/LMAR=0/XLINE=10/FONT#0=METL/FONT#1=METLI/FONT#2=METS/FONT#3=MUS[HHA,LCS]/FONT#4=MUZ[HHA,LCS]/FONT#5=BASL35
␈↓ α∧␈↓␈↓ ε↔81␈↓ 
T


␈↓"β␈↓ α∧␈↓␈↓ αdFrom␈α∩the␈α∩broadest␈α⊃point␈α∩of␈α∩view,␈α⊃all␈α∩the␈α∩altered␈α∩notes␈α⊃in
␈↓ α∧␈↓bars␈α∞4-8␈α∞and␈α∞17-20␈α∞may␈α∞be␈α∞taken␈α∞as␈α∞non-functional␈α∞elaborations
␈↓ α∧␈↓of␈α⊃the␈α⊃dominant.␈α⊂ (The␈α⊃same␈α⊃is␈α⊂true␈α⊃for␈α⊃bars␈α⊂21-24,␈α⊃but␈α⊃with␈α⊂a
␈↓ α∧␈↓different␈αtonic.)␈αIn␈αbars␈α2␈αand␈α
3␈αthe␈αbass␈αis␈αmelodic,␈αso␈α
there␈αneed
␈↓ α∧␈↓be no question of a ␈↓βA␈↓ chord.
␈↓"β
␈↓"β␈↓ α∧␈↓Figure 74a
␈↓"β␈↓ α∧␈↓␈↓ βY␈↓¬⊂⊗⊃L[%0.0,%-1.00]:74FA.PLT[HHA,LCS]⊂⊗⊃␈↓





␈↓"β␈↓ α∧␈↓␈↓ αdAs␈α∞the␈α∞variation␈α∞continues,␈α∞we␈α∞are␈α∞faced␈α∞with␈α
progressions
␈↓ α∧␈↓which␈α
do␈α
not␈α
respond␈α
so␈α
well␈α
to␈α
this␈α
approach.␈α
 The␈α
chords␈αof␈α
each
␈↓ α∧␈↓dotted␈αhalf-note␈αseem␈αto␈αacquire␈αmuch␈αmore␈αseparate␈αsignificance.
␈↓ α∧␈↓With␈α_this␈α_in␈α_mind,␈α→we␈α_might␈α_make␈α_an␈α_alternative␈α→(but␈α_not
␈↓ α∧␈↓necessarily␈α
"better")␈α
analysis␈αof␈α
the␈α
above␈α
discussed␈αmeasures.␈α
 Let
␈↓ α∧␈↓us␈αconsider␈αthat␈αA␈↓βF␈↓=G␈↓βS␈↓␈αin␈α
bar␈α4␈αand␈αthat␈αthe␈α
G␈↓βN␈↓␈αof␈αbars␈α4,␈α5,␈α
and␈α7
␈↓ α∧␈↓(and␈α∞17,␈α∞18,␈α∞and␈α∞19)␈α∂is␈α∞an␈α∞intermittent␈α∞pedal␈α∞point␈α∞within␈α∂the␈α∞d
␈↓ α∧␈↓minor␈α
chord.␈α
 Now␈α
the␈α
elaborations␈α
are␈α
shown␈α
as␈αfunctional␈α
under
␈↓ α∧␈↓ii (␈↓&d␈↓)αβ), concluding in each case with a C half-cadence.
␈↓"β
␈↓"β␈↓ α∧␈↓Figure 74a
␈↓"β␈↓ α∧␈↓␈↓ β[␈↓¬⊂⊗⊃L[%0.0,%-1.60]:74FB.PLT[HHA,LCS]⊂⊗⊃␈↓








␈↓"β␈↓ α∧␈↓␈↓ αdFor␈α⊃the␈α⊃sake␈α⊃of␈α⊃simplicity,␈α⊃the␈α⊃first␈α⊃diagram␈α∩(Figure␈α⊃74a)
␈↓ α∧␈↓will be used in the complete analysis.