandon any attempt at in-
terpretive analysis altogether in favor of simply labeling the chords with
a letter-name root and chord quality.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION
Subdominant and Dominant functional elements. Part I de-
velops a theoretical apparatus; Part II considers specific in-
stances of this phenomenon in various guises.
I. THEORIES OF HARMONIC FUNCTION AND PROLONGATION
Many theorists have struggled with the difference be-
tween diatonic and chromatic tonality, with varying degrees
of success. Most Schenkerians address music of the late
nineteenth century with little apology, while Schenker's de-
tractors cite his own inability to deal adequately with the
repertoire.4 My initial position is that Schenker's contribu-
tions are more than valuable-indeed, it is essential to ad-
dress his contributions regarding the interaction of harmony
and counterpoint. By the same token, however, Schenker's
system inadequately addresses the slippery issues of har-
monic function in the music of the late-nineteenth century.
To rehearse these arguments at this late date would serve lit-
tle use. Further, under the nouveau regime of functional
analysis initiated by Harrison 1994, a critique of Schenker
on these grounds becomes inappropriate. However, I believe
it is neither necessary nor appropriate to discard many of
Schenker's most important contributions. My intent is not to
4 Daniel Harrison writes: "Schenker's failure to deal with Reger's op. 81
is emblematic of a general failure to understand the harmonic structures
and procedures of chromatic music, or at least to understand them with
the same sensitivity that can be brought to the analysis of common-
practice and atonal musics. [...] We cannot repay this debt with
Schenker's coin or with coins stamped from his bullion; Schenker's own
experience is warning enough that his currency is not convertible"
(Harrison 1994, 5). In a similar spirit, David Kopp writes: "Most of our
prevailing analytic models and methods, predicated on eighteenth-
century practice, have traditionally explained chromatic music as the
elaboration of diatonic structures. The music's frequent lack of confor-
mity with these models has often been interpreted as a sign of weakness
or inferiority in the music itself, rather than due to any inappropriate-
ness of the model" (Kopp 2002, 1).
IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 251
revise, rewrite, or extend Schenker'stheory,5but only to in-
vestigate harmonic function in chromatic music with sensi-
tivity to his ideas.
Some authors propose that the nineteenth century repre-
sents a second harmonic practice, governed not so much by
traditional rules of diatonic harmony and counterpoint, but
by interactions and amalgams of scales (including the possi-
bility that a chromatic scale might serve the role once occu-
pied by diatonic scales), symmetric divisions of the octave,
models of directional tonality, or dual-tonic structures.6
These bipartite divisions imply that chromatic music cannot
be considered an extension of diatonic, but rather, must be
wholly separate. By extension, theories and methodologies
appropriateto the earlier first practice need to be retooled or
replacedto address this new way of composing.
Theories of harmonic function, on the other hand, hold
that diatonic and chromatic harmony may display different
idioms and customs, but are bound together by a common
functional basis. Some of the most important work in this
areahas come from theories of CharlesJ. Smith (Smith 1981
and 1986) and Daniel Harrison (Harrison 1994 and 1995),
both of whom rely to some extent on Riemannian notions
informed by a host of other historical contemporaries. Both
5 Blasius 1996 providesan excellentbackgroundto understandingwhy
such a courseis ill advised.
6 GregoryProctorwrites:"thereis not a single 'commonpractice'extend-
ing from the early seventeenthcenturythrough the end of the nine-
teenth century.Rather,the era can be dividedinto two large, overlap-
ping style systems,herein referredto as: classicaldiatonic tonality, and
nineteenth centurychromatictonality."(Proctor1978, iii). The essen-
tial featurethat distinguishesthese two tonal languagesis the underly-
ing scale on which each is based:the diatoniclanguage is grounded in
the traditionalmajor-minorsystem,while the chromatic/enharmonic
language is based on the 12-note, equal-temperedchromatic scale.
Other representativeexamplesof these approachesto the nineteenth
century as a second practice may be found, among other places, in
Benjamin 1975, Krebs 1981 and 1991, Stein 1985, Kinderman and
Krebs,1996.
 252 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
Hugo Riemann and Arnold Schoenberg believed that the
differentiation between diatonic and chromatic music was a
matter of style, rather than substance; neither recognized a
strict division between the two styles. Unfortunately,neither
Schoenberg nor Riemann developed an analytic methodol-
ogy sophisticated enough to present detailed analyticalpic-
tures of both vertical and linear dimensions. Without a sys-
tem that allows the linear representation of harmony, any
analytical theory is impractical,and ignores what is perhaps
Schenker's most significant contribution.7
In an effort to capture the powerful syntactic model of
a theory of harmonic function while also capturing the
linear-harmonic musical aspects as afforded by a Stufen-
theorie,I adopt a Riemannian theoretical model: a harmonic-
function/bass-line system following lines developed by
Charles J. Smith, and further informed by Harrison's re-
newal of harmonic function. The analytic system holds to
the tenet that just as surface voice-leading events may pro-
long a harmony (in the Schenkerian sense of the term), lin-
ear events may also be brought into the service of harmonic
function. The Smith/Harrison distinction regardsthe nature
of harmonic function itself. Smith's function is more akin to
7 As an analytical system, it is on this point where Harrison 1994 may
fall short. Harrison's three methods of analysis (segmental, linking, and
accumulative) generalize functional moments and points of functional
discharge according to segmentations based on the perception of an
imaginative listener. What Harrison gains in analytic flexibility, he sac-
rifices in analytic rigor and the more scientific notions of experimental
repeatability. Harrison never claims to provide a sophisticated system of
analysis; rather, he values the simplicity of his analytic notation
(Harrison 1994, 127). As a replacement for traditional models of coun-
terpoint, Harrison's new counterpoint weighs the functional discharge
of several individual melodic lines; these lines don't so much interact as
compete for functional presence. From the outset, he denies both the ap-
plicability of Schenker's system to this music as well as attempts at revi-
sionism (see note 1, above). For arguments that critique Harrison from
a Schenkerian perspective, see Whittall 1995. Despite this shortfall,
however, Harrison casts a gauntlet that no scholar of harmonic function
can afford to ignore.
Schenker's harmony--it is a property of a chord, part of
what a chord is. Harrison'sfunction is an action-it is some-
thing that a chord does.Thus we are not speaking of func-
tional prolongation, per se, but rather, of functional persis-
tence, despite intervening voice leading activity.Thus, the
analytic notation employed is designed to draw attention to
functional connections between chords and acrosspassages.
The analytic notation used modifies Smith's approach
(Smith 1981 and 1986). It is a hierarchicalnotation designed
to privilege the prolongation of harmonic function rather
than a specific harmony per se. At the layer closest to the
musical surface open noteheads indicate chord tones;
filled-in noteheads indicate non-chord tones; and barlines
separate discrete harmonies (often trivial harmonies). The
structuralouter-voice counterpoint is identified with stems,
while slurs relate the voice leading of non-chord tones to the
chord tones they embellish. Subsequent layers re-interpret
harmonies as embellishing chords that prolong or connect
regions governedby a particularharmonic function, showing
the interactionof harmony and counterpoint. On deeperlay-
ers, barlines separate functional regions rather than chords;
the deeper one goes into the hierarchy, the closer one
approachesa Schenkerianbackground, showing a very large
expanse of Tonic prolongation. While a more orthodox
Schenkerian notation could be used for this purpose, it
would not sufficiently highlight the aspects of harmonic
function that I discuss. In the interest of keeping the exam-
ples as compact as possible, I have compressed the analytic
layers closest to the foreground to functional symbols ap-
plied to the music itself, and presented a reasonablemiddle-
ground linear analysisto support the discussion.
DETERMINING HARMONIC FUNCTION
Small-scale and large-scale harmonic structuresare classi-
fied by harmonic function and bass line context. Categories
of harmonic function identify chords in terms of their rela-
tionships within familiar diatonic contexts, and provide the
 ASPECTS OF PLURALFUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC
basis for a harmonic syntax.8 Principally,authentic progres-
sions involve directed motion from Tonic (T) to Dominant
(D) regions and typically return to Tonic; these categories
should requirelittle defense at this point. The third signifi-
cant category betrays the fact that harmonic function cannot
be defined by pitch-class identity alone, even in the simplest
diatonic contexts. While some authors prefer to consider all
IV chords as Dominant-Preparation (DP), others preferthe
label Subdominant (S). The former betrays a bias for au-
thentic models of harmonic progression, relegating plagal
models as distinctly secondary;this seems to follow Classical
diatonic practice, and is closely aligned with Schenkerianas-
sumptions. The latter implies that plagal progressionslie on
equal ground with authentic systems as understood in a
Riemannian dualist model.10In this study,context shall dif-
ferentiate DP function from S function; when speaking in
general terms about the sonorities involved, I shall use the
term "Subdominant."
In addition to reckoning the relationship of a Klang to a
tonic pitch, the second principal functional determinantis a
chord's context. If we privilege the status of bass scale steps,
we can categorize chords according to their linear configura-
tions.11 Following Harrison's bold lead (Harrison 1994), I
shall abandon Roman numeral designations for all but the
most straightforward harmonies.12The occasional Roman
numerals that are mentioned are provided only to aid the
All functionalcategoriesarecapitalized,to distinguishthe termDomi-
8
nant (the functionalcategory)from dominant(the V triad),andTonic
(the category)from tonic (the chord),etc. Other functionaldescriptors
that do not sharetheir name with a chord are likewisecapitalizedfor
the sakeof consistency.
9 The termDominant-Preparation was firstused in Forte1979;the term
Predominantwould serveequallywell in this regard.
io This positionis well defendedin Harrison1994.
ii The importanceof bass scale steps when reckoningharmonicfunction
is too often undervaluedin treatiseson functionalharmony,with Smith
1981 and 1986 and Harrison1994 providingnotableexceptions.
12 Smith 2003 also presentsthis challenge,but does offeran alternative.
253
reader;they are neither meant to convey functional meaning,
nor to suggest a privileged status for the indicated root. In-
escapably,Roman numerals remain the linguafranca of our
discipline, even if through them we retain biases that may
need to be discarded when considering highly chromatic
music.
Defining a single functional affiliation for each of the
diatonic chords is often problematic, enough so to prompt
Harrison to abandon the effort altogether. In a traditional
conception of harmonic function, we needed to rely on
definitions of harmonicfunction ascribedto a predefined, "ac-
ceptable"pitch-class collection (Akkord).In contrast, Harrison
thoroughly works out a theory in which the individual scale
steps themselves bear the burden of expressing functionality
(Harrison 1994). This theory is most promising, and indeed
renews the notion of harmonicfunction in a powerful way. For
readersnot well versed with Harrison'stheory, a brief synop-
sis is providedin the appendix to this article.13
Because harmonic function resides in the constituents of
chords, we are given a tool with which to deconstruct any
sonority (Klang) and to reckon its harmonic function care-
fully. The argument is predicated on the proposition that
each primary scale step (with its own orbit of governance)
stands in a unique relation to its Tonic. More recently, how-
ever, conclusions in Harrison 2002 seem to challenge this
position. Harrison 2002 builds a case to support the "uncon-
formed Tonnetz"as a model for key relations-a Tonnetz
that is not conceived as a closed system in equal tempera-
ment (as on a torus), but rather one that may extend infi-
nitely in every direction, conceived in just intonation.14
13 Rifkin 2004 applied Harrison's theory in a promising way. Rifkin heeds
the call of Burkhart 1978, that a recurrence of a structural motive must
be presented in a similar or parallel functional context, but reckons that
function according to Harrison's theory. In this manner, Rifkin presents
a compelling theory of motivic/functional analysis in the music of
Sergei Prokofiev.
14 It is widely accepted that the elements of the Tonnetz may stand for
pitch relations or key relations. Pragmatically, of course, one does not
254 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
Harrison 2002 concludes that when a composer takes a jour-
ney through keys on the grid, let us say, moves from one C
on the grid to a different C on the grid, these two Cs are not
the same.That is to say,the composer has ended in a different
place; enharmonically equivalent pitches on the grid, or in-
deed any recurrencesof the same pitch class, do not have the
same meaning. In a way, Harrison broadens the scope of di-
rectional tonality; now, a piece may begin and end in the
same key,yet still have directionalproperties.
Harrison 2002 tacitly contains the correction to what I
see as the basic errorof Harrison 1994. On the unconformed
Tonnetz (Example 2, centered on a C major tonic triad), the
4 primitive for S function is not the same 4 that extends the
Dominant triad to a seventh chord. These two degrees stand
in a different relation to the original Tonic, contrary to the
suggestion in Harrison 1994, which asserts that there is only
a single 4 in relation to the Tonic, and that it is a primitive of
S function. The unconformed Tonnetzreconciles the percep-
tual difficulty I have with Harrison's formulation of har-
monic function. Sometimes 4 expresses Subdominant func-
tion, and sometimes it expresses Dominant function. The
same point can be made about 2: sometimes 2 is an amplifier
for the Dominant and sometimes 2 comes about through an
extension in the Subdominant direction. Likewise the sub-
mediants: to my ear, k6 is perceived differently when it ap-
pears in iv and when it appearsas the seventh of vii .
This begs a new question. How do we know which 4 we
are looking at on the score?Allow me to present a reading of
the major-minor system on the unconformed Tonnetz that
remains faithful to a dualist mode of theorizing. For ease of
reading, I shall work with the C major-minor complex. In
Example 3, the shaded area representsthe composite scale of
the major-minor system as generated by the primary triads.
In this figure, motions toward the West represent moves
meander into the realm of theoretic key signatures and expect that the
music shall not be adjusted for sensibility's sake.
toward the Subdominant side (T to S, D to T) and motions
toward the East represent moves toward the Dominant side
(S to T, T to D). The shaded area (the major-minor system)
is sufficient to account for the three primary triads and the
functionally slippery mediants and submediants as contigu-
ous lozenges on the Tonnetz. Each triad quality has a dis-
tinctive shape: an upward pointing triangle is a major triad
and a downward pointing triangle is a minor triad. Less
common, mixed structures are observed on the diagonals
(Ak-C-E, A-C-EB, Ek-G-B, and E-G-Bk). The main
East-West axis contains the bases and associatesof the three
primary functions, and in the offset rows to its North and
South, we find the functional agents. This region forms the
main province of the key. The rows that are twice removed
from the main East-West axis contain the elements of more
distant modulations, and the strong tendency for a key to
dissolve.The pitches located in these regions point to Tonics
on a differentEast-West axis than our home key, even if they
point to a different location of the same tonic (a different C).
Likewise, should one stray too far East or West, one might
easily get caught in another tonal gravity.However, the flexi-
bility along the main East-West axis is somewhat greater,
allowing for D ofD and S of S regions to maintain an affilia-
tion (if more remote) to the original key.
As essential seventh chords became fundamental har-
monies, we may look to this Tonnetz to stretch the basic
major-minor system. The first stretching element would be
to consider the seventh of V7. Projected from the dominant
triad, we stretch the system to include the F found on the
Dominant side of C. If we were to mirrorthis action on the
Tonnetz,we would stretch the system Westward, invoking
the Riemannian practice of generating a minor triad down-
ward from its dual root (its fifth, in traditional terms).Thus,
we gain access to a supertonic triad that is fully on the
Subdominant side of Tonic and a leading tone triad that is
fully on the Dominant side of Tonic. Since nineteenth cen-
tury harmonic practice typically permits dominant ninths
and leading tone sevenths, it is easy to allow for a hyper-
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC
A E B F
F C G D A E
Ab E6 B6
A a B C AB
EXAMPLE 2.
Unconformed
extension of the basic chromatic complex to include the A
and Ak lozenges toward the East. A balancing Westward-
extension toward B and B1 is also possible; strictly from a
theoretical point of view, there is nothing that would pro-
hibit this move, and it seems to sustain an equivalentjustifi-
cation as a duality.It must be noted, however,that a hyper-
extension in either direction results in the leading tone or
subtonic seventh chord. The harmonic function of the for-
mer is at times slippery; that of the latter has a nebulous
function that rarelyhas an unmediated associationwith the
home key. It is often read as either Dominant of lIII or
Subdominantof IV. Example4 outlines this largerregion.
A comment is warrantedregardingthe functional status
of the hyper-extendedelementsjust proposed.Notably,these
pitches are located far from the originalTonic on the Ton-
netz. Significantly,two of them they are found in the parallel
row, two steps removed from the main East-West axis. As
suggested, the axes that lie two steps above and below the
main tonal axis of the key bring scale steps that may be
drawn to the gravityof anothertonic. Specifically,these two
axes above and below representmoves towardthe sharpside
of the key and the flat side of the key respectively. As
255
Cl G# D# A# El
B, Fl C# GI
C Gt DI A E B
EG
Db G6 D6 A6 E6B6
Tonnetzand 4.
Harrisonpoints out, a move toward the sharp side is a gen-
eralizationof Dominant motion, and a move toward the flat
side, of Subdominant (Harrison 1994, 27). Thus, although
the hyper-extended7 is achievedby a Westward (Subdomi-
nant) extension, it crosses a Northern tonal field boundary.
The newly acquired7 is once again Dominant, but a Domi-
nant caught in the tonal gravity of a different 1-the one
found to its Southwest.The parallelargumentalso standsfor
the hyper-extended b6 that extends into the flat-side axis,
and its recovery of Subdominant function. Therefore,pace
Harrison and Erpf, the vii' chord becomes the first diatonic
harmonythat is functionallymixed by nature.
Adjacent to the outlined areain Example 4, we can rec-
ognize some basic chromaticchordsthat include F# (stretch-
ing furthertowardD ofD function) and the Neapolitan de-
gree, 62, extending further toward the West. If we stretch
furtherWestward,we reachthe realmof S ofS.
These traditional diatonic harmonies of the complex
major-minorsystem form the experientialbasis for an un-
derstandingof harmonicfunction in more complex Kliinge.
I suggest that our understanding of harmonic function is
based on pitch-class groupings, according to two guiding
 256 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
A E
F1 c G
Ab E6Bb
Fb GC Gb
AM Fa BR
EXAMPLE 3.
principles.The first principleis functionalparsimony.Given
a choice, it is more naturalto group together pitch classes
in closer geographicproximity.Thus, in a D-F-A complex,
functional parsimonywould dictate that the D results from
stretching the system toward the Subdominant side. It
would be decidedly unparsimonious to take the F-A from the
Subdominantside, and to pick up the D from the Dominant
side of our home Tonic. One would need strong contextual
justification to locate a D-F-A complex completelyon the
Dominant side of Tonic, where it might be considered a
modally unusualvariantof D ofD function.15 Alternatively,
in a Dominant-sided D-F-A complex, the A might be
perceivedas a non-chordal pitch class against a more stable
harmony--in which case the argument for an independent
function begins to dissolve. (I shall returnto this in the dis-
cussion of linear chords and Example 34.) The second prin-
ciple is a left-privilegedinterpretation,which allowsthe left-
most element on the Tonnetzto overshadowthe harmonic
15 This argument assumes sympathy with the discussion of the minor
Dominant in Harrison 1994,passim, especially 53-54.
B A Cl G D# A# Et
D 1CF C G
B Ct G A E B
Da F C G
F6 CG G D6 Ab E6, B6
UnconformedTonnetz and major-minor system.
function of elements on the central East-West axis, where
the context is appropriate.When notes are added to a Klang
in an Eastwarddirection,it is easy to imagine these as added
factors to a tertian sonority: fifths, sevenths and ninths.
Added notes in a Westwarddirectioncould representadded
sixths (which might not disrupt the prevailingfunction of
the Klang),or new bases,which redefinethe originalnotes as
agents and associates.Such a redefinitionis bound to change
the functionalorientationof the sonority.While the A-C-E
complex might sustainTonic function by virtue of the pow-
erful C-E Tonic elements, the left-privilege suggests that
this complex may lean towardSubdominantfunction.
The topography of the Tonnetzprovides a structurein
which to rethinkthe primitivesof harmonicfunction. How-
ever,our reckoningof harmonicfunction is incompletewith-
out consideringour expectationsof tonal syntaxand the lin-
ear patternsof the bass line.
The paradigmatic authentic harmonic progression is a
succession of chords T-DP-D-T (with DP optional). Any
contiguous segment of the paradigm is considered an au-
thentic harmonicprogression;any element that disruptsthe
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 257

A E B F CO Gcl D0 DO A E#

% % I I %
F c G D V A E B A C# G#

A EB Bb D A E B

AB BG E GG DD F AA O ES B BF

V
EXAMPLE
4. UnconformedTonnetz and extended major-minor system.

paradigm is considered non-functional with respect to the suggest a hierarchy,despite any sense of harmonic function
progression.The paradigmaticplagalprogressionis a succes- dischargedin the process.
sion of chords T-S-T.16 A roster of typical bass lines, catalogued by their linear
A categoryof linear chordsis essentialto an investigation shape, is a useful accompanimentto the abstractfunctional
of harmonicfunction.These chords are often functional,but paradigm.Such standardbass-line progressionsare common
they do not participatein typical paradigms.Examples in- among harmony textbooks, although they are normally
clude passing or neighbor chords (for example,a passingIV6 found amidst discussions pertaining to individual chords,
chord between V and V6), chords that result from linear rather than organized according to chords that share the
processes(such as the 5-6 motion abovetonic that generates same function and are built over the same bass scale step.17
a vi6 chord without a strong sense of Dominant-Preparation In this way, characteristicbass-line patterns and functional
or Subdominant function), and many of the standard progressionsbecome inextricablyintertwinedin this system,
4-chord techniques and sequences. The notion of a linear each informing and guiding the functionalinterpretationof
chord allows us to assess chords by their voice-leading and the other.
metriccontexts,where a blind applicationof functionaccord-
ing to identity is unmusicaland unconvincing.Linearchords 17 For example,Aldwelland Schachter2003 addressthe behaviorof IV,
ii6, IV7, and ii as they move to variouskinds of cadentialand non-
cadentialDominant chords,but these discussionsare well dispersed
16 In laternineteenthcenturypractice,HarrisonfollowsRiemannin pos- throughoutthe text.Certainly,when these discussionsareconcatenated
tulatingthe possibilityof a dual paradigm,T-D-S-T. As this is the accordingto bass-linemotion,thereis a dangerthat some subtletyre-
most problematicparadigm,I shall leaveit unconsideredfor the time gardingeach particularDP(4) chord might be lost, but this is at the
being.While I am sympatheticto the model, its considerationis not expenseof the clearpresentationand importanceof bass-linecohesion
germaneto my purposeat the moment. in functionalharmony.
 258 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
COLLIDING FUNCTIONS
Progressions are classified according to their bass lines.
Within an unembellished harmonic paradigm, nine
Dominant-Preparation to Dominant possibilities and six
Dominant to Tonic possibilities comprise the common au-
thentic progressions. While there are only a few common
Classic era bass lines for plagal progressions, nineteenth-
century practice greatly expanded the possibilities. These
bass-line rosters, given in Examples 5 and 6, can be con-
firmed in most standard theory texts by concatenating the
discussions of appropriate chords and their typical resolu-
tions. Exceptions to these practices may constitute "marked"
musical events, but certainly are not so prevalent as to invali-
date the theory as a whole.18
Examples 5(a) and 5(b) present rosters of authentic bass
lines according to their functional disposition; Example 6
presents the comparable roster for the nine plagal bass lines
found in nineteenth-century music. Using these figures, we
see bass lines that may representmore than one type of pro-
gression (authentic or plagal). Any bass lines found in both
authentic and plagal contexts are considered functionally
ambiguous, and therefore should be eliminated from a new
list of bass lines that characterizeone particular functional
disposition. For example, since a 4-3 bass line might reason-
ably support either D-T or S-T progressions, 4-3 is elimi-
nated as a characterizing bass line. On the other hand, it is
reasonable to declare that a 4-I bass line is emblematic of a
plagal progression, since the only typical context for a 4-1
bass line is S-T. Similarly, bass lines that could reasonably
arpeggiate a single harmonic function (such as 4-2, which
can potentially support either DP-D or DP-DP) and bass
lines that might commonly support T-D or T-S are also
eliminated, since they do not characterize any single func-
tional disposition. Rosters that summarize the possible
common-practice motions of T-D or T-S are not terribly
18 The term "marked"is used in this context following Hatten 1994.
valuable,because the motion from Tonic is generally unre-
stricted. Example 7 catalogs the bass lines that are elimi-
nated on the grounds that they do not characterizea particu-
lar functional disposition; Examples 8 and 9 provide the
resulting lists of characterizing authentic and plagal bass
lines respectively.
Examples 8(a) and 8(b) tell us that a 5-i bass line is, in it-
self, strongly suggestive of authentic D-T harmony:there is
no legitimate plagal succession with such a bass line.19Like-
wise, Example 9 shows that a bass line that moves from 4 to
I stronglyindicates plagal harmony for the same reason. It is
not surprisingthat the resulting rostersinclude only motions
from the paradigmatic S and D agents and bases. When
Dominant or Subdominant agents are placed in the lowest
voice and move to the Tonic Base, that condition alone is
sufficientto support a strong paradigmaticfunctional articu-
lation. Having postulated the tonal focusing power of bass
lines, we must still consider the implications of the upper
voices.
Any single upper-voice pitch may be a constituent of sev-
eral different diatonic triads or seventh chords-an obvious
point with an important ramification. Since any pitch may
imply one of several possible chords, a single pitch within a
Klang cannot represent a single chord. The unconformed
Tonnetzdiscussed above adds depth to this observation.In a
major-minortonal context, there may be different attitudes
availablefor many different scale steps. That is to say, there
are two distinct kinds of 4 in this system: one is found due
West of the Tonic (a strong Subdominant location) and
the other is an off-axis extension of the Dominant in the
stretched system. The principles of functional parsimony
suggested above argue that we should look at the companion
scale steps in the Klang to help us determine which 4 we
have before us.
Example 4, in its extended version, shows us that we have
only one 1 and one 5 in the system. If one of these is the left-
19 See also Harrison 1994, 48, Example 2.1, which confirms this finding.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 259

DP D D - T Bass Line T-D T-S DP-D D-T S-T Other

2 i-i x x
- (b)3 1i- x x
4 - 2-i x x
A
2 - ()3-i X X T-T
2 i
4 (6)3-2 x x x
4_7 X D-D
7• 4-4 x S-S
i - 7 4 - (~~3 4-(2
X X
(b) 4-2 X D-D

basslines.
EXAMPLE 7. Non-characterizingbasslines.
EXAMPLE 5. Roster
of.authentic
DP D D - T
S - T
i - i 4 5
2 - 1 (06)5 i
-
7
((03
(a) (b)

(-) EXAMPLE8. Characterizing bass lines: authentic.

(b)3
S - T
EXAMPLE 6. Rosterofplagal basslines. -
4 i
(0)3
most element of the Klang, then it will likely subsume the
function of the Klang to its purpose. If we find ourselvesat a
EXAMPLE 9. Characterizing bass lines.:plagal.
different 1, then the music has undertaken a noteworthy
journey to a new place.20There is also only one pair of Tonic
agents (3, b3), and two pairs of Subdominant agents (6, b6) and Dominant agents (7, b). Regarding the two Subdomi-
nant and Dominant pairs, one is found close to the Tonic
20 Cf Harrison 2002. whereas the other is in the hyper-extended tonal field. In
 260 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
either case, invoking the more remote agent will require an
extraordinary circumstance.21The viif chord is striking in
that it invokes a remote agent, attesting to the slippery na-
ture of this symmetricalharmony and accounting for its abil-
ity to slip so easily into a new tonal field. This observation
supports Harrison's position regarding the devotion of the
functional agents to a single tonic, even if it turns out to be a
different manifestation of the same tonic pitch. Regarding
Dominant agency, the last case suggested (a Dominant with
?7 agency) is ratherextraordinary.In most cases, left-privilege
suggests that the Klang which contains k7 will function as ei-
ther T or D of S. In a more extreme case, the context might
suggest that k7is found off the Western edge of the major-
minor complex, and that ?7 reaches toward S of S function.
However, two versions of 2 and 4 can be aligned with either
strong S or weak D. The closest chromatic scale steps to the
major-minor tonal field are #4, availablein close proximityas
the first step towardD ofD function, and availablein close
v2,
proximity on the subdominant side.
22
II. SUBDOMINANT-DOMINANT COLLISIONS
The criteria above constitute a new instrument for ob-
serving harmonic function. When evaluating harmonic
function, two elements must be observed-the bass line, and
the component scale steps of the chord in their relation to
Tonic on the Tonnetz.Characterizing bass-line patterns are
the primary determinants of harmonic function. In tradi-
tional harmonic language, the function of the upper voices
(the sonority) typically agrees with the function of the bass-
line pattern. Occasionally,however, these two elements con-
21 One might also locate 6 due East of the Dominant associate 2 (three
fifths to the East of Tonic). If that 6 is used, then we are getting re-
mote, but we are still along the main East-West axis, and are perhaps
engaged in "Dominant Accumulation?" (D of D of D) as per Harrison
1994, 153 f Note that the remote version of b6 is further removed in
the Southern direction, and is much more prone to behave as Sub-
dominant of a new tonal center.
tradict each other. For example, the bass line 1-4-i charac-
terizes the plagal paradigm T-S-T; however, if the chord
above 4 contains a leading tone that resolves correctly to
tonic with the change of bass (i.e., it behaves as an authentic
leading tone), then there is an inherent contradiction be-
tween the presence and resolution of the leading tone (the
agent of Dominant function) and the motion of the bass
(one of the bass lines that characterizesa plagal paradigm).
If such phenomena were rare and confined to the musical
surface,it would suffice to comment on the curious effect of
the progression,and to explain the processes that brought it
about. Such contradictoryprogressions appearwith surpris-
ingly regularity in the music of the nineteenth century.
Given that they appearso frequently on both the surfaceand
deeper levels of structure, it makes sense to investigate the
family of chords that contain collisions of Subdominantand
Dominant functions.22
A comment regarding Harrison 1994 and his discussion of Mixed
Function (a concept he credits to Riemann and Erpf) is necessary at
this point to clarify the difference between our discussions. Harrison
uses this term to describe chords of inherently mixed function: "Since
secondary triads contain scale degrees associated with different func-
tions, they arefunctionally mixed structures, able to communicate more
than one function" (Harrison 1994, 60). That is to say, since 2 is associ-
ated with D harmony, while 4 and 6 are associated with DP harmony, a
supertonic triad is functionally mixed. Of course, it is quite a different
matter to claim that a chord has the capability to express more than one
function (Harrison, after Erpf) versus the claim that a chord expresses
two functions simultaneously,as I shall argue below. In the application
of Harrison's version of mixed function, conflicting and ambiguous
functions are weighed to give a harmony a three-dimensional func-
tional vector. My reformulation of function-finding obviates the major-
ity of diatonic chords that have this property, with the exception of
viio7. The kind of functional mixture I speak of here is the very particu-
lar mixture found when a characterizing functional bass line conflicts
with upper voices that characterize a different function. In Harrison's
use of the term, mixed function chords are common diatonic phenom-
ena. While the Kldnge I explore are, by comparison, less common they
are nevertheless important and worthy of consideration.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION
There are two distinct ways for Subdominantand Domi-
nant functions to collide. The first type is defined as a chord
whose bass scale step participatesin a context that character-
izes a Dominant-Preparation or Subdominant chord, but
which also contains the Dominant agent in an upper-voice.
These chords shall be designated by their primary(bass con-
text) function with a superscript'D' indicating the element
of Dominant function in the upper voice. Thus, the two
paradigmatic contexts for this first type are T-SD-T and
T-DpD-D-T. As with any structural paradigm, the basic
forms of these possible progressions may be decorated
through various non-functional chords or successions of
chords that share the same function. Example 10 presents
the basic structural contexts that contain SD and DPD
chords. It is noteworthy that the mixed-function chords
in these two paradigms have markedly different effects. In
the first instance, the Dominant element in the SD chord
appearsbetween two manifestations of Tonic; in the second
instance, the Dominant element in the DPD chord antici-
pates the arrival of the stronger, authentic Dominant.
Nevertheless, even though the two contexts representdiffer-
ent manifestations of a chord containing a functional colli-
sion, the collision is the common element that allows us to
draw a similaritybetween them.
The second type of collision occurs when a bass scale step
contextually characterizesDominant function, but its essen-
tial harmonic characteris imbued with Subdominantfunc-
tion, according to the function-finding techniques discussed
above. This type shall be indicated in the same manner as
above,with roles reversed:Ds. A Ds chord cannot, by defini- 23
tion, exist in the context of a plagal succession-it may only
appear over a characteristicallyauthentic bass. On the other
hand, in the context of an authentic progression,a Ds chord
24
may stand in place of an expected Dominant chord in the
same fashion as a SD chord. The theoretic contexts of pro-
gressions involving Ds chords are given in Example 11. We
shall return to Ds structureslater, after exploringthe SD and
DPD categories in greaterdepth.
IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 261
SDchordsin plagalparadigms
In theory, the basic form of the plagal succession T-SD-T
may appear over any characteristically plagal bass line, as
defined in Example 9, above.
Interesting examples of SD progressions appear over
(b)6-1 or 4-1 bass lines, where the leading tone is occasion-
ally spelled enharmonically as bi.23 Note that while Kb is
proximate to the Tonic on the Tonnetz, it is twice removed
from the main East-West axis in relation to the Tonic. An
authentic (hypothetical) bi seriously challenges the nature of
a tonal system, perhaps in a way that cannot be sustained.
Most importantly,spelling such a pitch as b1 and treating it
contrapuntallyas such are very different things. In every case
I've found, b1 appearsto be spelled as such to form a tertian
sonority that is easy to read, yet it is contrapuntally treated
as a leading tone. (Refer to Example 1, where b1 (G?) was
treated as a leading tone (Fx) in the key of G# minor.)
Therefore, on functional grounds, I find it more compelling
to challenge the spelling of the note and to understand it as
the Dominant agent, thinly disguised, thus occupying a dif-
ferent (disjunct) location on the Tonnetz.In these situations,
Kiis a proxy for 7.
Because the SD chord classification is inherently ambigu-
ous in a traditionalsense, an obvious choice for the label and
notation of each chord is likewise unclear. SD chords could
be reasonably shown as altered, or non-standard Dominant
chords, or conversely, as altered Subdominant sonorities.24
While I do not discountthe possibilitythat the characterizingbass line
(b)6-(b)3(although admittedly
the weakest of the characterizingbass
lines) may supportsuch structures,I have yet to find convincing exam-
ples to demonstratethis pattern.
Having attemptedto reduce all chordswith colliding functions to ex-
pressionsof single Romannumeralswith appropriatealterations,I have
discoveredthat thereis simply not a single tidy symbol that will satisfy
all cases and conditions.I am gratefulto Daniel Harrison for warning
me (both in his book, and in reading an early draft of this paper)
againstfetishizingRomannumeralsymbologyat the expense of a clear
262 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
Plagal Bass AuthenticBass
T-SD-T T-DPD-D-T
T-S-SD-T T-DP-DPD-D-T
EXAMPLE IO. Possible contextsfor SD andDPD chords.
Authentic Bass
T-DS-T
T-DS-D-T
T-D-DS-T
T-DP-DS-T
EXAMPLE II. Possiblecontextsfor Ds chords.
As the purpose of this article is to explicate the functional
behavior of certain Kldnge, the analytic label for SD chords
simply appends the bass scale step to the functional designa-
tion. (While this symbol does not discriminate between all
of the possible sonorities for the category,the accompanying
discussion shall make those differences clear.)
A healthy roster of SD chords may be derived by placing
familiar diatonic and chromatic vii' or vii' chords over either
a bass 4 or (6)6. Example 12 provides such a roster of possi-
ble and SD(b6) chords with their scale steps; it also in-
SD(,)
cludes misleading Roman numerals that might be recog-
nized through common enharmonic spelling. The most
common enharmonic spelling substitutes 1 for 7, such as the
G? in the 6vi chord of Example 1. 7 by proxy produces a
comfortable triadic spelling, despite the linear behavior of G
as a lower neighbor, Fx. The last column on Example 12 is
representationof harmonicfunction.It is certainlypossible to examine
these harmonies as Roman numeralswith complex figured bass ap-
pendages,but such symbolstend to obscureand complicatethe discus-
sion of harmonicfunction.
presented to draw attention to this equivalency in the con-
text of a Roman numeral interpretation. By definition, all SD
chords are assumed to resolve to a T(i). In an authentic par-
adigm, this roster would also suffice for DPD chords resolv-
ing to D(5) chords. This list is not exhaustive, but it provides
insight into the nature of the chords and their possible
spellings in the literature.
SD(4) and SD(6)
SD(4) chords appear as embellishments of plagal cadences
in some liturgical pieces such as the traditional hymn-tune
Caithness, given as Example 13. Although the SD(4) chord
sounds innocuous due to its embellishing context in a
T(i)-S(4)-SD(4)-T(i) succession, its features are nonetheless
evident. First, the function of the succession is unaffected by
the decoration because it is governed, at the deepest level, by
a diatonic plagal cadence; that is, its resolution denies the
Dominant function often afforded to an unqualified vii 4 in
favor of recognizing the chord's Subdominant potential.
Second, the insertion of the leading tone before the resolu-
tion to tonic strengthens and directs the progression more
forcefully than the unadorned plagal close. For these reasons,
vii3j behaves as SD(4) rather than D(4). On the Tonnetz, this
manifestation of vii' is achieved in the hyper-extended field
to the North-West of Tonic. The chord is principally S(4),
which has been stretched to include a Dominant agent.
An example of a similar sonority in a non-liturgical
context is found in Robert Schumann's Kreisleriana, no. 5,
shown in Example 14.25 Here, the leading tone, F#, embell-
25 This piece is also discussed in Agmon 1995, 210, Aldwell and Schachter
1989, 392 and 2003, 418. Agmon exhibits the passage to support his
case for the weak Subdominant function potential of VII7. However,
the strength of Agmon's argument is undermined by the privileged sta-
tus given to chordal roots in his theory. It must be stressed that it is
only in its second inversion (over the bass scale degree 4) that any
Subdominant function may be realized. Although the first edition of
Aldwell and Schachter 1989 does not acknowledge the implied mixed
function of this progression, the 2003 edition makes this explicit.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 263

Genus Quality Structure RN (?)

dmd 2
4 vii..
ia O

dm1,no 3rd 4 vii"4

S
sD)(4 ) ... .... ..................................

E: 16 'V6 (vii/IV) IV sD(4) I

d 6
4b vii1, (iv??)

dd7 b 2 ^4 vii112

d6 b 4 viil, (iv6?)

Fr 3 4 1 #2i IVo0 6)
(D)
sD(4) dm+6 E: T(i) S(6/4) T(i)
,30 (26 ivo6
A"gm4
4-b
a ivL,
5 7 i V+4
dm iv"4# 4 EXAMPLE 13. Caithness.

sD(,7) m• 2#V
Mmi b87 2
EXAMPLE 12. RosterofSD chords.
ishes a plagal progression, resulting in a SD(4) chord that is
approached from its diatonic subdominant and resolves to
a root-position Tonic chord. While Aldwell and Schachter
(2003) point out that such treatment of a diminished-
seventh sonority built on the subdominant is not rare,I am
especially interested in the germinal properties of this pro-
gression, and in the fact that many more complex examples
might be related back to this simpler context in a largertax-
onomy of chromatic chords that are not so easily explained.
Example 15 (Schubert's Phantasie, op. 15, mm. 28-29)
provides an interesting context for a SD(44)structure.The
passage is situated between an opening section in C major
and a structural cadence in the dominant; it can be read as
the pivot region between these two keys. In measure 28,
vi
Schubert embellishes a V3 chord in an approach to I6 in C
b3II, that is expanded with 6/10 voice-exchange between the
outer voices, moving to a G-major dominant triad. The fig-
ure repeats before continuing to a cadence in the key of the
dominant. The pivot harmony is thus the C-major triad in
m. 29: Tonic becomes IV of G. The modulating dominant,
however, is a SD(4) chord in the key of G. Rather than mov-
ing to a traditional root-position C-major triad in the 6/10
voice-exchange, Schubert includes inner-voice motion that
transformsthe C-major triad into a secondary vii4j of G that
resolves to G over a S-T (4-1) bass line relative to the new
key.This is a decidedly weak modulating dominant that eas-
ily allows the ear to remain anchored to the key of C for a
repetition of the two-measure figure, before continuing and
confirming the new key. A noteworthy feature of this exam-
ple is the inclusion of the secondary 6 in the SD(4) chord
ratherthan b6, which is by far more common.
The examples to this point have looked at SD(44)chords
that function as embellishmentsof diatonic S-T progressions.
Examples of the SD(4) are more convincing when they are
264 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
sehrlebhaft
,6 a ,I -l
G: iv SD(4)
G: S(4) (D) T(i)
EXAMPLE 14. Schumann, Kriesleriana, op. 16, no. 5, mm. 51-53.
freed from a decorative role. An instance of an independent
SD chord resolving directly to a root-position tonic triad is
found in the opening to Brahms's Academic Festival Overture,
op. 80, given as Example 16. Here, the leading tone B? is su-
perimposed over a repeating 1-4-1 bass line in C minor, cre-
ating a conflict between a plagal bass and an authentically re-
solving leading tone in the top voice-precisely the category
SD as defined.
A SD(4) chord of a different variety may be found in the
final measures of Richard Strauss's Till Eulenspiegels lustige
Streiche, op. 28. The chord in the second measure of Ex-
ample 17 (sometimes called the "Till Sixth," Bb-Db-E?-G#)
is an augmented sixth chord whose characteristic augmented
sixth (Bk-G#) resolves to 3 (A?) of the following F major
tonic triad, over a structural 4 to 1 bass-a sonority that has
strong Dominant associations (by virtue of the leading tone,
E0) resolving to tonic. The Till Sixth thus combines the Sub-
dominant and Dominant elements necessary to qualify as a
SD(4) chord. Two measures later, Strauss uses a similar chord
4 6
C 117 3V3 [V]
G: IV6,6" SD I
C: D(2) T(3/1i) [V]
G: S(6/4) T(i)
EXAMPLE
15. Schubert,Phantasie, op. 15, mm. 28-29.
with two small differences. As the upper voice arpeggiates
through the tonic triad over the final four measures, another
SD(4) supports 5 in the soprano, with 6 appearing in an inner
voice rather than b6 as used in the earlier Till Sixth, above. In
this case, the resulting SD(4) chord might appear to be an
embellished third-inversion V+9 resolving to tonic over a 4 to
i bass line, but such a Roman numeral analysis seems grossly
misleading. The final embellishing chord of the piece is a
plagally-resolving German augmented-sixth chord.
Hypothetically, Strauss could have spelled the Till Sixth
by proxy (with bi and kb), and used a contiguous segment of
the Tonnetz to do so (see Example 18). But this spelling
would have obscured the linear behavior of the chord, and
hence its function. The representation in Example 18 shows
the functional behavior of the individual elements of this
chord and demonstrates its resolution to Tonic from both
the Subdominant and Dominant sides. On this figure, the
nature of the functional discharge is explicit. The 4-1 motion
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION
,r ? intriguing.
pp sepre e sotto voce
SD(4) i SD(4)
EXAMPLE I6. Brahms, Academic Festival Overture, op. 80, mm.
1-2.
is due East, representing base-to-base, S to T motion. b6-5 is
S to T, agent-to-associate motion; the 7-1 motion is exactly
symmetrical to b6-5 with a Dominant agent to Tonic base
discharge. The last motion, #2-3 accompanies 7-i in parallel
motion, and thus has a latent D-T of 3 functional discharge;
upon the arrival of 3, it is subsumed by the Tonic base, and
thus #2-3 is a kind of synchronized (as opposed to successive)
dominant accumulation, reconciled in the strength of the
1-3-5 Tonic Klang. In short, S and D functions are equally
balanced in the discharge to T.
The opening seven measures of the Adagio of Bruckner's
Ninth Symphony present a passage that defies traditional
Roman numeral analysis, but which can be illuminated func-
tionally. The passage is given as Example 19(a). The move-
ment is in the key of E, and the opening phrase ends on an E-
major triad; as no other clear position-finding elements are
available, this information will suffice to provide a starting-
point for the analysis. This accepted, the opening unharmo-
nized Bhfunctions as 5 of E, whose promise to move to tonic
is fulfilled by a substitute Tonic chord with the E# in the bass
of m. 2. The upper voices of this chord, however, complicate
such a simplistic opening gambit. A page from Harrison
1994 supports this interpretation: the chord built on E# con-
tains the bass and agent of the Tonic triad, displacing the
associate by the two semitones on either side of it, A# and
IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 265
C#. Certainly,the 5-i bass line provides sufficient grounding
for this interpretation.But it is what follows that is especially
The E# chord initiates an elaborate tonicization of A,
shown in Example 19(b). The leading tone of A is delayed
through a stepwise chromatic ascent in the upper voices,
against which the bass moves to D# (4 of A). D# is harmo-
nized with a transposition of the Till Sixth chord before
leaping down a fourth to A#. The 5-4-1 bass-line motive,
together with the SD(4') chord, is then cleverly used as a
structuralmotive to tonicize A. Immediately following, this
same motive is used to effect a tonicization of D major,
which arriveson the downbeat of m. 5.
When the bass leaps to A# on the third beat of m. 3,
Bruckner resolves the SD(4) chord deceptively by flatting the
fifth of the goal chord (the A major triad), which then serves
as a chromatic dominant of D (V65), and initiates the subse-
quent tonicization. (See Example 19(c).) The chromatic
dominant passes through a bass G# on the way to G#, filling
in the 5-4 motivic bass line with a passing #4 that supports
an enharmonicallyrespelled viiW/V.4 then supports another
SD(4), similar to the "Till Sixth" but for the substitution of
6 for b6. Thus, the bass line and the functional motive used
to tonicize A in m. 3 is elided into an embellished version of
the same progression(adding a passing chord and slightly al-
tering the color of the SD(4)), which tonicizes the key of D.
The remainderof the passage is much clearer;Bruckner uses
the D major triad as a diatonic pivot chord, from which he
moves to a half-cadence in the key of A, closing the phrase
on the first E major triad of the movement in the famous
quotation of the Dresden Amen.
In summary,plagally resolving SD(4) chords seem to be
found in only a few specific contexts. Not surprisingly, the
most common approach chord to a plagally-resolving SD(4)
is either a diatonic Subdominant chord with 4 in the bass
(SD(4)), or a move directly from tonic. Approaching SD(4)
chords from S(6) is uncommon; an approach from an altered
Dominant (as in Bruckner's Symphony no. 9 "Adagio") is
266 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
i 16F
I SD(4)
T
T(i)
EXAMPLE 17. R. Strauss, TillEulenspiegels lustige Streiche, op. 28, last six measures.
clearly extraordinary.Only occasionally does 6 appear as part
of the SD(4) chord at all; there is a clear preference for b6 in
this context. When 6 is found, the chord resolves to a major-
mode tonic.
Plagal bass:SD( 6)-T(J)
While 6 in a major key may theoretically support a SD(6)
structure, I have yet to find examples that are convincing. On
the other hand, SD(I6) chords are among the most common
manifestations of SD structuresin the literature.
In the minor-modeprogression,T(i)-SD( 6)-T(i), b is
often held as a common tone, while I and 5 expand outward
to 7 and L6 respectively, creating an enharmonically spelled
6vi chord. This voice-leading paradigmis precisely illustrated
in Example 1, the "Tarnhelm"motive from Wagner'sRing. It
i 44n
I Gr
D(4) I
-,
is in this context that the chosen notation "SD" sidesteps the
problems encountered when forcing a Roman numeral to fit
the circumstance. The symbol Mvifundamentally misrepre-
sents the linear behavior of the leading tone, whether or not
it is spelled with the common enharmonic notation of bi.
Likewise, the linear behavior of #2 is belied by the common
spelling as b6.26However misleading the context may appear,
the fact remains that bk is, for all purposes, a functional lead-
ing tone, despite the plagal bass line. The spelling of #2 as g3
26 The interchangeable spellingof #2 andb3is commonplacein both chro-
matic DP and chromaticD chords,dependingon the modalityof the
tonic that follows.For example,when a Gr5 resolvesto a majormode
tonic (or cadential-6) b3 is usually notated with #2, and yet alternate
symbolsarerarelyproposedfor such substitutions.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 267

* **
0 A

EXAMPLE I8. "Till Sixth"resolutionon the Tonnetz.

(a) Bruckner,Symphonyno. 9, iii, A4dagio,"mm. 1-7 (score).

EXAMPLE 19
268 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)

Ti analysis respells the appropriate notes to demonstrate their

linear, rather than their purely harmonic behavior.
In the Overture-Fantasy to Romeo andJuliet, mm. 32-36,
Tchaikovsky provides a similar context for the SD('6) chord
sD as above, but includes 4 in a T()-SD( )-T(i) progression.
A: D()
The passage, omitting the Harp part, which arpeggiates the
A: D(5) SDk(T)
framing tonic chords, is given as Example 21. In this exam-
ple, the leading tone E# is part of an arpeggiation in the
(b) Bruckner, Symphony no. 9, iii, Adagio, "mm. 2-3. Flute part, clarifying its chord-tone status; 5 moves to a
neighbor note b6 while K3 is retained as a common tone
through the progression. All this appears over a 14-6-1 bass
A line. While the upper-voice 7-b3 diminished fourth (in the
i
Flute) appears anomalous with respect to normal Dominant-
to-Tonic voice leading, the authentic resolution of the lead-
ITI
U
ing tone (7-1) is present in the English Horn and French
Horn II.
A remarkable manifestation of a SD(I6) formation ap-
pears in the famous aria "Nessun dorma" in the third act of
Puccini's Turandot.27As shown in Example 22, Puccini pre-
A: "T(1)"
sents a context in G major, where the bass note b6 (Ek) sup-
D: D(5) (P2) T(i)
sD(4) ports a V' triad with an added seventh. In the first presenta-
no.9, iii, Aldagio, tion, 5 (D#) is held across the upper voice of the progression,
(c) Bruckner,
Symphony "mm.3-5.
stabilizing the progression. In subsequent presentations, the
voice moves to the seventh, 4, which resolves to 3 in the fol-
EXAMPLE19. [continued]
lowing tonic chord, while the accompaniment parts maintain
5 as an essential element of the harmony. Thus, acknowledg-
ing the well-known difficulty of finding a satisfactory
is then simply a maneuverto show the chord in the music as Roman numeral for what might appear to be a Dominant-
a tertian triad, avoiding the harmonic doubly-augmented ninth chord in fourth inversion, this instantly recognizable
second from b1to #2, preferringinstead the major third, bi to chord is better left with the generalized analysis of SD(I6).
b3. Furthermore, there are instances when 4 is added to this Furthermore, it would clearly be a stretch of the imagination
basic sonority (as we shall see below) and the same unusual to think that the bass tone b6 is any kind of ninth. As in the
spellings appear. previous examples, this bass tone is operating independently
A passage from Franck'sPiano Quintet in F minor, shown of the whole sonority, although in this case, the situation is
in Example 20, demonstrates the same SD( 6) chord as more extreme.
Wagner's "Tarnhelm"motive, but one that resolves to a major
mode tonic. In this passage,Franckalso simplifies the spelling
of the chord to appearas a 6vi triad in the music. The linear 27 I am grateful to John Cuciurean for bringing this example to my attention.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION
Allegro
C#: I
C#: I
EXAMPLE 20. Franck,Piano Quintet (F minor), i, mm. 90-93.
Authentic paradigms: DPD (4-D(5)
When placed in an authentic context, where DPD chords
resolve to traditional Dominant chords, the nature of the
leading tone in the mixed-function chord subtly changes.
Rather than bearing the entire weight of the functional dis-
charge from Dominant to Tonic, the leading tone in this
context anticipates the Dominant proper, blurring the func-
28
tional boundary between the intermediate Dominant-
Preparation chord and the Dominant that follows. The bass
line 4 to 5 is clearly laden with the functional rhetoric of
DP-to-D, but Pablo de Sarasate complicates this progres-
sion in his Zigeunerweisen for Violin and Piano, op. 20, given
as Example 23. In this example, the leading tone, B?, arrives
prematurely above the bass 4 in m. 14; thus, the resulting
progression intensifies the Dominant-Preparation chord
with Dominant function and thereby anticipates the Domi-
nant of the passage atop a DP bass. Strikingly, in this con-
IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 269
sD6) I
text, the arrival of the cadential- provides the resolution of 7
in the DPD chord, but this "resolution" is also an anticipation
of the authentic resolution in the ultimate tonic.
Example 24 shows a similar progression in Schubert's
Moment Musical, D. 78, no. 3.28 In mm. 34-38, Schubert
This example is also used in Agmon 1995, 210, and Aldwell and
Schachter1989, 534 and2003, 572. Again, in Agmon's analysisit is not
the VII Stufethat definesthe subdominantfunction,but ratherthe bass
line. Schubert'sjuxtapositionof a chord that contains a functional lead-
ing tone againsta 4 to 5 bass line createsthe functional tension. Also,
the earliereditions of Aldwell and Schachterdo not acknowledge the
mixed functionalpotential of this chord, but in the 2003 edition, the
authorshave reinterpretedthe progressionto be a diminished-_ chord
that standsin for a ii56 chord,the chord-tonesof which (not present in
the music) are "elided"into the neighbor tone embellishments. How-
ever,these analysesaddressthe voice leadingorigins of the passage, and
do not purportto clarifyits harmonicfunction. If the leading tone is
 270 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)

duces Dominant function into the chord by superimposing

Fl. 11 1
I, II the leading tone, E?, on the bass 4. The result is a DPD(4)
Cl. I, II chord that is prolonged through a non-functional, passing
secondary dominant of V on the way to V7 in m. 37.29
Eng. Hn. 6. |
Bsn. I, II 61:, .. Authentic
bass.DPD(B6)-D(5)
It is apparent from the literature that when SD( 6) chords
are used plagally, they are not normally embellished; rather,
they normally embellish Tonic chords. This is not the case
when DPD( 6) chords are used in an authentic paradigm.
and Cb.
A common manifestation of DPD('6) is the viio4 chord.
F: i sD( i By definition, a Dominant functioning chord with b6 in the
,) bass cannot resolve functionally to tonic-b6 in the bass
must resolve down to 5, over which a functional Tonic chord
is extraordinary. Rather, viio4 normally dissolves into the
ii
dominant as an embellishing chord, functioning instead in a
weak pre-Dominant role, while already containing the lead-
ing tone. An oft-cited example of this progression is found at
the beginning of the development section in Beethoven's
F: i
"Pathetique" sonata, op. 13, given as Example 25.
In this example, Beethoven uses the fully-diminished sev-
EXAMPLE 21. Tchaikovsky, Romeo and Juliet, Fantasy-
enth chord as an enharmonic pivot between the keys of
Overture, mm. 28-33.
G minor and E minor, where viio4 in G is reinterpreted as
viio, in E, which subsequently resolves to a V7 chord of E.
presents a bass line that proceeds from i-4_#4-5-i, clearly V7 of E is then prolonged until the Allegro molto e con brio.
implying a plain functional paradigm [T(i)-DP(4i)-D(5)- Although the notation viio4 correctly identifies the pitch
T(i)], into which a secondary dominant to V has been in- content of the harmony, it does little to engage the subtle
serted. However, instead of the traditional DP(4) chord that element of DP function in the progression. However one
would be expected in m. 35, Schubert prematurely intro- chooses to label the sonority, DPD(b6) remains a helpful
mode of classification. Furthermore, this notation acknowl-
edges that the pivot undergoes more than an enharmonic
indeed standing in for 1, does it bear the function of i (not present) or
does it retain the function of the leading tone that is actually heard?
Aldwell and Schachter's analysis suggests that we attribute supertonic 29 Laufer 1997, 218, note 9 shows an example from Mozart's Piano
function to the chord while the leading tone is, in concept at least, a Concerto, K. 481, that is exactly parallel to this circumstance. He ar-
dissonant neighbor. My analysis claims that both functions are present gues that the origin of the voice leading is found in the Schenkerian
and are in conflict, intensifying our experience of the moment. For concept of "Elision." Through elision, Laufer demonstrates that the
more on "elision"in Schenkerian analytic practice, see Laufer 1997 and DPD(4) chord has its origin in a diatonic DP(4), with which the com-
Cadwallader and Gagne 1998. poser has elided a neighbor-tone 7.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 271

Andantesostenuto
THE PRINCE p

Nes-sun dor- ma! ... Nes-sun dor-

ma!...
X
i4

G: I
SD(I) I SD(

G: I

EXAMPLE 22. Puccini, Turandot,Act IIL/1, "Nessundorma."

reinterpretation.It also undergoes a subtle functional trans-
formation,where the Dominant functioning chord in the old
key mutates into a chord with Dominant-Preparationfunc-
tion in the bass. This new interpretationof an old problem
adds to our understanding of this aspect of many enhar-
monic modulations by recasting the functional behavior of
the pivot chord in the context of the new key, where it pre-
paresthe modulating dominant proper.
An example where a DPD(I6) governs a deeper level of
structureis found in measures1-4 of Liszt'sAnnetesdepdeeri-
nageII, S. 191, no. 2, "I1penseroso,"given in Example 26.
Here, Liszt prolongs a DPD(6) chord by arpeggiating
down to a DPD(4) structurebefore arrivingon a V7 chord
on the final beat of m. 3. Liszt spells 7 as bi through the
mixed-function chords, but restores the correct spelling of
the leading tone with the arrival of
V09; while he uses C (bi
in the key of C# minor) in the upper voices of both the
DPD(6) and the DPD(4) chords, he enharmonically rein-
terprets C? as B# when the Dominant proper arrives.
While the "Vorspiel" to Wagner's Tristan und Isolde is one
of tonal music's most discussed passages, a mixed-function
interpretation has been implicit in analytic writings for quite
some time. The opening to the "Vorspiel" is shown in Ex-
ample 27. Many analysts have commented on the G#-B
voice-exchange between the soprano and tenor in the open-
ing measures, which suggests a sense of shared harmonic
 272 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
Lento
f trispassion
po
C: i
C: i8-7
EXAMPLE 23. Sarasate, Zigeunerweisen, op. 20, mm. 12-15.
function between the Tristan chord and its resolution.30The
bass line from ?6 to 5 of the Tristan progression (one of the
characterizing bass lines associated with DP to D function)
is coupled with the prolonged leading tone (in this case,
through a voice-exchange), which gives the Tristan succes-
sion so much of its character.The addition of the inner voice
#4to 4 between these two harmonies is an additional com-
plication. The tendency of #4to move to 5 (D of D to D) is
thwarted; #4 instead moves to the weaker Dominant factor,
4. Represented on the Tonnetz,the resolution of the Tristan
chord has a remarkableelegance.The 2/7 voice-exchangerep-
resents the D functionalpersistence.b6 to 5 is a functionaldis-
charge from the Subdominant agent to the Dominant base;
30 This interpretation of the Tristan progression was explored in Smith
1986, 136-39 and later in Harrison 1994, 156-57.
ll.
1:
ral
rall.
DpD5(4) i
V4
this motion precisely mirrors the expected resolution of the
Dominant-of-the-Dominant agent to the Dominant base (#4
to 5). Instead of this resolution,the polarityof the Dominant-
of-the-Dominant agent changes from major to minor (#4to
84), at which point 4 becomes a factor of the Dominant.
Unlike the other DPD chords discussed thus far, the Tristan
chord is not a tidy chromatic Dominant placed atop a bass
line that suggests DP function, owing to the presence of #4.
However, I believe that the association of this chord with
other similarDPD(b6) chords is a useful correlation.
FUNCTIONAL COLLISIONS OF TYPE Ds
Authenticbass:Ds (5)-T()
DS(5) chords in general are closely related both to Domi-
nant chords with added dissonance, and to dominant pedal
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 273

Allegro moderato

I !

F: i DPD(4) (v/ V4-3

F: T(i) D(5) T(i)

24. Schubert,Moment Musical, D. 78, no. 3, mm. 34-38.

EXAMPLE

TI
,•T- ,
fp f

2"
,' i . . . f"[• "1 1 "1 r

I I _
-

G: D(4) T(63) D(4)

E: DpD(6) D(5) T(i)

EXAMPLE 25. Beethoven, Sonata, op. 13, "Pathetique,"i, mm. 134-37.

 274 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM27 (2005)

C#: i 9-8
DPD(6/) V95

C#: T() D(5) T(i)

EXAMPLE 26. Liszt, Annees depe'lerinage II, S. 191, no. 2, "Ilpenseroso,"mm. 1-4.

tones. From the former, a DS(5) chord is distinct in that it

often refers to Dominant Elevenths and Thirteenths, the
so-called "tall-chords,"31 whose upper, dissonant elements
behave as real chord tones rather than unresolved embellish- g2
ments. Dominant pedal tones, on the other hand, typically
support Subdominant or Tonic chords in a non-functional
context-that is, they resolve to the diatonic dominant be- A: i V7
DPD(6g)
fore the change of the bass. A DS(5) chord is different from
these because it bears the entire Dominant function of the
passage, where there is no resolution of the upper-voice
Subdominant elements.
As with SD chords, the notation of Ds chords is similarly
fraught with problems. Thus, rather than contriving a com-
plex Roman numeral to account for the many possible
A: T(i) D(5)
configurations, the notation will be simplified to a straight-

Kostka and Payne 1995 use the term "Tall chord" in this manner. EXAMPLE
31 27. Wagner,Tristan undlsolde, "Vorspiel,
"mm. 1-3.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION
forward account of the chord's function. From a practical
perspective, DS(5) chords may be thought of as complete
Subdominant chords built atop 5 in the bass, normally
placed in a texture where the two functional halves, and their
behaviors, are clearly separate. A roster of DS(5) chords
(such as ii7 built atop 5, IV7 built atop 5, etc.) is easily imag-
ined, and an enumeration of all possible permutationsyields
little direct benefit.
The opening of the first movement of Schumann'sFan-
tasy, op. 17, given as Example 28, contains a striking DS(
formation that is subsequently undermined at a deeper
structurallayer. In what is apparentlya conscious effort to
blur together Subdominant and Dominant function,
Schumann superimposes a ii7 chord over 5 in the bass. The
resolution of the DS(5) to D(5) across mm. 7-9 blurs the
harmonic function, as the right hand resolves to Dominant
harmonywhile the left hand continues to outline the super-
tonic triad in m. 7. On a deeper level, the Ds(5) chord is re-
alized as non-chord-tone motion, embellishing a structural
V7 chord. In this case, the nature of the prolongation of
these non-chord-tones preserves a surface-level indepen-
dence of the harmony.
In the opening to the "Rigaudon"from Le Tombeaude
Couperin(Example 29), Ravel blurs the Dominant function
in the second measure by superimposingan arpeggiationof a
complete ii9 chord over an authentic bass. Unlike the
Schumann example above, Ravel does not decorate a dia-
tonic Dominant with a DS(5) chord; rather,the chord
DS(5)
stands alone and resolves directly to Tonic in a
DP(4i/2)-
Ds ()-T(i) progression.
In the first few measures of Debussy's "Prelude"to the
Suite Bergamasque,given as Example 30, Debussy strongly
emphasizes a ii7 chord built atop a bass 5 for all but the final
sixteenth note of m. 2, which introduces the leading tone
and so fleetingly turns the harmonytoward an explicit,tradi-
tional Dominant. Once again, the surface-layer analysis
holds the DS(5) as a recognizable and significant aspect of
the composition; the second layer revealsDebussy's elaborate 32
IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 275
suspension. The metric context and the emphasis of the
arpeggiated ii7 (Gm7) chord reinforce this interpretation
across the sixteenth-note figuration.The metric emphasis of
the G minor-seventh chord suggests that the real upper-
voice voice leading prolongs a G through a downward arpeg-
giation from G5 to G4, resolving into the suspended ninth
above the Tonic chord in m. 3. At the deepest level, the
Dominant chord remains privilegedby convention.
Authenticbass:T(i)-DS(7)-T(i)
From a theoretical perspective, the neighbor bass 1-7-i
holds some of the most intriguing mixed-function situations.
This bass line is also the most problematic from a notational
perspective and the most sensitive to the modality of the
Tonic chords.
The examples that follow all hinge upon the spelling of a
Dominant chord that is alteredwith #2. A vii` chord inher-
ently presents a conflict between the bass note, which is em-
blematic of Dominant function, with the upper-voice scale-
steps #2 and b6.These scale steps are disjunct on the Tonnetz,
and thus naturally divide the chord's allegiance to a Tonic.
When #2 resolves to 3 in a major mode Tonic, there is a clear
sense that it functions as #2; when #2 resolves to a minor-
mode Tonic, it is normally spelled as b3, and, more impor-
tantly,soundslike b3resolving by common tone.
Chopin presents a #2 alteration of a viiOchord in his Bb
minor Sonata, op. 35.32 As Example 31 shows, the opening
measures tonicize F, as the dominant of Bb minor, implying
a secondary viiO/V, from which an implied 2 of F moves
through #2 on the way to 3 of F (V of Bb) in an extended
structuralanacrusis.In this context, the chromatic scale-step
#2 clearly moves to 3 in a Dominant-to-Tonic impulse; imag-
ining this resolution as K3to 3 is not productive, and seems
to cloud the issue more than it clarifies.
This interpretationmaybe found in Smith 1986, 122-24.
276 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)

Durchausfantastischundleidenschaftlichvorzutragen
% -W

EXAMPLE 28. Schumann, Fantasy, op. 17, mm. 1-9.

 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION
C: V13
IV7
iil
C:
DP(/) D> T(i)
EXAMPLE Ravel, Le Tombeaude Couperin,"Rigaudon,"
29.
mm.1-2.
Example 32 presents a contrast to Example 31. The
opening measures of "Salome'sTanz,"from Strauss'sSalome,
embellish the tonic with a surface-level plagal succession
i-bV16-i, which establishes the key and mood of the dance.
After the first phrase closes with a half-cadence, the second
phrase begins in the same fashion, but as the expected WVI
chord embellishes tonic in the upper voices, the bass moves
to the lower neighbor bi,apparentlysubstitutingbvi6for WVI6.
However, we have seen this respelling before, in the context
of SD chords, where the pair Kiand 0i are proxy spellings of
pitches that have a linear function of 7 and #2 respectively.
When appearingin the bass like this, the second phrasethus
begins with an authenticstatement to contrast the opening
plagal gesture, resulting in a Ds(7) chord. The essential pla-
gal aspect of the progression is embodied in the "resolution"
of #2 to b3 in Tonic, exhibiting the linear behavior of a
common-tone b3alongside the Subdominant ~6resolving to
5. Careful analyses of this behavior must separatethe appar-
IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 277
Moderato
F: I 7 19
-
Tii D(5)?
F: T() Ds(5) T()
EXAMPLE 30. Debussy, Suite Bergamasque, "Prelude," mm. 1-3.
ent vertical spelling and acknowledgment of a triadic sonor-
ity from the linear behavior and clear authentic functional
discharge that characterizes the sense of double-function
afforded this striking progression.
Rimsky-Korsakov, in the second movement of the
Capriccio Espagnol, op. 34 (see Example 33) uses Ds chords
rather than straightforward Dominants in both the initial
compound basic idea and the continuation phrase of the
second variation. The DS(7) chord in m. 43 is identical to
the one found in Example 32, above. The passage concludes
with a strikingly rich cadence that superimposes a Nea-
politan triad above a bass 5 in m. 47. While this cadential
dominant might also be interpreted as an altered V7 (with a
lowered 2) the texture and spacing of the chord suggests a
DS(5) interpretation, where the Neapolitan chord is heard
superimposed over the lower-voice Dominant harmony.
278 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)

Grave Doppiomovimento

L
f-

Bb: (viio/V) V6-5

F: vii' DSO() "I"

Bb: [DS(7)/V] V7

EXAMPLE 31. Chopin, Sonata in Bbminor, op. 35, i, mm. 1-6.

CONCLUDING REMARKS ples in an effort to explain the "big moments"-the most

The Kldnge I have discussed in this article are related in
that they all involve a collision of Subdominant and Domi-
nant functional elements. While in practice bi frequently ap-
pears instead of 7, the linear nature of the progression is evi-
dent. It is so strong, in fact, that the authentic functional
discharge embodied in 7-1 must be acknowledged as the
guiding element of the progression, granting some degree of
Dominant function to the chord so that the result is a true
functional hybrid.
Scholars of the nineteenth century speak often of the
Romantic penchant to blur boundaries in art and in music.
The Kldnge I have discussed blur the boundaries of harmonic
function on the musical surface. This blurring, rather than
33
creating ambiguity, suggests a conflict that draws our atten-
tion to functionally hybrid chords. I have chosen my exam-
interesting and striking events in the compositions at hand.
Hatten 1994 develops a theory of markedness for the in-
terpretation of music.33 There is tremendous opportunity to
assimilate the present study with Hatten's interpretive strate-
gies. In this context, plural-functioned harmonies constitute
one half of the equipollent opposition (Plural-function vs.
Singular-function) where Plural-functionality is clearly the
marked term in the opposition. I argue that the presence of a
functional collision in a harmony constitutes a stylistic type,
within which the variants I've explored above represent a
range of musical tokens. This approach can lead us to make
This theory is adaptedfrom the field of linguistic semiotics;Hatten
credits the work of Michael Shapiro (1968) as his source for these
ideas.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 279

m.7
m.073

Lm

C6: i 6VI6 6i 1vi6? i

DS(7)
a
t~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

~~ 7 __4__
___L _ ___ __ __ ___ __ __ __ ___ __ __

c : T(i) T(i)
EXAMPLE
32. R. Strauss, Salome, "Salome'sTanz," mm. 1-3, 7-9.

Andante con moto

dolce r--- 3 > 3
r---

-4o

Cad6 D
D: i Ds(7) iII Ds(5)
F: I vi

D: T() DS T(i)

EXAMPLE 33. Rimsky-Korsakov, Capriccio espagnol, op. 34, ii, mm. 41-48.
280 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
informed interpretive decisions where these harmonies are
found.
But there is yet much work to be done; this study is only a
first step toward a fuller understanding of these fascinating
harmonies. Further avenues for study might attempt to draw
intertextual connections between plural-functioned har-
monies; to define a tradition for their use; to make general-
izations about their location; and to come to grips with
issues of stylistic evolution. It is my hope that this investiga-
tion might prove a useful point of departurefor such studies.
34
APPENDIX:
A BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF DANIEL HARRISON S THEORY
Harrison's approach is a mature dualist formulation
whose nineteenth-century origin may be traced to Haupt-
mann. Using a dialectic apparatus,34 Hauptmann was con-
cerned not with building a dualist tonal system, but rather
with using oppositional structures to explain the tonal sys-
tem as he found it. Helmholtz countered this theory with a
scathing critique supported by the natural sciences-a disci-
pline so much in vogue at the time that his critique carried
a great deal of weight. To counter Helmholtz's argument,
Ottingen invoked Hauptmann's Having/Being dialectic in
the context of the overtone series, and constructed a natural
basis for the minor mode (thus for harmonic dualism itself)
in his explanation of Tonicity/Phonicity. Ottingen's rationale
in the natural sciences was sufficient for Riemann to devise
his system of harmonic function and transformation. Al-
though he misread Ottingen's theory when he proposed his
infamous "undertone series," Riemann later revised his argu-
ment to find its basis in the mind rather than in nature, and
thus realigned his theories more closely with Hauptmann's
original formulation. Harrison's dualism is likewise uncon-
cerned with providing a natural basis for the diatonic system;
simply, Harrison finds the explanatory power of oppositional
pairs to be a useful entry into chromatic harmony. Since this
kind of dualism offers substantial explanatory power, it is
therefore a valid vehicle for musical analysis.
The primitive of Harrison's dual system is the simple op-
position of major and minor, from which he generates a dual
network of scale degrees. Onto this network, Harrison grafts
a second postulate, that of the "three-termed dualism,"
which places a neutral Tonic in between the marked ex-
tremes of Subdominant and Dominant. From these central
See Klumpenhouwer2002, 459-62, for discussionaboutthe degreeto
which authenticallyHegelian thought can be ascribedto Hauptmann's
theoryas opposedto Hauptmann'smereuse of dialecticlanguagewith-
out a deep understandingof true Hegeliandialectics.
 ASPECTS OF PLURAL FUNCTION IN CHROMATIC MUSIC 281

postulates, Harrison then explores the harmonic function 4.i A.

that can be inferred from each individual scale-degree in the
tonal system, and accordingly, in scale-degree assemblies.
In relation to a Tonic, the basic functional dualities, S and
D, are represented by 4 and 5 in particular, but also by the
primary triads projected from 4 and 5. When placed in the n- I
lowest voice, either 4 or 5 normally suffices to convey a sense
of its respective function and to subsume the remainder of
the Klang to its purpose. When placed in an upper voice, 5
requires the support of its functional agent, 7. 4 is not bur-
dened by this constraint, as it is not found in either of the
other primary triads (Harrison 1994, 46 Functional
ff.). T D T T DP D T
agents (the thirds of the primary triads) "are entirely dedi-
cated to the function in question" (Harrison 1994, 49) and
EXAMPLE 34. Modelprogressions involving DP(2)?-D.
thus operate unconditionally. Functional bases have the
power they do in large part because they imply the presence
of their agents. Functional associates (the fifths of the pri-
mary triads) are weak functional signifiers; they are able to In Harrison's theory, a similar argument is advanced for
amplify their comrades, but unable to bear functional expres- the dominant seventh chord. In V7, the seventh, 4, provides a
sion alone. strong element of S function, and thus empowers this har-
Any Klang may be disassembled and may represent a mony with S potential, especially if 4 is found in the bass.
functionally mixed structure; witness Harrison's disassembly Context or competing functional elements coexisting in a
of the supertonic triad. Since the function of the Klang as a Klang do not deny the potential of the functional primitives
whole is dependent on the functional status of its con- in the system. For Harrison (following Erpf), functional
stituents, the supertonic triad is functionally mixed: 4 and 6 mixture is an abstract property of a chord. In musical con-
are base and agent of S function; 2 expresses a weak D func- texts, these elements are reconciled as the scale steps com-
tion. Thus, there resides in the supertonic triad a latent pete for functional presence.
Dominant potential. Compare the two progressions in
Example 34. The first progression provides a context where REFERENCES
the latent Dominant potential of the supertonic triad is
apparent-the supertonic triad is subsumed into the func- Agmon, Eytan. 1995. "Functional Harmony Revisited: A
tion of the Dominant. The metric context and shared bass Prototype-Theoretic Approach." Music Theory Spectrum
scale step suggest that the soprano 2 is an arpeggiation 17.2: 196-214.
within the dominant harmony; 6 is a dissonant upper neigh- Aldwell, Edward and Carl Schachter. 1989. Harmony and
bor to 5. In the second progression, however, the metric con- Voice Leading, 2nd edition. New York: Harcourt Brace
text suggests that the soprano 2 has a greater degree of inde- Jovanovich.
pendence from the leading tone that follows. The leaping -- . 2003. Harmony and Voice Leading, 3rd edition.
bass supports a compelling change of harmonic function. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group/Thompson Learning.
282 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 27 (2005)
Benjamin, William E. 1975. "Interlocking Diatonic Col-
lections as a Source of Chromaticism in Late Nineteenth-
Century Music." In TheoryOnly (11-12): 31-51.
Blasius, Leslie. 1996. Schenker'sArgument and the Claims of
Music Theory.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Burkhart, Charles. 1978. "Schenker'sMotivic Parallelisms."
Journal ofMusic Theory 22: 145-76.
Cadwallader,Allen and David Gagnd. 1998. Analysisof Tonal
A Schenkerian Approach. New York and Oxford:
Music.
Oxford University Press.
Forte, Allen. 1979. Tonal Harmony in Concept and Practice,
3rd edition. New York:Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Harrison, Daniel. 1994. Harmonic Function in Chromatic
Music: A Renewed Dualist Theory and an Account of its
Precedents.Chicago and London: University of Chicago
Press.
.. 1995. "Supplement to the Theory of Augmented-
Sixth Chords." Music Theory Spectrum 17.2: 170-95.
. 2002. "Nonconformist Notions of Nineteenth-
Century Enharmonicism."MusicAnalysis21.2: 115-60.
Hatten, Robert. 1994. Musical Meaning in Beethoven.
Bloomington & Indianapolis:Indiana University Press.
Kinderman, William and Harald Krebs,ed. 1996. The Second
Practice of Nineteenth-Century Chromatic Tonality. Lincoln
and London: University of Nebraska Press.
Klumpenhouwer, Henry. 2002. "Dualist Tonal Space and
Transformationin Nineteenth-Century Musical Thought,"
in The Cambridge History of WesternMusic Theory. Edited
by Thomas Christensen. Cambridge:Cambridge Univer-
sity Press. 456-76.
Kopp, David. 2002. Chromatic Transformations in Nineteenth-
CenturyMusic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kostka, Stefan and Dorothy Payne. 1995. Tonal Harmony
with an Introduction to Twentieth-Century Music, 3rd edi-
tion. New York:McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Krebs, Harold. 1981. "Alternativesto Monotonality in Early
Nineteenth-Century Harmony." Journal of Music Theory
25: 1-16.
. 1991. "Tonal and Formal Dualism in Chopin's
•-
Scherzo, op. 31." Music Theory Spectrum 13.1: 48-60.
Laufer, Edward. 1997. "Some Aspects of Prolongational
Proceduresin the Ninth Symphony"in BrucknerStudies.
Edited by Timothy L. Jackson and Paul Hawkshaw.
Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.209-55.
Lewin, David. 1992. "Rehearings-Some Notes on
Analyzing Wagner: The Ring and Parsifal." Nineteenth
Century Music 16.1: 49-58.
Proctor, Gregory M. 1978. Technical Bases of Nineteenth-
Century Chromatic Tonality.: A Study in Chromaticism.
Ph.D. diss., Princeton University.
Rifkin, Deborah. 2004. "ATheory of Motives for Prokofiev's
Music." Music Theory Spectrum 26.2: 265-89.
Schenker, Heinrich. [1954] 1980. Harmony, ed. Oswald
Jonas, trans. Elisabeth Mann Borgese. Chicago and
London: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, Charles J. 1981. "Prolongations and Progressions as
Musical Syntax," in Music Theory. Special Topics.Edited by
Richmond Browne. New York:Academic Press. 139-74.
-- . 1986. "The Functional Extravaganceof Chromatic
Chords." Music Theory Spectrum 8: 94-139.
-. 2003. Functional Fishing with Tonnetz.: A Dualist
Syntax of Transformations. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the Society for Music Theory, Madison,
Wisconsin.
Stein, Deborah. 1985. Hugo Wolf's Lieder and Extensions of
Tonality.Ann Arbor:UMI Research Press.
Whittall, Arnold. 1995. "Review of Daniel Harrison's
Harmonic Function in Chromatic Music." Music and
Letters 76.3: 457-60.
MusicTheorySpectrum, Vol. 27, Issue 2, pp. 249-282, ISSN 0195-6167,
electronicISSN 1533-8339. ? 2005 by The Society for MusicTheory.
All rights reserved.Please direct all requestsfor permissionto photo-
copy or reproducearticlecontent throughthe Universityof California
Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpress.edu/
journals/rights.htm.