Hubbry Logo
Function (music)Function (music)Main
Open search
Function (music)
Community hub
Function (music)
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Function (music)
Function (music)
Function (music)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In music, function (or harmonic function[1]) is a term used to denote the relationship of a chord[2] or a scale degree[3] to a tonal centre. Two main theories of tonal functions exist today:

  • The German theory created by Hugo Riemann in his Vereinfachte Harmonielehre of 1893, which soon became an international success (English and Russian translations in 1896, French translation in 1899),[4] and which is the theory of functions properly speaking.[5] Riemann identified three abstract tonal "functions"—tonic, dominant and subdominant—denoted by the letters T, D, and S, respectively, each of which could take on a more or less modified appearance in any chord of the scale.[6] This theory, in several revised forms, remains much in use for the pedagogy of harmony and analysis in German-speaking countries and in Northern and Eastern European countries.
  • The Viennese theory, characterized by the use of Roman numerals to denote the chords of the tonal scale, as developed by Simon Sechter, Arnold Schoenberg, Heinrich Schenker, and others,[7] practiced today in Western Europe and the United States. This theory in origin was not explicitly about tonal functions. It considers the relation of the chords to their tonic in the context of harmonic progressions, often following the cycle of fifths. That this actually describes what could be termed the chords' "function" is evident in Schoenberg's Structural Functions of Harmony (1954), a short treatise dealing mainly with harmonic progressions in the context of a general "monotonality".[8]

Both theories find part of their inspiration in the theories of Jean-Philippe Rameau, starting with his Traité d'harmonie (1722).[9] Even if the concept of harmonic function was not so named before 1893, it can be shown to exist, explicitly or implicitly, in many theories of harmony before that date. Early usages of the term in music (not necessarily in the sense implied here, or only vaguely so) include those by Fétis (Traité complet de la théorie et de la pratique de l'harmonie, 1844), Durutte (Esthétique musicale, 1855), and Loquin (Notions élémentaires d'harmonie moderne, 1862).[10]

The idea of function has been extended further and is sometimes used to translate Antique concepts, such as dynamis in Ancient Greece or qualitas in medieval Latin.

Origins of the concept

[edit]

The concept of harmonic function originates in theories about just intonation. It was realized that three perfect major triads, distant from each other by a perfect fifth, produced the seven degrees of the major scale in one of the possible forms of just intonation: for instance, the triads F–A–C, C–E–G, and G–B–D (subdominant, tonic, and dominant respectively) produce the seven notes of the major scale. These three triads were soon considered the most important chords of the major tonality, with the tonic in the center, the dominant above, and the subdominant below.

This symmetric construction may have been one of the reasons the fourth degree of the scale, and the chord built on it, were named "subdominant", i.e. the "dominant under [the tonic]". It also is one of the origins of the dualist theories that describe not only the scale in just intonation as a symmetric construction, but also the minor tonality as an inversion of the major one. Dualist theories are documented from the 16th century onward.

German functional theory

[edit]

The term "functional harmony" derives from Riemann and particularly from his Harmony Simplified.[11] Riemann's direct inspiration was Moritz Hauptmann's dialectic description of tonality.[12] Riemann identified three abstract functions: the tonic, the dominant (its upper fifth), and the subdominant (its lower fifth).[13] He also considered the minor scale the inversion of the major scale, so that the dominant was the fifth above the tonic in major, but below the tonic in minor; the subdominant, similarly, was the fifth below the tonic (or the fourth above) in major, and the reverse in minor.

Despite their complexity, Riemann's ideas had huge impact, especially where German influence was strong. A good example are Hermann Grabner's textbooks.[14] More recent German theorists have abandoned the most complex aspect of Riemann's theory, the dualist conception of major and minor, and consider the dominant the fifth degree above the tonic and the subdominant the fourth degree in both minor and major.[15]

Tonic and its relative (German Parallel, Tp) in C major: CM and Am chords Playⓘ.

In Diether de la Motte's version of the theory,[16] the three tonal functions are denoted by the letters T, D and S, for Tonic, Dominant and Subdominant respectively; the letters are uppercase for functions in major (T, D, S) and lowercase for functions in minor (t, d, s). Each function can in principle be fulfilled by three chords: the main chord corresponding to the function and the chords a third lower and a third higher, as indicated by additional letters. An additional letter P or p indicates that the function is fulfilled by the relative (German Parallel) of its main triad: for instance Tp for the minor relative of the major tonic (e.g., A minor for C major), tP for the major relative of the minor tonic (e.g. E♭ major for c minor), etc. The other triad a third apart from the main one may be denoted by an additional G or g for Gegenparallelklang or Gegenklang ("counterrelative"), for instance tG for the major counterrelative of the minor tonic (e.g. A♭ major for C minor).

Triads a third apart differ from each other by one note only, the other two being shared. In addition, within the diatonic scale, triads a third apart necessarily are of opposite mode. In the simplified theory where the functions in major and minor are on the same scale degrees, the possible functions of triads on degrees I to VII of the scale could be summarized as in the table below[17] (degrees II in minor and VII in major, diminished fifths in the diatonic scale, are considered chords without fundamentals). Chords on III and VI may have the same function as those a third above or a third below, but one of these two is less frequent than the other, as indicated by parentheses.

Degree I II III IV V VI VII
Function in major T Sp Dp / (Tg) S D Tp / (Sg)  
in minor t   tP / (dG) s d sP / tG dP

In each case, the chord's mode is denoted by the final letter: for instance, Sp for II in major indicates that II is the minor relative (p) of the major subdominant (S). The major VIth degree in minor is the only one where both functions, sP (major relative of the minor subdominant) and tG (major counterparallel of the minor tonic), are equally plausible. Other signs (not discussed here) are used to denote altered chords, chords without fundamentals, applied dominants, etc. Degree VII in harmonic sequence (e.g. I–IV–VII–III–VI–II–V–I) may be denoted by its roman numeral; in major, the sequence would then be denoted by T–S–VII–Dp–Tp–Sp–D–T.

As summarized by Vincent d'Indy (1903),[18] who shared Riemann's conception:

  1. There is only one chord, a perfect chord; it alone is consonant because it alone generates a feeling of repose and balance;
  2. this chord has two different forms, major and minor, depending on whether it is composed of a minor third over a major third or a major third over a minor;
  3. this chord is able to take on three different tonal functions—tonic, dominant, or subdominant.

Viennese theory of degrees

[edit]
The seven scale degrees in C major with their respective triads and Roman numeral notation

According to the Viennese theory, the "theory of degrees" (Stufentheorie), represented by Simon Sechter, Heinrich Schenker, and Arnold Schoenberg, among others, each scale degree has its own function and refers to the tonal center through the cycle of fifths; it stresses harmonic progressions above chord quality.[19] In music theory as commonly taught in the US, there are six or seven different functions, depending on whether VII is considered to have an independent function.

Stufentheorie stresses the individuality and independence of the seven harmonic degrees. Moreover, unlike Funktionstheorie, where the primary harmonic model is the I–IV–V–I progression, Stufentheorie leans heavily on the cycle of descending fifths I–IV–VII–III–VI–II–V–I".

— Eytan Agmon[20]

Comparison of the terminologies

[edit]

The table below compares the English and German terms for the major scale. In English, the scale degrees' names are also the names of their functions, and they remain the same in major and in minor.

Name of scale degree Roman numeral Function in German English translation German abbreviation
Tonic I Tonika Tonic T
Supertonic ii Subdominantparallele Relative of the subdominant Sp
Mediant iii Dominantparallele or
Tonika-Gegenparallele 		Relative of the dominant or
Counterrelative of the tonic 		Dp/Tg
Subdominant IV Subdominante Subdominant (also Pre-dominant) S
Dominant V Dominante Dominant D
Submediant vi Tonikaparallele Relative of the tonic Tp
Leading (note) vii° verkürzter Dominantseptakkord [Incomplete dominant seventh chord] diagonally slashed D7 (Đ7)

Note that ii, iii, and vi are lowercase: this indicates that they are minor chords; vii° indicates that this chord is a diminished triad.

Some may at first be put off by the overt theorizing apparent in German harmony, wishing perhaps that a choice be made once and for all between Riemann's Funktionstheorie and the older Stufentheorie, or possibly believing that so-called linear theories have settled all earlier disputes. Yet this ongoing conflict between antithetical theories, with its attendant uncertainties and complexities, has special merits. In particular, whereas an English-speaking student may falsely believe that he or she is learning harmony "as it really is," the German student encounters what are obviously theoretical constructs and must deal with them accordingly.

— Robert O. Gjerdingen[13]

Reviewing usage of harmonic theory in American publications, William Caplin writes:[21]

Most North American textbooks identify individual harmonies in terms of the scale degrees of their roots. ... Many theorists understand, however, that the Roman numerals do not necessarily define seven fully distinct harmonies, and they instead propose a classification of harmonies into three main groups of harmonic functions: tonic, dominant, and pre-dominant.

  1. Tonic harmonies include the I and VI chords in their various positions.
  2. Dominant harmonies include the V and VII chords in their various positions. III can function as a dominant substitute in some contexts (as in the progression V–III–VI).
  3. Pre-dominant harmonies include a wide variety of chords: IV, II, ♭II, secondary (applied) dominants of the dominant (such as V7/V), and the various "augmented-sixth" chords. ... The modern North American adaptation of the function theory retains Riemann’s category of tonic and dominant functions but usually reconceptualizes his "subdominant" function into a more all-embracing pre-dominant function.

Caplin adds that there are two main types of pre-dominant harmonies, "those built above the fourth degree of the scale (scale degree 4) in the bass voice and those derived from the dominant of the dominant (V/V)". The first type includes IV, II6 or ♭II6, but also other positions of these, such as IV6 or ♭II. The second type groups harmonies that feature the raised-fourth scale degree (♯scale degree 4) functioning as the leading tone of the dominant: VII7/V, V6V, or the three varieties of augmented sixth chords.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Function (music)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In music theory, function (also known as harmonic function) denotes the relational role of a chord or scale degree within a tonal framework, determining its tendency to provide stability, create tension, or facilitate progression toward resolution in harmonic sequences. This concept is central to common-practice Western music from the 18th and 19th centuries, where chords are categorized not merely by their intervallic structure but by their dynamic interaction with a central tonic pitch or key. The primary harmonic functions are tonic, subdominant (or pre-dominant), and dominant, each associated with specific diatonic chords that drive musical coherence. The tonic function, exemplified by the I chord (built on the first scale degree), establishes a sense of rest and home base, often prolonging stability through related chords like iii or vi. In contrast, the subdominant function, typically represented by IV or ii chords, builds preparatory tension by leading toward the dominant, while the dominant function—embodied in V or vii° chords—generates strong pull through the leading tone, resolving back to the tonic for closure. These functions underpin standard progressions, such as the authentic cadence (V–I), which reinforces tonal hierarchy and phrase endings. Functional analysis extends beyond classical genres to , rock, and contemporary styles, where it aids in , composition, and understanding chord substitutions, though variations occur across musical idioms. For instance, in minor keys, the dominant often employs the raised seventh degree from the to enhance resolution strength. This framework, rooted in scale-degree tendencies, allows musicians to interpret contextually, prioritizing relational behavior over absolute chord identity.

Core Concepts

Definition of Harmonic Function

Harmonic function in music denotes the structural and expressive role that chords fulfill within a tonal framework, surpassing their intervallic structure to influence the progression and overall coherence of . This concept highlights how chords contribute to the creation of tension, stability, and resolution in musical progressions, guiding the listener's of tonal direction./09%3A_Harmonic_Progression_and_Harmonic_Function/9.04%3A_Harmonic_Function) Central to this idea is the principle that harmonic functions emerge from the interrelations among chords derived from the scale degrees of a given key, providing a sense of purpose and movement toward cadential closure. These relationships are fundamentally anchored in the acoustic phenomena of the overtone series, which underlies the consonance of basic harmonies, and in voice-leading practices that facilitate efficient, smooth connections between successive chords./03%3A_Harmony/3.02%3A_Harmonic_Functions) The terminology "function" (Funktion) originated in the late through Hugo Riemann's theoretical work, where he borrowed from mathematical principles of relational dependencies to model the dynamic interactions among tonal elements in . Essential to understanding are the foundational chord types: triads, formed by stacking thirds to create a , third, and fifth, and seventh chords, which extend triads by adding another third, serving as the core units for constructing functional progressions in tonal ./09%3A_Harmonic_Progression_and_Harmonic_Function/9.04%3A_Harmonic_Function) In practice, these functions manifest primarily as tonic for stability, dominant for tension, and for preparation, forming the triad of roles that underpin tonal ./03%3A_Harmony/3.02%3A_Harmonic_Functions)

Primary Functions in Tonal Harmony

In tonal harmony, the primary functions—tonic, dominant, and —organize chord progressions to generate tension and resolution, forming the foundation of musical structure in keys. The tonic function establishes stability and a sense of closure, the dominant creates instability that demands resolution to the tonic, and the prepares tension by bridging the tonic and dominant, facilitating smooth harmonic motion. These functions are not tied strictly to individual chords but to their contextual roles within progressions, often following a cyclical pattern of tonic to to dominant back to tonic. The tonic function provides harmonic rest and reinforces the key center, typically embodied by the I (or i) chord in root position, which shares the , third, and fifth with the scale's tonal foundation for maximum stability. Chords like the (III or iii) and (VI or vi) serve as tonic substitutes due to their shared tones with the primary tonic triad—the (iii or III) shares the third and fifth of the tonic, while the (vi or VI) shares the and third—allowing them to prolong tonal closure without demanding progression. For instance, in , the C major (I), (iii), and (vi) chords all contribute to tonic function by evoking resolution. Dominant function generates the strongest tension, pulling inexorably toward the tonic through the leading tone (scale degree 7) and, in the V7 chord, the interval between the third and seventh that requires resolution to the and third. Centered on the V chord (major triad in minor keys), this function includes variants like the leading-tone (VII or vii°), which substitutes for V by emphasizing the leading tone, and secondary dominants, which temporarily tonicize non-tonic chords (e.g., V/V or V7/ii) to heighten local tension before resolving. In , (V) and B diminished (vii°) exemplify this, with the in (B-F) resolving characteristically to . The function acts as a preparatory , introducing mild unrest to propel the toward the dominant without the full instability of the latter, often involving the IV (or iv) chord and its relatives like the (ii), which shares two tones with IV and leads smoothly to . The (VI or vi) can also adopt subdominant qualities in certain contexts, sharing tones with IV to extend preparation, serving as a bridge between tonic stability and dominant pull. In C major, (IV) and (ii) illustrate this, with progressions like IV-V or ii-V common for building anticipation. Chords exhibit functional interchangeability depending on voice leading, progression context, and modal mixture, where a single chord might shift roles; for example, the IV chord typically functions as subdominant but can borrow from the parallel minor as iv for added color while retaining preparatory tension, or the vi chord may alternate between tonic prolongation and subdominant preparation based on its resolution. This flexibility enhances expressive variety while maintaining tonal coherence.
FunctionPrimary ChordSubstitutes/VariantsExamples in C Major
Tonic (T)Iiii, viC, Em, Am
Dominant (D)Vvii°, secondary dominants (e.g., V/V)G, Bdim
Subdominant (S)IVii, vi (contextual)F, Dm

Historical Development

Origins in the 18th Century

The origins of harmonic function in music theory trace back to the early , particularly through the innovative work of French composer and theorist . In his seminal 1722 treatise Traité de l'harmonie réduite à ses principes naturels, Rameau introduced the concept of the basse fondamentale (fundamental bass), which posited that all derives from a series of root-position chords progressing in a logical sequence. This framework implied functional relationships among chords, such as the progression from the dominant (V) to the tonic (I), where the dominant chord generates tension resolved by the tonic, laying a foundational principle for understanding tonal as a dynamic system rather than mere superposition. Rameau's ideas shifted focus from linear to vertical chord structures, influencing subsequent theorists by emphasizing how chord roots drive harmonic motion. Parallel to Rameau's theoretical advancements, practical traditions in and fostered an intuitive grasp of through and partimento practices. , a indicating chord intervals above a bass line, was widely used in the era to guide improvisational accompaniments, encouraging realizations that adhered to conventional progressions reflecting tonal stability and resolution. In , partimento exercises—unfigured bass lines serving as pedagogical tools—trained musicians to generate upper voices in ways that prioritized smooth and cadential closures, embodying functional logic without formal . German adaptations of these methods, evident in treatises like Johann David Heinichen's Der General-Bass in der Composition (1728), further integrated such practices into compositional training, where chord successions intuitively supported key centers through dominant-tonic resolutions. A pivotal development in this era was the broader transition from modal to tonal organization in Western music, crystallized during the common-practice period of the 18th century. This shift prioritized major and minor keys over ecclesiastical modes, with harmonic functions emerging organically from standardized cadences that articulated phrase endings and structural hierarchies. Authentic cadences (V-I) provided strong closure by reinforcing the tonic as the gravitational center, while plagal cadences (IV-I) offered a softer resolution, both contributing to the perception of tonality as a hierarchical system governed by chord interrelations. These cadential formulas, ubiquitous in works by composers like Johann Sebastian Bach and Joseph Haydn, underscored the functional roles of chords in establishing and maintaining tonal coherence. Bridging into the early 19th century, Austrian theorist Simon Sechter built upon these foundations by explicitly analyzing chord roles in key establishment, such as requiring the dominant and to affirm the tonic's primacy. In his theoretical writings and later works, Sechter emphasized how specific chords function to delineate tonal boundaries, prefiguring systematic degree-based analyses. These 18th-century precursors, from Rameau's abstractions to practical improvisatory traditions, set the stage for the more formalized theories of that emerged later in the century.

German Functional Theory

German functional theory, primarily developed by , represents a pivotal advancement in understanding tonal through psychological and perceptual roles of chords rather than their strict scale-degree positions. In his early work Musikalische Logik (1872), Riemann laid foundational ideas for harmonic dualism, positing that major and minor triads are symmetrical counterparts generated by and , respectively, to explain the perceptual equivalence of keys like and as tonic functions. This dualism underpins the theory's core, treating minor chords as "upside-down" versions of major ones, with the minor triad's root interpreted as its uppermost note in a perceptual sense. Riemann formalized his functional nomenclature in Vereinfachte Harmonielehre (1893), where he defined three primary functions: T (Tonik) for the tonic, S (Subdominante) for the , and D (Dominante) for the dominant, each with parallel minor variants denoted by lowercase letters (t, s, d). For instance, in , the tonic function T encompasses C major, while its parallel t corresponds to , emphasizing psychological stability over intervallic structure; similarly, S might represent or , and D or . This system introduced functional interpretations of "relative" and "parallel" keys, where relatives share the same tonic function across major-minor modes, and parallels maintain symmetry through dualistic inversion. Central principles include harmonic dualism's emphasis on major-minor , which Riemann extended to under-dominants (subdominant side, akin to pulling toward resolution) and over-dominants (dominant side, based on overtones leading to tension). Progressions follow a "Riemannian " cycle of T-S-D-T, simplifying harmonic motion into perceptual rotations that prioritize functional contrast and return, reducing all diatonic and many chromatic chords to transformations of these three functions by 1893. This 1893 simplification, building on earlier ideas, profoundly influenced pedagogy in German-speaking regions, becoming a standard for analyzing tonal coherence through perceptual roles rather than arithmetic positions. Within the school, criticisms arose over the theory's overemphasis on , which often led to awkward analyses of modal mixtures and borrowed chords that disrupted dualistic balance, forcing non-fitting interpretations onto asymmetrical progressions. Despite these, Riemann's framework, rooted in , offered a versatile tool for understanding harmony's emotional and structural logic.

Viennese Theory of Degrees

The Viennese Theory of Degrees, also known as Stufentheorie, emerged in the early as a scale-degree approach to , emphasizing the position of chords within the to define their functional roles. Gottfried Weber introduced a systematic use of to denote scale degrees in his Versuch einer geordneten Theorie der Tonsetzkunst (1817–1821), refining earlier notations by Abbé Georg Joseph Vogler to distinguish chord qualities through uppercase and lowercase letters (e.g., I for major tonic, vi for degree). Simon Sechter, often regarded as the founder of this Viennese school, further developed the theory in Die Grundsätze der musikalischen Komposition (1853–1854), prioritizing chord progressions based on these degrees while employing sparingly alongside letter notations. Central to the are the principles of grouping scale degrees by their relational functions within the key, rooted in a monistic tonal derived from the . The tonic function encompasses degrees I and vi, providing stability; the dominant function includes and vii°, generating tension toward resolution; and the function comprises IV and ii, facilitating movement away from the tonic. This approach analyzes through the context of the established key and scale positions, eschewing perceptual dualism in favor of a unified where functions emerge from diatonic relationships rather than symmetric oppositions between modes. In the 20th century, the theory gained prominence through its integration into , where , influenced by Sechter via , treated scale degrees as foundational to structural reductions in tonal music. It also became a cornerstone of Anglo-American , as seen in Walter 's Harmony (1947), which employs to illustrate degree-based functions in standard textbooks. Pedagogically, the classifies by degree progressions, such as the authentic cadence (V–I), which reinforces the tonic-dominant polarity, or the plagal cadence (IV–I), highlighting resolution.

Theoretical Comparisons

Terminological Differences

In German functional , particularly as developed by , chords are classified by their harmonic roles using the labels T (Tonic), S (), and D (Dominant), which emphasize the relational functions within a key, in contrast to the Viennese of degrees (Stufentheorie), which employs such as I, IV, and V to denote scale-degree positions. For instance, in functional , the (ii) is interpreted as Sp (subdominant parallel), blending elements of tonic and through shared tones to prepare the dominant, whereas degree views the progression ii-V-I simply as a chain of scale degrees without inherent functional blending. Notation in functional analysis often simplifies progressions to sequences like T-S-D-T to highlight cadential drive, while degree theory uses I-IV-V-I to specify exact chord roots and qualities, potentially obscuring functional hierarchies. This divergence extends to altered chords; the Neapolitan sixth, treated as an altered in both frameworks, is labeled N⁶ or ♭II⁶ in degree theory to indicate its position, but in functional theory, it may be notated as Sp (subdominant parallel) to stress its pre-dominant role.
Term/ConceptFunctional Theory (German/Riemannian)Degree Theory (Viennese/Roman Numerals)
Primary TonicT (e.g., I or vi)I (major) or i (minor)
Subdominant GroupS (e.g., IV or ii)IV or ii
Dominant GroupD (e.g., V or vii°)V or vii°
Cadential ProgressionT-S-D-TI-IV-V-I
Neapolitan SixthSp (altered subdominant parallel)♭II⁶ or N⁶
Regionally, the German term "Funktionstheorie" directly refers to Riemann's system, whereas English-language texts often translate it as "functional harmony" or subsume it under "common-practice harmony," which prioritizes broader tonal practices over strict functional labeling. These terminological variations influence analytical emphasis: functional theory, with its T/S/D framework, prioritizes voice-leading connections and dual interpretations (e.g., parallel and relative variants), while degree theory focuses on root-motion patterns and scale-degree successions.

Conceptual Similarities and Influences

Both the German functional theory, primarily developed by , and the Viennese theory of degrees, associated with figures like Simon Sechter and Gottfried Weber, recognize a fundamental triad of harmonic roles centered on stability (tonic), tension (dominant), and preparation or mediation (), which underpin tonal progression toward resolution. This shared framework emphasizes the tonic as a point of repose, the dominant as a generator of instability requiring resolution, and the as a preparatory element facilitating smooth transitions, often culminating in cadential progressions that affirm tonal coherence. These principles reflect a common prioritization of diatonic harmony's psychological and structural effects, where chord successions are evaluated not merely by intervallic content but by their contribution to overall tonal direction. Riemann's functional approach drew significant inspiration from Weber's earlier work on scale degrees (Stufen), which systematized chord relationships within keys, providing a scaffold for Riemann's abstraction of functions as dynamic forces rather than static positions. Reciprocally, Sechter incorporated functional intuitions into his degree-based , treating chords as temporary tonics or bass fundamentals that align with preparatory and resolutive roles, thus bridging the two traditions through a emphasis on hierarchical tonal unity. This mutual adaptation highlights how Viennese degree theory's focus on scale-step progressions informed Riemann's more abstract functional notation, while Sechter's pedagogical influence extended indirectly to later theorists via students like . A key unified concept across both theories is the treatment of altered chords, such as secondary dominants, which are interpreted as extensions of the dominant function to create temporary tonal centers, enhancing progression without disrupting overall coherence; for instance, a V/V chord serves as a dominant preparation targeting the degree. Similarly, both frameworks emphasize the circle of fifths as a foundational structure for natural progressions, with Weber's Tonartenverwandtschaften (key relationships) paralleling Riemann's functional cycles that generate stepwise root motion for cadential drive. In addressing , the theories converge on functional reinterpretation, exemplified by augmented sixth chords functioning as dominant equivalents due to their pitch-class equivalence with dominant sevenths and their role in creating tension resolved by fifth-motion to the tonic. These overlaps facilitated 20th-century syntheses, notably Heinrich Schenker's Ursatz (fundamental structure), which integrates functional goals—such as dominant tension resolving to tonic stability—with degree-based linear progressions, treating the Urlinie (fundamental line) as a span from scale degree 3 or 5 to 1 over a bass arpeggiation that embodies subdominant-dominant-tonic motions. This approach resolved lingering debates on chromatic handling by viewing alterations as prolongations within a unified , influencing global analytic practices in Schenkerian theory.

Applications and Extensions

Analytical Examples in Music

Functional analysis illuminates the structural and expressive roles of harmonies in tonal music by assigning tonic (T), subdominant (S), and dominant (D) functions to chords, revealing their contributions to progression and resolution. This approach, rooted in German functional theory, emphasizes the dynamic relationships among chords rather than mere scale degrees, allowing analysts to trace the "drive" toward stability or tension in musical passages. In common-practice repertoire, such labeling highlights how composers manipulate these functions to propel form and emotion. A example appears in Johann Sebastian Bach's from BWV 78, "Jesu, der du meine Seele," where the employs pre-dominant (S) functions leading to dominant (D) resolutions, underscoring the text's themes of suffering and redemption. In measures 1-2 of Chorale 269, a chord serves as the pre-dominant, transitioning smoothly to the dominant, which resolves to the tonic, creating a pattern of tension-release that reinforces the chorale's devotional character. This dual labeling—degrees like ii-V-I alongside functions S-D-T—demonstrates Bach's mastery of resolution patterns, where the anticipates the dominant's pull toward closure. In the Classical era, Ludwig van Beethoven's Op. 2 No. 1 in , first movement exposition, exemplifies functional drive through progressions that propel the sonata form. The opening tonic area establishes T in , transitioning via elements to the dominant minor () second group, interpretable as T in the new key, culminating in a . A typical progression, such as I-IV-V-I, translates to T-S-D-T, where the dominant's prolongation builds urgency toward the exposition's close, integrating with thematic development. Riemann's functional framework, applied to Beethoven's sonatas, reveals how such sequences adapt theoretical rules to repertoire demands, emphasizing third-relations and tonal polarity. The Romantic period extends to more expansive and chromatic textures, as in Frédéric Chopin's Prelude Op. 28 No. 4 in . Here, expansions dominate, with measures 5-6 featuring iv₆/₃ (S function) in or ii₆/₃ in , prolonged through circle-of-fifths motion (E-A-D-G), delaying tonic resolution and evoking melancholy. Modal mixture appears in the same passage, borrowing from parallel modes (e.g., vii°₇ as ii°₇), interpreted dually as S or D preparations, which heighten emotional depth without abandoning tonal function. Measure 9's iv₆ resolves as the first clear S-to-T, while later vii°₇/iv in / introduces borrowed dominants, expanding the 's role in the prelude's lamenting arc. To perform functional analysis, analysts follow a structured method: first, confirm the key and identify phrases via ; second, reduce the harmony to root-position chords, labeling each with and functions (T for I/iii/vi, S for ii/IV, D for /VII); third, trace the progression's drive, noting prolongations or substitutions. For instance, in a simple authentic :
MeasureChord (Roman Numeral)Function
1IT
2IV or iiS
3 or vii°D
4IT
This table illustrates the standard T-S-D-T flow, where S builds from T and yields to D's tension before resolving. Adaptations account for inversions or mixtures, ensuring the analysis captures the music's directional impulse. Functional theory proves especially useful in revealing emotional arcs, such as the prolonged dominant creating in Mozart's operas. In the statue scene of (Act II, Scene 14), the dominant harmony () is extended over several measures before the Commendatore's entrance, heightening dramatic tension through unresolved D function, which delays the tonic and amplifies the dread. This technique leverages the dominant's inherent instability to mirror , a hallmark of Mozart's operatic .

Modern and Non-Tonal Adaptations

In and , functional concepts from tonal persist through adaptations like the progression, where the I-IV-V structure is analyzed as tonic (T), (S), and dominant (D) functions, providing a foundational framework for tension and resolution despite the genre's modal and blues-scale inflections. Extensions such as substitutions further preserve dominant function by replacing the V7 chord with another dominant seventh chord a away, maintaining the essential interval (3rd and 7th of the original) for smooth and heightened color in improvisations. For atonal and post-tonal music, reinterprets functional ideas without relying on traditional tonal hierarchies, originating in David Lewin's 1987 framework of transformational operations on triads. These include the (parallel) operation, which shifts a major triad to its minor counterpart sharing the root; (relative), connecting a major triad to the triad a minor third below; and L (leading-tone exchange), linking a major triad to the minor triad a major third above, each preserving two common tones to model smooth progressions in works by composers like Wagner or in chromatic atonal contexts. Pedagogical approaches in the 2020s have updated functional theory by blending it with post-tonal tools, such as for analyzing pitch-class relations, enabling students to apply T-S-D concepts alongside atonal structures in comprehensive curricula. Yet, scholars critique this integration for perpetuating a tonal in global , where emphasis on functional reinforces Eurocentric narratives and racial hierarchies by privileging Western classical traditions over diverse non-tonal practices. Such biases manifest in unrepresentative teaching corpora dominated by white European composers, limiting broader analytical inclusivity. The 1950s Darmstadt School exemplified a sharp rejection of functional tonality, with composers like Boulez and Stockhausen embracing to negate traditional in pursuit of structural innovation and social utopianism. In contrast, functional analyses remain vital in modern film scores, as seen in John Williams's works where T-D resolutions drive emotional arcs, such as the chromatic modulating cadential resolutions in "Welcome to " (B♭ major half leading to tonic resolution) or the subtonic half in the Star Wars main theme, evoking narrative closure through dominant-to-tonic pulls. Emerging trends as of 2025 incorporate functional thinking into and AI music generation, where models trained on vast datasets generate chord progressions and harmonic accompaniments that mimic T-S-D tensions for coherent, expressive outputs in tools aiding composition and . These systems, including AI-based analyzers, extend functional concepts to automate resolutions and stylistic emulation, fostering interdisciplinary applications in and creation.

References

  1. https://musictheory.pugetsound.edu/mt21c/HarmonicFunction.html
  2. https://openmusictheory.github.io/harmonicFunctions.html
  3. https://muted.io/chord-functions/
  4. https://rwu.pressbooks.pub/musictheory/chapter/harmonic-direction-i-root-motion-and-progression/
  5. https://intmus.github.io/inttheory20-21/07-harmonic-functions/a2-diaprogcirclefifths.html
  6. https://direct.mit.edu/books/oa-monograph/chapter-pdf/2333016/c006900_9780262377362.pdf
  7. https://mtosmt.org/issues/mto.95.1.3/mto.95.1.3.kopp.php
  8. https://iastate.pressbooks.pub/comprehensivemusicianship/chapter/6-1-diatonic-harmony-tutorial/
  9. https://musictheory.pugetsound.edu/mt21c/SecondaryDominantsInMajorAndMinor.html
  10. https://theory.esm.rochester.edu/integral/32-2018/pau/
  11. https://music.arts.uci.edu/abauer/5.2/readings/Lester_Compositional_Theory_Eighteenth-Century_Ch_4.pdf
  12. https://www.athensjournals.gr/humanities/2017-4-1-1-Chandler.pdf
  13. https://music.arts.uci.edu/abauer/5.2/readings/Christensen%2C_Thoroughbass_Partimento_and_Continuo_Playing.pdf
  14. https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=music_and_worship_student_presentations
  15. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/eighteenth-century-music/article/partimento-fugue-in-eighteenthcentury-germany-a-bridge-between-thoroughbass-lessons-and-fugal-composition/3F67B165D4141242F1F014B16FD36C14
  16. https://forrestbalman.com/media/analyses/modality-to-tonality.pdf
  17. https://mtosmt.org/issues/mto.08.14.1/mto.08.14.1.gur.html
  18. https://www.jstor.org/stable/746180
  19. https://read.dukeupress.edu/journal-of-music-theory/article/66/1/63/313634/Music-Theory-Pedagogy-in-the-Nineteenth
  20. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3090670
  21. http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/2742/1/48.pdf.pdf
  22. https://archive.org/details/cu31924022305357
  23. https://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/20738/sample/9780521820738ws.pdf
  24. https://dcmlab.github.io/ddd/scope.html
  25. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/hugo-riemann-and-the-birth-of-modern-musical-thought/39CC0F257BBE86A7EE4E650C0A51B70D
  26. https://mtosmt.org/issues/mto.05.11.2/mto.05.11.2.harrison.php
  27. http://www.myweb.ttu.edu/pmarten/HOT2/HOT2Readings/CHWMT25-Bernstein.pdf
  28. https://europeanmusictheory.eu/stufentheorie/
  29. https://bpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.tufts.edu/dist/6/2974/files/2015/10/Piston.pdf
  30. https://www.enriqueigoa.com/articulos_y_libros/Functional_Harmony.pdf
  31. https://www.academia.edu/27928798/A_Guide_to_the_Terminology_of_German_Harmony
  32. https://mtosmt.org/issues/mto.95.1.3/mto.95.1.3.kopp.html
  33. https://symposium.music.org/18/item/1812-schenker-and-the-theoretical-tradition-the-concept-of-musical-reduction.html
  34. https://mtosmt.org/issues/mto.04.10.1/mto.04.10.1.bass.html
  35. https://reginaldbain.com/atmi12/ca/ex4/
  36. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259731459_Tonality_between_Rule_and_Repertory_Or_Riemann%27s_Functions-Beethoven%27s_Function
  37. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wFBcMGJpZ0
  38. https://digital.library.txst.edu/bitstreams/0b15d9d5-bae0-4a78-a6e2-e72c65d3e46a/download
  39. https://openmusictheory.github.io/harmonicAnalysis.html
  40. https://www.metopera.org/discover/education/educator-guides/don-giovanni/musical-snapshots/don-giovannis-downfall/
  41. https://viva.pressbooks.pub/openmusictheory/chapter/blues-harmony/
  42. https://viva.pressbooks.pub/openmusictheory/chapter/substitutions/
  43. https://viva.pressbooks.pub/openmusictheory/chapter/neo-riemannian-triadic-progressions/
  44. https://routledgetextbooks.com/textbooks/9781138052536/
  45. https://read.dukeupress.edu/journal-of-music-theory/article/68/1/59/387899/Tonality-and-Racism
  46. https://mtosmt.org/issues/mto.22.28.1/mto.22.28.1.london.pdf
  47. http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/221758/23985349/1385826808150/LachenmannComposingShadowDarmstadt.pdf?token=hSBKMmeYRsYPxevLh0yu4e376pE%253D
  48. https://www.mtosmt.org/issues/mto.13.19.4/mto.13.19.4.lehman.html
  49. https://www.amworldgroup.com/blog/artificial-intelligence-in-music
  50. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3765325.3765343
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.