perm filename VP52[C4,LCS] blob sn#456873 filedate 1979-07-10 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00003 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	. DEVICE XGP    
C00004 00003	.PAGE←51
C00010 ENDMK
C⊗;
. DEVICE XGP    
.spacing 20*5 mills;
.EVERY HEADING(,{PAGE},)
.AREA TEXT LINES 4 TO 40
.FONT 1 "MBIG[HHA,LCS]"
.font 2 "BMETI[HHA,LCS]"
.font 4 "BMUS[HHA,LCS]"
.font 6 "MBIG[HHA,LCS]"
.!XGPLFTMAR←400
.PORTION MAIN;
.PLACE TEXT;
.PAGE FRAME 138 WIDE 106 HIGH;
.COMPACT
.<< Put in a footnote. >>
.
.COUNT FOOTNOTE INLINE FROM 1 TO 999 IN PAGE PRINTING ⊂"*****"[1 TO FOOTNOTE]⊃
.<<	(IF THISDEVICE = "XGP" THEN "%51%*" ELSE "[1]");>>
.
.FOOTSEP ← "__________";
.AT "$$" ENTRY "$"
.	⊂
.	NEXT FOOTNOTE;
.	FOOTNOTE!;
.	SEND FOOT
.		⊂
.		BEGIN "NEXT FOOTNOTE"
.		SELECT 1;
.		SINGLE SPACE
.		SPACING 0 MILLS
.		INDENT 0,0,0;
.		(FOOTNOTE! & " ");
ENTRY
.		END "NEXT FOOTNOTE";
.		⊃;
.	⊃;
.
.TURN ON "%↓_↑↓[&]","α"
.at "!!" txt ";"	⊂
.("↑[%3"&"txt"[1]&"]&↓["&"txt"[2]&"]%*");
.COMMENT ("txt"[1]&"↑[%3"&"txt"[2]&"]&↓["&"txt"[3]&"]%*");
.  ⊃
.PAGE←51
.NEXT PAGE
.FILL INDENT 12
	Of the two following possible analyses, the second is better.
In the first, we assume that since the F is omitted at (*), an
E, though not present, might be implied.  (Even so, this would give the
sound of the subdominant's F6.)  In the second, we more
reasonably assume that the F persists in the memory and that the context
does not lead us to interpret the chord B%4F%1-D-F-G%4S%1 as an inversion
of ↓_A_↓): VII%4G%1.
.BEGIN VERBATIM

Figure 56
.END
.CENTER
%6⊂⊗⊃L[α%0.06,α%-2.40](17,22):N56F.PLT[C4,LCS]⊂⊗⊃%1
.SKIP 4

.FILL INDENT 12
 
	It should be pointed out again that no chord may be evaluated
until all its parts have been heard.  However, no set rules can be
given for this; as usual, the context must be the determining factor.
In the Schubert %2Sonata%1, the B%4F%1 chord fills a measure and a quarter
before the appearance of the G%4S%1.  Thus the relatively simple progression
of I to %4F%1II has time to be accepted before the function is altered by
the addition of a fourth pitch.  Such particulars are certainly open to
varying interpretations.  In both of these Schubert pieces, such ambiguous
procedures are possible because of the extremely firm establishment of
the main tonic in the preceding passages.

 
	A case with some similarity is presented in the %2Prelude #23
in F%1 of Chopin, where an E%4F%1 is found in the final arpeggiated
chord.  This E%4F%1 is usually heard merely as an intensification of
the already present 7th partial of the bass note's overtone series.
However, it is undeniable that some tendency toward the subdominant,
a tonal area which is almost completely neglected in the piece, is
heard.  At the end of a piece devoted to almost nothing more than
figuration on I and V, this E%4F%1 comes as a welcome bit of
fantasy.