Sonata Form and The Problem of Second TH

DOI: 10.1111/musa.
12011
MARK RICHARDS
SONATA FORM AND THE PROBLEM OF SECOND-THEME BEGINNINGS
Charged with the task of confirming the new key in the exposition and resolving
to the home key in the recapitulation, the second theme group performs perhaps
the defining actions of any sonata form.1 Although Classical works provide many
instances of a clear beginning to this crucial part of the form, in a significant
proportion of works the beginning of the second theme (ST) cannot be so easily
discerned, especially in works from Beethoven’s middle and late periods. Con-
sequently, debate continues to surround the issue, particularly in the work of
James Hepokoski and Warren Darcy and that of William E. Caplin.2 The
problem is that no matter how powerful a single rule may be, no rule by itself can
identify all those locations which may be considered an ST beginning. Widely
known, for instance, is Hepokoski and Darcy’s mandate that ‘if there is no medial
caesura, there is no secondary theme’ (2006, p. 52; emphasis in original). But far
less well-known is that, in rare cases, the authors allow an ST to be expressed
without the textural gap of a medial caesura, as in the first movement of Haydn’s
Piano Sonata in E Major, Hob. XVI:52.3 On the other hand, while in his book
Caplin stipulates that an ST begins with a unit of initiating function that is
supported by tonic harmony, in a more recent writing he cites several of
Beethoven’s STs in which the initiating unit prolongs dominant harmony.4
Clearly, then, an ST is defined by more than a single principle, and for this
reason I contend that there are several indications which contribute to its
expression. One may therefore understand the initial ST of a movement to be a
synthesis of musical signals which, taken together, allow a passage to be per-
ceived as the first syntactically complete set of formal functions (at the very least,
a beginning and end) which centres on the secondary key of the movement.
Thus, an ST is not merely a full-fledged theme set in the new key, but rather a
theme in the new key that is articulated by one or more reinforcing signals which
render that theme perceptible.5 Not all signals appear with every initial ST, nor
are they necessarily in their clearest state when they do appear: an ST may still
be expressed when some of the most familiar signals are considerably weakened
or even absent. Consequently, STs have many possible degrees of expression,
obviating the need to decide between all-or-nothing levels of expression in cases
that seem to hover somewhere between the two. Moreover, this spectrum of
possibilities allows us to understand how STs, and sometimes entire ST groups,
may be engaged in a dynamic process which seeks to compensate for weaknesses
Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) 3

© 2013 The Author.
Music Analysis © 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK
and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
4 MARK RICHARDS
Table 1 The Seven Contributing Signals for Second-Theme Beginnings
Signal Type Strong State
1. Tonic harmony of new key Requisite I or I6 as first harmony, or on first

downbeat
2. Beginning and end functions Requisite Tonic-based function at beginning,
cadential at end
3. Preparation by a phrase-ending Reinforcing Dominant in I or V (minor: III or v)
chord or other prepared key
4. Textural gap of a medial caesura Reinforcing Literal gap with rests, caesura-fill, or
brief pickup to ST in gap
5. Change in texture Reinforcing If present
6. Change in dynamic Reinforcing If present
7. Characteristic melodic material Reinforcing If present
in the ST’s expression, a phenomenon I call an ST process. In the Classical

repertoire this ST process is primarily associated with Beethoven, but it may be
found on occasion in the works of Haydn and Mozart. A full appreciation of
these signals requires some familiarity with the style at hand. In the present
study, I limit my discussion to works by Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven.
Just what are these signals, and how does their combination express an ST
beginning? Assuming that a preceding first theme group and transition are in
evidence, the new phrase which marks the ST beginning may involve a total of
seven constituent signals: (1) tonic harmony of the new key in root position or
first inversion, even if only as the last chord of the phrase; (2) a phrase structure
with beginning and end functions in the manner of one of Caplin’s theme types;6
(3) preparation by a phrase-ending chord within the transition; (4) the textural
gap of Hepokoski and Darcy’s medial caesura; and at the start of the new phrase
itself, (5) a change in texture; (6) a change in dynamic, usually to piano; and (7)
characteristic melodic material, usually lyrical. These seven signals may be
divided into two categories, each of which encompasses an essential aspect of ST
expression. First and foremost, requisite signals (signals 1 and 2) describe the ST
as a form-functional theme set in the new key and are both present to some
extent in all STs. By contrast, reinforcing signals (signals 3–7) serve to articulate
the ST and set it apart from the preceding transition. No reinforcing signal is in
itself a necessity, but those which are present serve to enhance the articulation of
an ST. Table 1 presents a summary of the seven signals.
Table 1 also demonstrates that each signal may appear in what I call a ‘strong
state’. As I argue in this study, all initial STs possess both of the requisite signals
and at least three of all seven signals in a strong state. Most Classical STs sound
six or seven strong-state signals, resulting in a particularly clear expression of the
ST. Any signal that is weak or absent in such cases involves either an unusual
opening chord, which quickly resolves to the new-key tonic (signal 1), or a lack
of dynamic contrast (signal 6); both of these allow the ST to remain clear in
© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

Music Analysis © 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
SONATA FORM AND THE PROBLEM OF SECOND-THEME BEGINNINGS 5
expression, if at a lower level of default.7 On the other hand, because of the

rigorously harmonic underpinning of sonata form, any weakened signal that
substantially delays the arrival of harmonic signals drastically weakens the
expression of the ST and represents a sonata deformation, that is, ‘a stretching
or distortion of a norm beyond its understood limits; a pointed overriding of a
standard option’ (Hepokoski and Darcy 2006, p. 11). In these situations, the ST
will be partly obscured on account of the weakened harmonic signals. As the
music progresses, however, it attempts to compensate for the harmonic defi-
ciency of the weakened signals in an ST process.8
The question arises: why these seven signals and not others? After all, there
are at least two other types of evidence which are sometimes indicated in the
analysis of ST beginnings: long-range comparisons of material within the same
movement and stylistic comparisons of material from different movements.
William Horne, for instance, has recently argued the location of the ST begin-
ning in the first movement of Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony by drawing on both
types of evidence. For the first type, he cites the use of the ST beginning’s
material in both the development and recapitulation; and for the second type, he
draws on stylistic trends in early Beethoven such as the most common harmonic
approaches to the V chord preceding the ST beginning, the gradual erosion of
the medial caesura’s textural gap, the level of chromaticism within each portion
of the ST group and the gradual migration of the strongest new-key PAC (what
he calls the ‘weighted PAC’) towards the end of the exposition. He even draws
details from Beethoven’s sketchbooks.9
While there is no doubt that these types of evidence can strengthen such an
argument, they say nothing of the signals heard within the exposition itself which
shape our perception of the ST as it is sounded. The signals I propose are
intended to capture these more local effects by demonstrating how ST begin-
nings are expressed through combinations of various signals in and around the
theme. In developing this methodology, I will first describe each signal in detail
and distinguish precisely what constitutes a strong state, then discuss how
various combinations of signals play out in complex examples of ST processes
and other deformational situations.
Signal 1: New-Key Tonic Harmony

The establishment of contrasting keys has been recognised as a fundamental
feature of expositions ever since the earliest writings on sonata form. But that an
important moment – an ST beginning – occurs with the start of the first phrase
in the new key has become widely accepted only in the last half-century or so.10
In the Classical style, a phrase that is ‘in the new key’ and thus expresses the first
requisite signal will at some point sound the tonic harmony of that key in either
root position or first inversion (even if only at the very end of the phrase), thus
anchoring the theme to the new key with a stable form of tonic harmony.11 A
strong state for this signal occurs when the opening harmony of the phrase is
Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

6 MARK RICHARDS
tonic, either as an anacrusis or as the first downbeat of the phrase.12 This is how
most Classical ST groups begin. But if an ST group begins with a non-tonic
harmony (diatonic or chromatic) in the new key, or with the tonic of the wrong
mode (minor), then the signal is in a weak state, because the new key is presented
in a less direct manner.
Especially in Beethoven, there are a number of movements in which the ST
group begins with tonic harmony of a non-normative key, usually the submedi-
ant, in what is commonly (though perhaps misleadingly) referred to as a ‘three-
key exposition’. Producing a strong state in this signal depends on the harmonic
approach to the ST and the key that is confirmed by the theme’s end function.
If the new key has been adequately prepared by the transition, then the impli-
cation is that the key will be accepted with the ST and produce a strong state in
the signal. If, in such cases, the ST cadences in the non-normative key, the
implication is confirmed. But if it cadences in a different key (which is exceed-
ingly rare), the implication is thwarted, denying any strong state the signal might
have had. On the other hand, if the new key is approached abruptly, without
sufficient preparation, the implication is that the key is a false one which, sooner
or later, will be supplanted by a more suitable key. Thus, no strong signal is
expected here, and none is usually given, since in these cases the ST moves away
from its opening key and cadences in a normative key, confirming the implica-
tion of a false key.13 In short, then, a key may be non-normative from a dialogic
point of view but can be ‘normalised’ by the circumstances of the particular
movement and therefore be considered a true ST key from a generative point of
view.
In some minor-mode movements, there is a normative start on the tonic
harmony of the mediant and an ensuing modulation within the phrase to the
other normative choice for minor movements, the dominant minor, in which key
the phrase ends.14 Some well-known examples of this type of ST group include
Haydn’s Farewell Symphony, the finale of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in A minor, K.
310 and Beethoven’s Coriolan Overture.15 Because both keys are common in ST
groups, this process might best be described as a ‘tonic conversion’ from one
normative choice to the other. And surely this is part of the expressive effect of
such a phrase: having begun firmly in the comfort of the expected relative major,
the music eventually experiences a ‘downfall’ in which it gives way to the tragedy
of the dominant minor.16 Thus, the tonic harmony which begins the phrase
remains a strong-state signal despite the motion away from this key later in the
phrase.
Signal 2: Beginning and End Functions

The second requisite signal for an ST beginning is that the new phrase must be
structured as a type of theme, complete with beginning and end functions.
Although this idea derives from Schoenberg and his pupil Erwin Ratz, the details
of its consequences have only recently been worked out by Caplin.17 What, then,

constitutes the formal functions of beginning and end, and when is this signal in
a strong state? Themes begin with a basic idea, a unit of structure which is usually
two bars in length, comprises two or more motives and, perhaps most important,
emphasises tonic harmony.18 Conversely, the end of a theme is generally sig-
nalled by a cadential function, which includes two features. First, and most
obviously, it is based on a cadential progression, which in its fullest form contains
the harmonies of tonic–pre-dominant–dominant–tonic, the final two chords
always being in root position. Second, and more subtly, it must always follow an
initiating unit of structure (at the very least, a single basic idea), thus providing
an ‘end of something’.19
Because harmonic aspects are the most significant in determining a phrase’s
formal functions, they also determine whether a beginning or end is articulated
in a strong or weak state. A strong-state beginning is based on new-key tonic
harmony, either as part of a tonic prolongation or as the goal of a harmonic
sequence (as in vi–ii–V–I and its variants).20 But the tonic is not the only
harmony on which a beginning function may be based: as mentioned earlier, a
good number are supported by dominant harmony, especially in Beethoven.21 As
Caplin points out, however, it is important to distinguish among three different
types of dominant harmony which begin a theme: (1) those which become tonic
prolongational within the basic idea, (2) those which prolong the tonic harmony
over a dominant pedal and (3) those which prolong the dominant throughout the
initiating unit.22 Of these situations, the first two represent strong-state begin-
nings because they prolong the tonic. In the second situation specifically, the
sense of a beginning remains strong even though the dominant reigns on a more
global level, since on the local level (that which defines small-scale formal
functions) the prolongation is of tonic harmony. By contrast, the last situation is
weak because prolonged dominant harmonies are usually a sign of an ‘after-the-
end’ function (i.e. a standing-on-the-dominant) rather than a beginning one, and
hence obscure the function.
As for the end of a theme, a strong state will result when there is a cadential
function, as described above. In most cases, the ST ends with a perfect authentic
cadence (PAC); but not infrequently the first cadence one encounters in the
entire group is a half cadence (HC).23 Because the ST group as a whole requires
a PAC, such an HC is never the last of the group, yet it may occur after a
beginning or medial function (i.e. sentence continuation), thus creating a strong-
state end by providing proper closure to the theme at least on one level of
structure.24
In some cases, a presumed ST end begins to sound cadential harmonies but
evades a final tonic chord, leaving the exposition without a new-key PAC. Can
this still be considered an ST? An answer is suggested by Caplin’s distinction
between cadential function and cadential arrival.25 Cadential function involves a
cadential progression heard after at least one initiating unit, whereas a cadential
arrival constitutes the final chord of the entire cadential function. In STs, this
final chord is, of course, usually a tonic. But since such a tonic chord is always

8 MARK RICHARDS
implied by the preceding progression, a sense of cadential function may still be

projected without necessarily producing a cadential arrival. Thus an ST may lack
its final chord yet express an end function through the other harmonies of the
cadential function.26
As I discuss elsewhere, themes in the Classical repertoire sometimes do not
end with a cadential function but with a type of ending I call a closural function.27
This formal function ends on a tonic or dominant chord, but one that is
non-cadential because it is inverted, lacks a preceding cadential progression, is
approached by a pedal point or, in the case of the dominant, includes the
dissonant seventh. In these situations, an end function is still present, but it is
expressed by a formal function that is significantly weaker than a cadential
function.
In order for this entire signal to be heard in a strong state, both the beginning
and end functions must occur in their clearest manifestations, that is, with a
tonic basis for the beginning function and a cadential progression with cadential
arrival for the end function. On the other hand, the signal is weak when the
beginning function is based on a non-tonic harmony (usually dominant) or when
the end lacks a cadential arrival or is a closural function.
Signal 3: Preparation by a Phrase-Ending Chord

One of the most widely held conceptions regarding an ST beginning is that it
must be prepared by a transition ending with a dominant chord, either in the
new key to form a modulating transition or, less frequently, in the home key to
form a non-modulating transition.28 Indeed these are the most common arrange-
ments in Classical sonata forms, and they produce a strong state for this signal
because they are the most direct means of preparing for an ST.29 It is also
possible, however, for a transition to end on a tonic chord in the new key.30 As
Poundie Burstein suggests, in Haydn’s music from around 1760 this type of
situation ‘may well be regarded a type of first- or second-level default option’
(2010, p. 93). When ending on a tonic rather than a dominant chord, this signal
is in a weak state, since the harmony does not imply an ensuing ST group. At
times, such a tonic chord is elided with the following ST group, and, if preceded
by a dominant, it may seem as though the ST has been prepared by a dominant
chord and that this reinforcing signal is therefore in a strong state, as demon-
strated in Ex. 1.31 But because the preceding phrase of the transition does not
properly end until the first chord of the ST, the dominant cannot be considered
to end the phrase. Likewise, when the elision involves a dominant chord, as in
Beethoven’s Cello Sonata in D major, Op. 102 No. 2, given in Ex. 2, the signal
is still weak because the dominant does not actually precede the ST, negating the
sense of preparation it would have provided.
In some instances the transition ends with the dominant chord of a non-
normative key, and the strength of the signal depends on how the dominant is
approached. Consider the well-known instance of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in

Ex. 1 Haydn, Symphony No. 90 in C major/iv, bars 23–33

end of Transition
23
( )
C:
G:
ST (elided)
30
Ex. 2 Beethoven, Cello Sonata in D major, Op. 102 No. 2/i, bars 25–33
end of Transition
25
cresc.
cresc.
ST (elided)
29
A:
F major, Op. 10 No. 2. Although the transition begins squarely on the home
tonic at bar 13, an apparent V7/IV at bar 15 is interpreted enharmonically as a
German sixth of A minor (iii), the dominant of which ends the transition.32 The
abruptness of this dominant, as well as its unusual key, renders the chord an

10 MARK RICHARDS
unconvincing preparatory marker for an ST group. In other words, there is no

strong indication that an ST group is about to arrive in iii, so the signal remains
weak. On the other hand, if a dominant in an unorthodox key is given ample time
to unfold, especially if it is prolonged with a standing-on-the-dominant, the
impression is one of ‘normalising’ the unusual key choice. Hence, the striking
move to V of III at the end of the transition in Beethoven’s Waldstein Sonata, Op.
53 (bar 23), produces a strong rather than a weak state in this signal – not only
is the dominant prolonged through a lengthy dominant prolongation, but its E
major key is also, famously, the basis of the ST group.33
Signal 4: Medial Caesura

The gap of a medial caesura (MC) constitutes another reinforcing signal in the
expression of an ST beginning, its literal or implied textural break separating the
ST from the end of the transition and thus giving the ST a degree of articula-
tion.34 In music of the late eighteenth century, the presence of an MC is virtually
axiomatic, and for this reason Hepokoski and Darcy go so far as to claim that an
ST group cannot exist without an MC. Nevertheless, the authors add that ‘any
exception to this principle – a self-evident S [secondary theme] that is not
prepared by a clear MC (and that must be judged as an S for other compelling
reasons) – must be regarded as both highly unusual and deformational’. Signifi-
cantly, the ‘other compelling reasons’ they recognise correspond with the other
six signals I propose here. For example, in their discussion of situations with a
‘clear S but problematic MC’, they suggest two features besides an MC as
possible indications of an ST beginning when they ask:
[D]oes the potentially ‘acceptable’ S (perhaps starting off thematically as a sen-

tence or period [signal 2]) at least follow a half cadence within TR [the transition]
[signal 3]? If so, ... one could conclude that although the HC MC-effect is weak,
S is nevertheless presented as though it were accepting that HC-arrival as a
workable MC.
Moreover, in their elaboration of typical contexts for the MC, they observe four
other features of ST beginnings which correspond with the remaining signals:
Immediately following the MC proper (after the implied or actual GP-gap), one
expects to find the launching of a characteristic secondary theme (S) [signal 7] –
which may exemplify any of a number of types ... . One of the most common types
features a sudden change of texture after the MC-point [signal 5], usually com-
bined with a precipitous drop from an energetic forte to piano [signal 6] and the
unfolding of a melody articulating the second expositional key [implying signal
1].35
While the four features listed here apply to movements with an MC gap, there
is no reason to exclude them from movements lacking one. Hence, far from
contradicting the main argument I propose here, these remarks support it by

acknowledging directly that there are cases in which an ST is expressed without

the presence of an MC gap, and indirectly that in such cases the ST is expressed
by some or all of the other six signals.
An MC may be considered to be in a strong state when it consists of either a
literal gap with rests in all parts, or a bridging-over of the gap through a brief
pickup to the ST, or a mere ‘sonic link’, which Hepokoski and Darcy refer to as
‘caesura-fill’.36 If the MC gap is filled with the ‘more crafted material’ of
expanded caesura-fill or is reduced to the extent that the ST appears ‘flush-
juxtaposed’ with the end of the transition, then the articulation of the MC
becomes more difficult to discern and consequently weakens its ability to signal
an upcoming ST.37 In other words, a strong-state MC is one that is free of
elements which obscure its articulation.38
Signal 5: Textural Change

One of the most obvious reinforcing signals, which usually appears at an ST
beginning, is a change in texture. Frequent textural changes have long been
recognised as a prominent feature of the Classical style – indeed, Charles Rosen
describes it as one of the main features that distinguish Classical phrase structure
from that of the late Baroque.39 Because their opening always projects the sense
of a form-functional beginning, virtually every ST group includes a change of
texture, which occurs in a strong state when present.40 This helps to explain why
an ST may still be expressed in the absence of so common a marker as the MC,
as in Haydn’s Symphony No. 98 (bar 59). As with any other signal, a change in
texture cannot articulate an ST on its own but always combines with other
strong-state signals.
Signal 6: Dynamic Change

As is widely noted in the literature, an ST beginning usually sounds at a piano
dynamic level. While this assertion is certainly true, we might well ask why this
particular dynamic is such a common convention at ST beginnings, especially
since the often-encountered lyrical melody, which may seem to be the prime
motivation, is only one of several expressive options for the initial ST.41 Com-
pelling evidence derives from the context in which these piano ST beginnings are
situated vis-à-vis the transition. As Hepokoski and Darcy point out, the transi-
tion is generally characterised by an ‘energy-gain’ in which a forte dynamic is
maintained right until its end.42 In that case, a piano ST beginning provides a
striking contrast which greatly emphasises it.43 Thus, it seems that the piano ST
beginning stems from a desire to articulate that moment in the form. But
dynamic contrast between the transition and ST is not limited to a forte–piano
arrangement: a piano end to the transition may be followed by a forte start to the
ST, as occurs in Haydn’s Piano Sonata in E major, Hob. XVI: 52 (ST at bar 17)
and Mozart’s Dissonance Quartet, K. 465 (ST at bar 56). Though this is a less

12 MARK RICHARDS
common arrangement, especially later in the eighteenth century, it nevertheless

remains a possibility.44
With regard to analysis, this reinforcing signal is in a strong state (and indeed
only exists) when there is a contrast in dynamic level between the end of the
transition and the ST beginning. In cases of expanded caesura-fill, the dynamic
contrast which defines this signal will, if present, occur between the end of the
caesura-fill (not the end of the transition) and the ST beginning.45
Signal 7: Characteristic Melodic Material

Melodic lyricism is one of the most commonly cited features of an ST beginning,
and although such early writers as Heinrich Christoph Koch and Francesco
Galeazzi do not specifically recognise this part of the form, they do refer,
respectively, to a ‘singing’ and ‘gentle, expressive’ phrase towards the middle of
the exposition which seems to correspond with the ST beginning.46 But, as
mentioned above, a lyrical melody is but one of many possibilities for an ST
beginning; others posited by Hepokoski and Darcy include ‘a bustling, staccato,
energetically galant, or jauntily self-confident S’, ‘the P-based S’, ‘S as “con-
trasting derivation” from P’, ‘the forte S’ and ‘the “learned-style” or fugal/
imitative S’ (Hepokoski and Darcy 2006, pp. 132–42). As it was with dynamics,
the point here is to articulate the ST beginning, in this case by sounding melodic
material which will grasp our attention through its characteristic nature, espe-
cially when combined with other signals, as Rosen has observed:
In the sonata, the cadences are reinforced by a brief pause, sudden changes of
harmonic rhythm, or the appearance of a new theme. The thematic order is
essentially an aspect of texture: the appearance of a new theme – or the reap-
pearance of an old one – marks a clear break in texture when the theme has a
clearly defined, memorable contour; the arrival of a theme enforces a structural
point, makes an event, a moment of articulation. (Rosen 1988, p. 99)
Even more broadly, characteristic melodic material is a typical signal of a

thematic beginning (i.e. a basic idea) in the Classical style, the end of a theme
being more often composed of conventional, and thus opposing, material.
Caplin provides a useful distinction between these two types of material:
A basic idea acquires its characteristic quality by the nature of its constituent
melodic and rhythmic motives. A diversity of intervallic content (combinations of
leaps, steps, and directional changes) and a variety of durational patterning help
bestow individuality on the idea. Conversely, conventional ideas tend to feature
consistent stepwise or arpeggiated motion within a series of uniform durational
values. (Caplin 1998, p. 37)
As with signals 5 and 6, this reinforcing signal attains a strong state when it is
present, that is, when the melody of the ST can be considered characteristic
rather than conventional. But because of the close relationship between the type

Ex. 3 Mozart, Symphony No. 40 in G minor/i, bars 38–51

end of Transition
38
( )
ST
strings wind strings wind
44
of melodic material and its location within a theme, it is rare to find an ST

beginning which lacks characteristic material (though one such example was
given in n. 18).47
The Seven Signals in Normative ST Beginnings

In order to demonstrate how the signals described above contribute to defor-
mational ST beginnings, we must first understand how they are expressed in
fairly normative situations. The most common type of ST beginning in the
Classical repertoire involves all seven signals in a strong state – a situation
particularly favoured by Mozart, which explains why so few of his sonata expo-
sitions present problems with locating this part of the form.48 To give but one
example, in the first movement of the Symphony in G minor, K. 550 (shown in
Ex. 3), the ST undoubtedly begins at bar 44. But consider how each signal
expresses a strong state: the start on tonic harmony (implied I6) of the new key,
B major; beginning and end functions expressed within a regular eight-bar
period by the start of the antecedent phrase (bars 44–45) and the end of the
consequent phrase (bars 50–51); preparation by V of the new key; the full-bar
medial caesura; the textural change from the rhythmically active tutti and
hammer-blow chords to a dialogue between strings and winds in slower-paced
dotted minims and crotchets; the normative drop in dynamic level from the
transition’s forte to the ST’s piano; and the characteristic, indeed lyrical, melodic
material at bar 44. In short, the ST beginning could not be clearer.
Not all normative ST beginnings, however, are quite as well articulated as
this. In Haydn’s Symphony No. 99, shown in Ex. 4, bar 48 is unquestionably the
ST beginning, even though it lacks a dynamic change. The other six signals are

14 MARK RICHARDS
Ex. 4 Haydn, Symphony No. 99 in E major/i, bars 42–49
end of Transition MC-gap (caesura-fill)

42
( )
B : HC
ST
46
in a strong state: the ST begins on tonic harmony in the new key, B major; it
starts with a four-bar sentence presentation (beginning function) and eventually
ends with the elided cadential arrival at bar 71 (not shown); a preparatory V
chord is established in the transition with the half cadence at bar 44; a medial
caesura is articulated in the same bar, with the reduction in texture from full
harmony to a mere unison; and at the ST beginning itself, there is a change in
texture from unison back to full harmony, and the melodic material there is
certainly characteristic, especially as it is a typically Haydnesque transposition of
first-theme material. Although the forte dynamic level persists from the end of the
transition throughout the medial caesura (to create the ‘juggernaut’ type of
caesura-fill) right into the ST,49 we have no trouble discerning the ST beginning
owing to the six other strong-state signals that are present.
In other instances, the ST opens with a non-tonic chord that quickly resolves
to the tonic harmony of the new key, as in Beethoven’s Cello Sonata in F major,
Op. 5 No. 1, bar 73, given in Ex. 5. In this case, the ST begins on VI of the new
key (C major) and thus, in weakening the harmonically based signal 1, may seem
to throw the ST beginning into doubt. Note, however, that the new-key tonic
emerges two bars later while the theme is still in its beginning function (a
compound basic idea). Because there is only a momentary unsettling of the
tonality, which occurs before the theme has left its functional beginning, it does
not seriously undermine the expression of the ST. After all, the other six signals
are in a strong state: beginning and end functions (sentence presentation in bars
73–80 and a PAC at bar 183 [not shown]), preparation by a phrase-ending V
chord (bar 65 [not shown]), a medial caesura (bar 72), changes in texture and
dynamics and characteristic melodic material. Hence, as long as there is a tonic
basis for the initial function of the theme, an ST may open with a non-tonic
chord and yet still be clearly articulated.

Ex. 5 Beethoven, Cello Sonata in F major, Op. 5 No. 1/i, bars 70–76
end of Transition
70
MC-
72 gap
Sonata Deformations and the ST Process

In Viennese Classical music, the strongly harmonic basis of sonata form is
typically established with great clarity. From the perspective of the ST, this
clarity will normatively involve strong states in the first three ST signals: a
transition concluding with a phrase-ending dominant chord in the new or home
key (signal 3), an ST that begins with new-key tonic harmony (signal 1), a tonic
basis for the theme’s functional beginning and a cadential arrival at its end (both
signal 2). While an ST beginning may be clear in spite of a weak state in signal
1, as we have seen, other options selected for signals 2 and 3 obscure the
underlying tonal design of the ST. Because these options are employed far less
frequently in the repertoire, they constitute various types of sonata deformations.
When such deformations occur, the ST often attempts to compensate at some
later point (perhaps even multiple times) for the weakened state of the ST signal
in question, creating a highly teleological structure which I refer to as an ST
process. This ST process is therefore distinct from Janet Schmalfeldt’s similarly
termed ‘process of becoming’, which is a process of retrospective reinterpretation
rather than compensation.50 With the onset of an ST process, some may feel that
the weakened signals create uncertainty as to whether the music has entered the
ST group at all. But when such situations are understood as deformations of
normative STs rather than unresolvably ambiguous situations, then the dramatic
power of the ST process comes strikingly to the fore. As Kofi Agawu has argued,
‘[T]heory-based analysis necessarily includes a mechanism for resolving ambi-

16 MARK RICHARDS
guities at all levels of structure’; moreover, ‘in situations of competing meanings,

the alternatives are always formed hierarchically, making all such situations
decidable without denying the existence of multiple meanings’ (1994, p. 107).51
Thus, while the beginning of an ST process may contain elements more typical
of the preceding transition function (for instance, a dominant harmony which is
prolonged from a previous half cadence), the presence of three or more strong-
state signals favours the interpretation of an ST, though one which is signifi-
cantly weakened.52
The ST Process versus the Trimodular Block

Because an ST process involves weakened signals which affect the ST’s overall
design, it can resemble Hepokoski and Darcy’s trimodular block (TMB), in which
there are ‘apparent double medial caesuras’ over a substantial stretch of music.53
The two concepts, however, differ in two main respects: (1) whereas the start of
an ST process is always part of the ST group, this is not necessarily the case with
the TMB; and (2) apparent double MCs, which are required for the TMB, are
not essential for an ST process.54
Concerning the first discrepancy, there are situations in which the TMB does
not coincide with the ST beginning. Because the TMB concept applies to all
situations in which there are apparent double MCs, it necessarily folds in
instances of medial caesura declined, a phenomenon in which the offer of a
‘proposed’ MC to move into an ST group is denied. In some situations, this
denial is due to the entrance of a phrase in the wrong key, which is usually fixed
by a second, ‘real’ MC and ST group later on. Thus, what follows the proposed
MC is definitely not the ST; rather, it is an extension of the transition. But in
other situations, the TMB begins with a phrase which, for Hepokoski and Darcy,
either unequivocally is the ST or at least could be the ST.55 From the perspective
of an ST process, there is no such distinction to be made: both situations
constitute bona fide STs. The matter therefore concerns the definition of the ST
itself. For Hepokoski and Darcy, a TMB which could be the ST ought to be
non-committal in its assignment of formal parts, for, as they maintain,
any projecting of such a label as S1.1 or S1.2 onto portions of a TMB – and
especially onto this more problematic type – insists on interpreting a more
complex expositional phenomenon (the TMB) by means of the conceptual cat-
egories of a simpler one (the two-part exposition with nonproblematic S). For this
reason any mapping of the S-concept onto a TMB tends to be reductive, even
though it might seem to be locally clarifying in certain kinds of discussions. (2006,
p. 175)
For these authors, the concept of an ST is always a non-problematic phenom-

enon. In other words, if the ST signals have been weakened, then we cannot
speak of an ST. But hearing an ST at a certain point is not necessarily an
unconditional vote in the affirmative – a qualified ‘yes’ is not only possible, but

at the very heart of a deformational ST. What is gained by viewing such cases as
weakened STs is a sense of the teleological power of the ST process as a musical
device.
In the case of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in D major, Op. 10 No. 3, consider
the combination of ST signals at bar 23, where the unusual B minor key has
proven to be a major sticking point in previous analyses.56 Four signals appear in
a strong state to suggest an ST: there are a clear medial caesura (signal 4)
occupied by a single-voice pickup to the ST on the last crotchet beat of bar 22,
a change of texture (signal 5), a drop in dynamic from fortissimo to the normative
piano (signal 6) and characteristic melodic material (signal 7). With such rein-
forcement, an ST beginning can hardly be completely denied, which is surely
why Caplin advocates hearing at this point a ‘modulating’ ST and Horne an
‘oblique’ start to the ST group.57 Yet the B minor key remains troublesome,
since it opposes the sense of an ST beginning; hence Hepokoski and Darcy’s
suggestion that the PAC which concludes this theme in bar 53 is a ‘third-level
default’ V:PAC MC and what follows, the true ST beginning.58
At the same time, preparation by a V chord (signal 3) does occur here with the
implied V of B minor in bar 22, but it is in a non-normative key, and one must
ask whether the key is firmly established by the time this V chord sounds, which
would lend a strong state to the signal. This chord ends a cadential function
begun in B minor with the previous bar’s implied chords of i6 and a pre-
dominant (possibly ii6), but the consistent use of a unison texture throughout
this phrase considerably obscures these harmonic functions. Because the key has
not been clearly solidified by the end of the phrase (a requirement brought on by
its non-normative status for STs), this signal appears in a weak state.
At bar 23, a new phrase begins, but on the tonic harmony of B minor (signal
1), which is prolonged over a two-bar basic idea, the beginning function of a
theme (half of signal 2). Moreover, given that the theme ends with a PAC (in A
major) at bar 53, it contains both requisite ST signals. But since the submediant
(B minor) is a non-normative key for an ST, it must achieve a PAC if it is to be
confirmed as the ST’s key. And herein lies the theme’s propulsive force, for the
B minor key does not last for the entire theme. Rather, in bar 29, there is a
modulation towards its minor dominant, F minor, and thence towards the home
dominant, A major, in bar 35. From this point on, the theme remains centred on
A and, at bar 53, provides a clear PAC in that key. Notice especially the
proportions of these keys in the theme: six bars each for B minor and F minor,
but an overwhelming nineteen bars in A major. Notice, too, how remarkably
emphatic is the theme’s final cadence in A: it is made prominent not only
through an expanded cadential progression, but also through its forte dynamic
level and bar-long cadential trill. Hence, by the time the entire theme comes to
an end in bar 53, the impression given is of a complete thematic unit – that is,
an ST – having wound its way into a rock-solid A major, which is enormously
satisfying after the tonal instabilities at the theme’s outset. Taken as a whole,
then, the passage from bar 23 to 53 may be understood as an ST process which

18 MARK RICHARDS
Ex. 6 Beethoven, String Quartet in D major, Op. 18 No. 3/i, bars 49–90
end of Transition ST?
49
sempre stacc.
54
cresc.
cresc.
cresc.
cresc.
59
decresc.
decresc.
decresc.
responds to, and indeed compensates for, the weakened signals in its non-
normative beginning.
With regard to the second discrepancy between the concepts of the ST
process and the TMB – that of not requiring apparent double MCs in the former
– we have already seen that a clear ST beginning may lack the textural gap of the
MC. The same also applies to the sorts of weakened beginnings heard in ST
processes. Beethoven’s String Quartet in D major, Op. 18 No. 3, shown in Ex. 6,

Ex. 6 Continued
64 ST?
cresc.
cresc.
cresc.
70
77
is a case in point, as its ST beginning has been located either at the start of a
dominant prolongation in A major at bar 51 (or 52) or at the appearance of a
fleetingly stable C major at bar 68. Others sidestep the issue by focusing on
aspects other than the form but nevertheless imply that the movement is in
standard sonata form.59 No matter how one parses this exposition, the phenom-
enon of apparent double MCs clearly does not pertain – and yet there exist the
kinds of tension which are part and parcel of an ST process.

20 MARK RICHARDS
Ex. 6 Continued
85
A: PAC
But if this true, then at which point does this theme begin, and how do its
weakened signals play out in the rest of the theme? If bar 51 is taken as the ST
beginning, then we find three signals to be in a strong state: not only is there an
obvious change in texture (signal 5) and dynamic to the normative piano
dynamic (signal 6), but the melodic material (in the first violin) is also charac-
teristic (signal 7), especially in its non-uniform rhythm. At the same time, the
remaining four signals are either weak or absent: the V chord that ends the
transition at bar 51 (signal 3) is elided into the ST, and there is no MC gap at
all (signal 4). New-key tonic harmony (signal 1) is much delayed by the lengthy
dominant, eventually arriving in the latter half of bar 55 and again with the PAC
at bar 57. Beginning and end functions (signal 2) are also present, the former
with an initiating four-bar idea presented over dominant harmony and the latter
by three bars of cadential function (bars 55–57).60 Although the delay of tonic
harmony weakens both of these signals, that they are nonetheless present satisfies
the two requisites of an ST.
Because the first three of the seven signals all concern harmony (signals 1–3),
their weak states create enormous tonal instability. The ST is therefore driven
forward in search of a stable tonic, something which the PAC of bar 57 seems
adequately to provide. But this tonic is revoked in the very next bar with a return
of the opening material on the dominant (with parts rearranged), reopening the
phrase and undoing the newly attained PAC. This time the expected cadential
function does not arrive, for the theme questions its A major underpinning with
a chromatic diminished triad before landing soundly in C major at bar 68. In
some ways, the stability of this C major plateau makes up for the extremely weak
ST beginning in bar 51, as it provides a solid tonic at what appears to be the
beginning of a new theme. Were this a possible ST beginning, the two requisite
signals may have been strong (had it closed with a C major cadence), but the fact
that the theme starting at bar 51 has not yet closed in its proper key of A major
indicates that this C major is subsumed within the larger theme and is destined

not to last.61 The theme is driven forward yet again, and when it finally reaches
the sought-after A major at bar 76, a forte celebration bursts forth, remaining
firmly fixed to that key with an expanded cadential progression which is then
repeated with even greater expansion. The entire theme, which comprises the ST
group, is therefore an extended ST process in which the weakened signals at bar
51 propel the theme forward in search of greater tonal stability.
ST Processes over Multiple Themes

The above examples demonstrate the effects of ST processes which are con-
tained within a single theme. The effects of weakened signals in an ST process
may, however, extend into one or more successive themes in the new key,
pushing compensatory actions deeper into the exposition. Not only do such
situations increase the already high teleology of the entire ST process, they also
encourage us to hear these multiple themes as a broad unit regardless of whether
one considers them to be part of the ST group or a subsequent closing group.62
In other words, the terminology is far less important than the recognition of the
dynamic process which binds such themes together. For the sake of convenience,
I will refer to all themes within an ST process as STs, though with the under-
standing that new-key themes after the first one may be viewed as closing
themes, depending on one’s preferences.
A prime example of a multiple-theme ST process occurs in Mozart’s Hunt
Quartet, K. 458, in which five strong-state signals indicate an ST beginning at
bar 47: a half cadence in F is sounded at bar 36 (signal 3) and has its final
dominant chord prolonged through a standing-on-the-dominant until bar 42. A
textural reduction to a single voice then articulates an MC gap (signal 4), which
proceeds with four and a half bars of caesura-fill. At bar 47 there is a change in
texture to full four-part harmony (signal 5), a sudden forte dynamic (signal 6)
and now the trill figure, which, though purely conventional material when
sounded in isolation (as in the MC gap), is paired with a contrasting sigh figure
and thus cleverly transformed into characteristic melodic material (signal 7)
through its lack of uniformity.
The two requisite signals of new-key tonic harmony (signal 1) and begin-
ning and end functions (signal 2) are also present, thus, together with the five
strong signals, expressing an ST beginning at bar 47. But the prolonged domi-
nant is more typical of a continuing standing-on-the-dominant than an ST
beginning, and hence it weakens the requisite signals and sets off an ST
process which seeks a balancing emphasis on tonic harmony. When the tonic
chord finally arrives at bar 51, its effect is minimised by a hushed piano
dynamic which contrasts starkly with the forte of the theme’s dominant
opening. And although tonic harmony appears in an arresting forte at both
ends of the cadential function of bars 53–54, its brief existence can hardly be
said to make up for the overpowering dominant of the theme’s beginning.
Note, moreover, that the entire theme from bar 47 to bar 54 constitutes an

22 MARK RICHARDS
eight-bar sentence with no phrase expansion, leaving no room to sound an

expansive stretch of compensatory action, as was the case with the A major
section in the opening ST of Beethoven’s Op. 10 No. 3.
Mozart’s solution is therefore to pass the burden of compensation on to the
succeeding theme – what I will call ST2. Here a tonic prolongation supports a
two-bar presentation in bars 55–56 and even spills over into the start of a
continuation in bar 57. But, as with the preceding ST1, the tonic harmony itself
is understated, appearing coyly on the soft ends of fortepiano markings and in a
metrically weak position. Thus, the tonic beginning of ST2 can only partially
make up for the tensions left unresolved in ST1. Note especially how Mozart
strengthens the connection between these two themes by employing the same
motives for the same formal functions: the trill figure for each beginning, and the
descending staccato scale for each cadence.
A second attempt at ST2 begins at bar 61, but the tonic harmony of its
presentation is again plagued by self-doubt as the fortepiano markings return. A
slightly altered continuation likewise leads to the same cadential function, but at
the very moment that this cadence closes at bar 66, the theme is reopened with
another varied repetition of the continuation. And it is here that we experience
the long-awaited payoff of this ST process: the tonic now appears brightly
illuminated with a forte mark and prolonged over two and a half bars. Not only
that, but after the same cadential figure is sounded in the latter part of bar 68,
the forte tonic bursts forth once more, thus providing ample compensation for the
weakened signals of ST1. With bars 71–73, a short string of diminished seventh
chords leads us to question whether this compensation will be revoked with a
final chromatic twist. But Mozart quickly leads back to the tonic in bar 74 for a
four-bar cadential function that jettisons the short staccato-scale figure, which
was never able to move on to new material, and replaces it with graceful legato
figures, as though to ensure that the theme’s cadence will ‘stick’ this time
around.
Perhaps the most extensive example of a multiple-theme ST process in the
Classical repertoire is that which occurs in Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony. Past
analyses have proposed three different locations for the ST beginning: the dolce
melody in bar 45, the rising-scale melody in bar 57 and the repeated-note
melody in bar 83.63 Although the phrase starting in bar 45 is certainly no clear
ST beginning, enough strong signals remain to articulate that part of the form.
But even more important, this bar sets into motion an enormous ST process
which is the driving force behind the entire ST group.
Of the seven possible signals, four reinforcing ones are expressed in a strong
state in bar 45. On the downbeat, a phrase-ending dominant chord (signal 3)
immediately precedes the start of the theme. On the second beat of the bar, there
is the striking change of texture (signal 5), the normative drop to piano from
fortissimo (signal 6), and a strikingly lyrical characteristic melody (signal 7). Yet
at the same time, three signals are weak or indeed absent. First, there is no MC
gap (signal 4) separating the end of the transition from the start of this phrase.64

Secondly, stable tonic harmony in root position or first inversion is withheld until
the last possible instant at the end of the phrase at bar 57, rendering signal 1
weak. More prominently, the new phrase prolongs dominant harmony, which
weakens the first part of signal 2 since this tactic is more typically found at the
end of a transition than in an ST beginning. Finally, the closing tonic chord
(elided with the next phrase) must be considered not cadential, but rather as part
of a tonic arrival (closural function), because it merely puts a halt to the long
dominant prolongation without an independent cadential progression, weaken-
ing the second part of signal 2. Hence, in this case, an ST process results from
the deformational signal 1 and, unlike the other ST processes examined above,
both the beginning and end functions of signal 2, the lack of a cadence being
particularly important to the ST process which follows.
A corrective to the deformational beginning of this ST does appear with a new
phrase at bar 57, which states and prolongs tonic harmony. But as with the initial
ST, the notion that this theme is a part of the ST group is obscured by another
feature typical of transitions: a dissolution into modulatory harmonies in bars
65–72. Moreover, although this theme possesses a true cadential function in bars
75–83, complete with a pre-dominant chord, its final three bars are pared down
to a unison texture, substantially undermining the closure provided by the PAC
at the end of the phrase (especially given the absence of a typical cadential bass
line). A third phrase begins in bar 83, again on the tonic, but proper closure once
more remains elusive, as it ends not with a cadence, but with another closural
function, a dominant arrival – a final dominant chord which is not cadential
owing to its being inverted or, as in this case, containing the dissonant seventh.65
This dominant chord is much prolonged before moving into a fourth and final
phrase at bar 109, which once again begins on the tonic. This time, after much
expansion, the theme reaches a cadential function at bar 140, which, for the first
time in the movement, achieves a PAC in the new key with a dominant chord at
bar 143 that remains fully harmonised into the final tonic chord. Thus, the vast
distance between bar 45 and this final PAC is constructed as a broad ST group
which seeks to rectify the tonal and cadential problems of the initial ST. From
this perspective, bar 45 is therefore the start not only of the ST group, but of the
intensely teleological ST process which runs through the entire group.
Other Sonata Deformations in ST Signals and Their Combination

We have seen that deformations in signals which weaken the tonal aspects of an
ST are responsible for the onset of an ST process. But other configurations of ST
signal deformations may also be found in the Classical repertoire, particularly
those involving the two signals which precede the ST, namely the phrase-ending
chord in the transition and the MC (signals 3 and 4, respectively). In some
instances the MC gap is absent, but there is a strong harmonic preparation
(signal 3), and the tonal aspects of the ST beginning remain perfectly clear
(signals 1 and 2). The result is an ST which follows on the heels of the transition

24 MARK RICHARDS
with no break between the two, or what may be called an integrated ST.66 A
notable example occurs in Haydn’s Piano Sonata in E major, Hob XVI:52,
which has been cited by Hepokoski and Darcy as well as Caplin as an instance
of an ST which lacks a preceding MC gap.67 Note, however, that a preparatory
V chord is established with a half cadence in bar 14 and then prolonged before
the ST, and that the ST itself at bar 17 begins squarely on, and indeed prolongs,
the tonic harmony. There are also obvious changes in texture and dynamics, and
the melodic material is certainly characteristic (especially as it recycles the
opening of the first theme). Thus, the MC gap is the only signal out of the seven
that is absent from this ST, which is surely why the ST remains remarkably clear
even though it lacks this common signal.68
Another possible deformation, found in Beethoven, occurs when the ST
receives no preparatory signals whatever because the MC gap is absent and the
phrase-ending chord in the transition is either absent or elides with the ST
beginning. In these cases, the spontaneous ST, as it may be called, enters
unprompted, either before the transition has had a chance to come to any kind
of ending or just as it reaches its final chord. Consider, for instance, the finale of
the Pastoral Symphony (Ex. 7), a movement in which the possibility of an ST
group has recently been debated by Caplin, Hepokoski and James Webster. The
point of contention lies in Caplin’s claim that the ST group begins at bar 42
because of the tonic prolongation and because ‘larger-sized units are
re-established following fragmentation’ (Caplin 2009c, p. 35). While Webster
agrees with this view, Hepokoski does not, instead positing that the exposition is
a ‘continuous’ one owing to the absence of an MC.69 Obviously, by late
eighteenth-century standards, this is no normative ST beginning, since it lacks
both a preparatory phrase-ending chord and an MC gap, but it is difficult to
deny the articulation of an ST at bar 42 on account of the strong-state signals
which are present.70 That bar 42 starts on a I6 chord renders the first requisite
signal of new-key tonic harmony strong. Moreover, because this chord is pro-
longed through a sentence presentation (and its repetition), and because the
continuation in bars 50–52 (which is promptly repeated) closes with a clear
cadential function, the second requisite signal of beginning and end functions is
likewise in a strong state.71 The sense of a beginning in bar 42 is further
enhanced by the onset of a tonic prolongation, by the ‘augmentation’ of the
length of the units and by Beethoven’s orchestration: the trumpets and trom-
bones, which have been silent since the end of the first-theme group, trium-
phantly re-enter at the start of each basic idea in bars 42 and 44, emphasising
those moments as form-functional starting points.
On the other hand, signals 5 and 6 are absent, since the texture remains
essentially unchanged in moving from the transition into the ST at bar 42
(especially evident in the orchestral score); likewise for the dynamic level. Even
the melodic material remains directly linked to the transition, but because this
material is characteristic (as virtually all the melodic material has been thus far
in this highly lyrical finale), signal 7 is strong. With three strong signals, along

Ex. 7 Beethoven, ‘Pastoral’ Symphony/v, bars 38–58

end of Transition
38
( )
ST?
42
46
cadential cadential
50
cresc. cresc.
C:
Retransition
54
dimin.

26 MARK RICHARDS
with the two requisite signals, an ST beginning remains perceptible, though

considerably weakened, at bar 42. In this case, the spontaneous ST is obscured
by the close affiliation it has with the transition, out of which it evolves.72
Of course, it is possible to find deformations in preparatory ST signals
occurring in conjunction with an ST process, though again the technique seems
to be limited to Beethoven, at least in the Classical repertoire. In fact,
Beethoven’s Op. 18 No. 3 provides an example of an ST process combined with
a spontaneous ST, since an MC gap is absent and the V chord which ends the
transition elides with the start of the ST. Another example occurs in the finale of
his Eighth Symphony, where the transition sounds a premature dominant arrival
in C major at bar 42, then prolongs that dominant as preparation for the ST
(signal 3).73 Because there is no MC gap, however, an integrated ST results.74
When the ST begins at bar 48, it is articulated by strong changes of texture and
dynamics and by the lyrical melody (signals 5, 6 and 7, respectively). The
theme’s wrong-key start in A major undermines the true key of C major,
weakening signals 1 and 2 and setting off an ST process. Compensation arrives
in bar 60, where the theme re-begins in C major, now, perhaps in more typical
ST fashion, with the melody shifted to the woodwinds and marked dolce.
Theorising about how the start of the ST group is expressed in Classical sonata
forms has proven difficult because composers sometimes override the norms
established for this purpose. It is for this reason that analytical approaches to STs
ought to be broadened to include the seven signals investigated in this essay.
Overall, STs were found never to contain fewer than three of these signals in a
strong (i.e. normative) state; it was further found that STs contain, to some
degree, the two signals of new-key tonic harmony (signal 1) and, at the very least,
the formal functions of beginning and end (signal 2).
This widened view of STs allows us to gain insight into the tonal problems
that are established through deformations in these signals and how they come to
be resolved at a later point (or at several later points) in the ST group, a
technique I have called an ST process. In such cases, the ST beginning appears
significantly weakened and participates in a highly teleological compensatory
process which can span several subsequent themes. The tonal anomalies
encountered in ST processes involve at least one of three deformations: a
non-normative phrase-ending chord preparing the ST, an ST which starts on a
chord other than the new-key tonic (and does not reach the tonic chord until
after the theme’s beginning function) and a beginning function to the ST which
is based on harmony other than the new-key tonic.
Through this broadened approach, we also gain an appreciation of how an ST
can remain perceptible in the face of such deformations as the lack of a preceding
MC gap (an integrated ST) and perhaps of a preparatory phrase-ending chord as
well (a spontaneous ST). Moreover, in the music of Beethoven, these deforma-
tions were sometimes found to combine with ST processes, creating an entirely
different sort of ST than was typically found in late eighteenth-century music.

What is obtained when STs are viewed from the vantage point of multiple
signals is a sense of the great variety in the degree of expression an ST may
obtain. In other words, an ST beginning is not always the clearly defined event
which is the Classical norm. Indeed, as we have seen, its obfuscation through the
manipulation of its various signals is one of the most powerfully engaging
techniques a composer can employ at this pivotal moment in sonata form.
NOTES
1. I use the relatively neutral term ‘second theme’ and its abbreviation ‘ST’ in
order to retain an impartiality with respect to the various approaches to the
analysis of sonata form. In doing so, I hope to allow the value of each to
contribute to the overall view I present here in a more inclusive approach
than would otherwise be possible.
2. The central tenets of these scholars’ points of view are found in Hepokoski
and Darcy (1997) and (2006) and Caplin (1998); for an example of a
direct disagreement between their approaches, see Hepokoski (2009), pp.
43–5, and Caplin (2009b), pp. 59–61.
3. For the gapless approach to the ST, see Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), pp.
49 and 117 n. 1.
4. See Caplin (1998), p. 97 and especially pp. 111–15, where he describes
STs in which there is an ‘omission of initiating function’ by way of an
opening function of continuation, cadential or standing-on-the-dominant.
For his more recent view, see Caplin (2009a), p. 100.
5. By this definition, not all sonata forms express an ST. Especially in Haydn,
one often encounters another type of exposition in which there is a begin-
ning to the transition and a final PAC to confirm the new key, but no ST
beginning. The structure has been variously named: Larsen calls it a
‘three-part’ exposition, Caplin an ‘obscured boundary between transition
and subordinate theme’ and Hepokoski and Darcy a ‘continuous exposi-
tion’. See Larsen ([1935–85] 1988), pp. 274–5; Hepokoski and Darcy
(1997), pp. 117–21, and (2006), pp. 51–64; and Caplin (1998), pp. 201–3.
This type of structure may also be found in Mozart and Beethoven. See, for
example, the first movement of Mozart’s String Quartet in D minor, K.
421, and the slow movement of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in F minor, Op.
2 No. 1.
6. Once we hear a beginning function, we naturally expect an end function as
well. As I argue later, even if the final chord of a presumed ST’s end
function does not materialize, we still understand the passage to constitute
an ST on account of the harmonic progression (usually cadential). Thus
the appearance of an end function serves to confirm the initial impression

28 MARK RICHARDS
that we are indeed within an ST. This explains why we are not waiting for
an end function simply to signal the ST beginning, particularly in cases
with exceptionally long STs, as in the first movement of Beethoven’s Cello
Sonata in F major, Op. 5 No. 1 (see Ex. 5).
7. ‘Levels of default’ are defined in Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), p. 10.
Examples of clear STs in which one or two signals are weakened or absent
are discussed in the ‘Seven Signals in Normative ST Beginnings’ section of
the present article.
8. Not all sonata forms with deficient ST signals attempt this sort of com-
pensation, especially if the deficiency occurs before the ST. In Beethoven’s
Piano Sonata Op. 109, for instance, the ST beginning at bar 9 lacks both
a preparatory chord and the textural gap of a medial caesura but never
attempts to reinstate either of these signals. Rather, the theme is left to
sound as a spontaneous interlude (and thus forms an example of the
spontaneous ST, described further below).
9. See Horne (2006).
10. Eighteenth-century writings on various types of sonata form (before it was
so christened) tend not to highlight the first phrase which begins in the new
key as the start of an especially significant section. As Ratner (1980, p. 217)
points out, they describe the form in terms of what he calls a ‘tour of keys’.
Even when individual phrases of the exposition are described, the emphasis
is on the ends of phrases rather than their beginnings. See, for instance,
Koch ([1787] 1983), p. 213, who divides his basic model of the exposition
into four phrases, the first two ending on I and V, respectively, of the tonic
key and the last two ending on V and I, respectively, of the dominant key.
No direct relationship can be drawn, however, between this parsing of an
exposition and one which includes an ST group because in some cases, the
ST group corresponds to Koch’s third and fourth phrases and in others,
only the fourth. On this point, see Burstein (2010), pp. 97–8. In a similar
vein, Kollmann ([1797] 1973, p. 5) divides the exposition (the ‘first
section’ of a two-section movement) into two ‘subsections’: ‘The first
subsection must contain the setting out from the [home] key towards its
fifth in major, or third in minor; and it may end with the chord of the key
note or its fifth. The second subsection comprehends a first sort of elabo-
ration, consisting of a more natural modulation than that of the third
subsection [i.e. the development section]; it may be confined to the fifth or
third of the key only’ (emphases in original). In this case, it is not clear
whether the beginning of the second subsection is always in the new key
and thus forms an ST beginning, as Hepokoski and Darcy (1997, p. 117)
suggest. One exception to these early theorists is Galeazzi, who locates a
‘Characteristic Passage’ in the new key after a ‘Departure from the [Main]
Key’, that is, what would appear to be an ST beginning after a transition.

He further notes that the ‘Characteristic Passage’ may be omitted in

shorter compositions (most likely ones which, by modern standards, would
be considered to be not in sonata form but in a type of binary form), and,
inexplicably, that the new key area may be in the subdominant. See
Churgin (1968) for a complete English translation of Galeazzi’s description
of sonata form. In nineteenth-century writings, the ST beginning starts to
be regarded as an important point in the form, Birnbach (1827) being
credited with coining the term ‘second theme’ (das zweite Thema). But
although the ST’s new key is generally recognised, its melodic aspect is
highlighted above all else. Well-known, for example, are Reicha’s terms
première idée mère and seconde idée mère for the first and second theme,
respectively, and grande coupe binaire (large binary form), the chart for
which is reproduced in several sources, such as Newman (1972, p. 33),
Bent and Drabkin (1987, p. 21) and Hoyt (1996, p. 142). See also Marx
([1841–75] 1997), whose Hauptsatz (main theme) and Seitensatz (subor-
dinate theme) are building blocks for his descriptions of all the large tonal
forms but hold special significance in sonata form because, as Burnham
(1996, p. 185) observes, there is an interdependency between the Haupt-
satz and Seitensatz, which form ‘a more integrated and, in Marx’s scheme
of things, more highly evolved whole’. Moreover, Czerny ([ca. 1840] 1848,
vol. 1, p. 35) remarks that the ‘middle subject [i.e. ST] ... must consist of
a new idea’. Perhaps this was the influence of Reicha, especially since
Czerny translated the latter’s work, as Newman (1972, p. 32) indicates. In
the early twentieth century, Tovey railed against the melodic view of
expositions numerous times, as, for instance, where he states ([1927] 1949,
p. 274) that ‘not only do the terms “first” and “second” subject have no
reference to a couple of themes, but there are no rules whatever as to the
number or distribution of themes in any sonata movement’ (themes, in this
sense, referring to distinct melodic entities). Schenker ([1935] 1979, p.
135) likewise opines that terms such as ‘the second theme, the subordinate
theme, the lyrical theme, or the like ... are in every respect inadequate
terms and concepts which afford no insight into sonata form’. The har-
monic view which these latter two scholars advocate as the fundamental
aspect of the form came to be widely adopted only after Ratner’s (1949)
article. More recent studies combine this harmonic view with other signals,
Caplin (1998) adding that an ST must be a bona fide theme with beginning
and end functions (my signal 2), and Hepokoski and Darcy (1997 and
2006) identifying the medial caesura as an important indicator of the ST
(my signal 4).
11. The idea that Classical STs always include a stable form of new-key tonic
harmony dates at least back to Marx ([1841–75] 1997), who views the
Seitensatz (i.e. ST) in sonata form as consisting of at least one Satz, which
is a segment of music (large or small) that includes melodic and harmonic

30 MARK RICHARDS
closure on the tonic (though not necessarily cadential closure – see his
Ex. 4.17 on p. 112, in which Marx calls the opening ten bars of
Beethoven’s Op. 28 Satz which is ‘self-sufficient and closed’ despite the
fact that it lacks cadential closure). Also implicit in Marx’s analyses,
however, is the notion that an ST group has new-key tonic harmony at or
near its outset (see pp. 134–46). No doubt this is why he reads the ST
group in the first movement of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in F major, Op.
10 No. 2, as beginning with a Satz at bar 19 with the phrase in C major
even though it ends on the dominant and thus promptly ‘becomes a Gang’
– Marx’s term for an open-ended, forward-driving segment of music that is
fundamentally opposed to the Satz. For the requirements of closure for the
Satz and the main characteristics of a Gang, see Marx ([1841–75] 1997),
pp. 71 and 67 respectively. More recently, Schoenberg’s idea that themes
‘centre around a tonic’ (1967, p. 20), also adopted (if implicitly) by Ratz
(1973) and Caplin (1998), suggests that tonic harmony of that key is
always present to some degree in STs as well.
12. A phrase beginning with tonic harmony was a virtual necessity for Tovey in
his readings of ST beginnings. Nowhere is this better expressed than in his
analysis of Beethoven’s Seventh Symphony (1935–9, vol. 1, pp. 58–9), in
which he states that ‘the beginning of the second subject, like that in the
Eroica Symphony, has often eluded the commentators, in spite of its
containing one of the most important figures (d) in the movement. The
only difficulty in finding it comes from the habit of searching for something
that looks different on paper, instead of listening for the point at which the
harmony and phrasing settle firmly in the new key’. He then shows the ST
beginning as occurring at bar 130, where there is a new phrase starting on
the tonic of the new key, E major. However, as discussed below, such a
tonal component is not a necessity for an ST beginning and is frequently
omitted in Beethoven. Hence, I would argue that the ST beginning occurs
on the third quaver of bar 112 as a result of the preparation by a V chord
(of iii), the change in texture and the characteristic melodic material, all of
which are in a strong state (as defined below). Moreover, this entire phrase
(bars 112–130) expresses both requisite signals: it states new-key tonic
harmony in bars 119 and 130 and contains both beginning and end
functions as a result of its construction as a sentence (bars 112–118 =
presentation; bars 119–130 = continuation + cadential material). Note that
in bar 326 of the recapitulation, the tonal anomaly of the ST beginning is
somewhat rectified in that it is now transposed to the right tonic (A),
though still in the wrong mode (minor). Moreover, the second statement of
the basic idea in G minor has now been eliminated, keeping the tonic
constant for the entire phrase. Beethoven employs practically the same
tactic in the finale (ST starting at bar 63 in the exposition and bar 274 in
the recapitulation).

13. Ratner (1970, pp. 474–5) cites this situation in the finale of Beethoven’s
String Quartet in F major, Op. 18 No. 1, and the first movement of the
same composer’s Eighth Symphony in what he calls ‘false starts’ to the
second key area. Longyear and Covington (1988, p. 460) recognise it in
their ‘Type II Three-Key Exposition’ but insist that ‘the initial key be
maintained long enough to give at least an initial impression of the music’s
being in that key’. By contrast, I prefer to distinguish the true presence of
a key by a cadence, which is the means by which keys are generally
established in the Classical style. Caplin (1998, p. 119) makes a similar
argument with respect to such situations.
Unless otherwise indicated, all references to musical works in this essay
are to the first movement only. Examples of an accepted non-normative
key in Beethoven include the String Quintet in C major, Op. 29, bar 41
(ST in VI and vi); the Waldstein Sonata in C major, bar 35 (ST in III); and
many other of his middle- and late-period works such as the String Quartet
in E major, Op. 127, bar 41 (ST in iii); the Piano Sonata in C minor, Op.
111, bar 50 (ST in VI); and the Ninth Symphony, bar 74 (ST in VI). One
example of a non-normative key which implies that it will be accepted but
is then supplanted occurs in the Violin Sonata, Op. 12 No. 2 (the ST
begins in a prepared vi key but quickly modulates, eventually cadencing in
the normative V key of E major). Examples of a false non-normative key
include the String Trio in C minor, Op. 9 No. 3, bar 21 (ST starts in VI
but moves quickly to III), and the Violin Sonata in G major, Op. 30 No.
3, bar 35 (ST begins in iii and eventually moves to V).
14. Longyear and Covington refer to this situation as a ‘Type I Three-Key
Exposition’ (1988, p. 449), Caplin as a type of ‘modulating subordinate
theme’ (1998, p. 119), Hepokoski and Darcy as a type of ‘tonally-
migratory’ S theme (2006, p. 120) and Horne as a type of ‘oblique approach
to the second key’ (2006, p. 111; emphasis in original).
15. As Webster (1978, p. 26) has pointed out with respect to Schubert’s
‘Quartettsatz’, the fact that the first key of the ST group (A major) forms
‘a closed period’ (i.e. achieves cadential closure) marks a significant dif-
ference from Beethoven’s Coriolan Overture, where the ST’s first key (E
major) moves into the second (G minor) without being solidified by a
PAC. Although the ‘Quartettsatz’ would, in this respect, seem to be a
development of Classical procedures in general, it would be more accurate
to view it as a development of Beethoven’s practices in particular, since it
was only with him that the procedure became something of a regularity.
After all, as Webster notes elsewhere (1991, p. 18), the suggestion of two
competing keys in the ST group, which, he remarks, occurs in the Farewell
Symphony, ‘is found nowhere else in Haydn’. Moreover, Longyear and
Covington (1988), pp. 449–50, indicate lone examples from Gluck and
C.P.E. Bach as possible precedents.

32 MARK RICHARDS
16. Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), p. 316, describe the phenomenon similarly,
the mediant representing ‘a vision that cannot be realized’ in a ‘collapse of
modal “hope” within the generic sonata’.
17. See Schoenberg (1967), Ratz (1973) and Caplin (1998). I would consider
the ‘medial’ function which Caplin requires for themes (p. 257) to be an
optional one, since it occurs only with a continuation function (from the
sentence), which is not present in all theme types (such as the period, for
example).
18. See Caplin (1998), p. 37. Caplin also notes here that a basic idea generally
has characteristic melodic material, a concept with which I fully agree, but
which I prefer to view as a separate signal, since a basic idea may emerge
with conventional material, such as a rhythmically undifferentiated passage
of scales and/or arpeggios. See, for example, Haydn’s Piano Sonata in E
major, Hob. XVI: 31, bar 13, which begins the ST group with a two-bar
basic idea (in a larger antecedent phrase) composed of just such material.
By contrast, an ST beginning like that of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in A
Minor, K. 310, would not be conventional by the above definition because,
although it proceeds in continuous semiquavers, it lacks the ‘consistent
stepwise or arpeggiated motion’ that Caplin (1998, p. 37) ascribes to
conventional material. In other words, its melodic intervals are memorable
enough to constitute characteristic material.
19. These two tenets are from Caplin (2004), the second of which is based on
Lerdahl and Jackendoff (1983), p. 168.
20. Examples include Mozart, Piano Sonata in C major, K. 279, bars 17–20;
the slow movement of Beethoven’s First Symphony, bars 27–30; and the
finale of his Eighth Symphony, bars 48–60 (here, the progression being
altered to an expanded VI–V7/V–V7–I in the dominant, C major).
21. As I argue elsewhere (2011, pp. 185–9), the basic idea (or ideas) of a theme
may take on any harmonic structure, although a tonic prolongation
remains the most pervasive. For similar arguments in favour of a broader
approach to the harmonic beginnings of sentences, see BaileyShea (2004),
pp. 8–9; and Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), p. 84 n. 14.
22. Caplin (2009a, p. 102) cites twenty movements by Beethoven which begin
a subordinate theme (i.e. an ST or a first rondo episode) with dominant
harmony. In the first category are pieces such as the Piano Sonata in E
major, Op. 7; in the second, those such as the Piano Sonata in F minor,
Op. 2 No. 1; and in the third, those such as the finale of the Tempest
Sonata, Op. 31 No. 2.
23. The imperfect authentic cadence, with the melody ending on the third or
fifth of the chord, occurs as well but is decidedly rare; one example is
Beethoven’s Harp Quartet, Op. 74, bar 70.

24. From a larger point of view, such a cadence may be regarded as an ‘internal
half cadence’ within a larger two-part theme, as described by Caplin
(1998), pp. 115–17.
25. See Caplin (1998), p. 43, and (2004), p. 77.
26. The locus classicus of this situation is the finale of Beethoven’s Fifth Sym-
phony, in which a final tonic at the end of the ST is evaded in both the
exposition and the recapitulation and only compensated for in the massive
coda. For an excellent analysis of this ST group (including the cadential
functions without cadential arrival), see Caplin (1999), pp. 63–71.
27. See Richards (2010), pp. 30–4.
28. Caplin’s ‘two-part transition’ incorporates both a non-modulating transi-
tion and a modulating one, in that order (1998, pp. 135–8). The final
dominant chord of any transition need not be a half cadence in the strictest
sense (i.e. a root-position dominant triad approached via tonic or pre-
dominant harmony), hence I do not refer to it as such. The non-
modulating transition corresponds to Winter’s earlier notion of the ‘bifocal
close’ (1989).
29. The same would also apply to those minor-mode movements which
employ a non-modulating transition and so move from a home-key V at the
end of the transition to, usually, the mediant-key I at the start of the ST.
See, for example, the finale of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in C minor, Op.
10 No. 1, where the functional end of the transition occurs in bar 15 with
a home-key V, which is then followed by a standing-on-the-dominant.
In some cases, a dominant chord is sounded and prolonged before the
transition comes to an end. This ‘premature dominant arrival’, as Caplin
(1998, p. 256) calls it, produces a strong state in signal 3 despite the fact
that the dominant does not enter as the transition’s functional end. This is
possible because the premature dominant generates the same sense of
anticipation for a subsequent ST provided by a dominant which is a true
end to the transition. As discussed later, an example occurs in the finale of
Beethoven’s Eighth Symphony.
30. See Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), pp. 27–8. Although these authors also
allow a home-key authentic cadence (PAC or IAC) as a possible (fourth-
level default) chord to prepare a medial caesura, they remark that ‘generally
the PAC or IAC closes off a brief, straightforward P, and the resulting
impression is that of omitting the TR zone altogether. Because of the
ellipsis of TR, the I:PAC or IAC at the end of P is asked to do double duty
as the rhetorical MC’ (p. 29). To my mind, if TR is completely omitted in
the exposition, then what we are dealing with is not sonata form but a
simpler construction.
31. Caplin (1998, pp. 135–7, Ex. 9.13) also notes the lack of a preparatory
phrase-ending V for the ST in this example.

34 MARK RICHARDS
32. Not only is the V7/IV the more normative hearing on first impression, it is
also the one for which we are primed by the opening theme in bars 7–8,
4
where a V 2 /IV resolves to IV6. Hepokoski and Darcy (1997, pp. 149–50)
regard this exposition as containing a trimodular block, which begins at bar
19 with a module (TM1) that they admit may be viewed as S1 (i.e. the ST
beginning).
33. This reasoning is similar to that of signal 1, in which a non-normative key
at the ST beginning must be confirmed with a cadence (as opposed to
being ‘given ample time to unfold’ in transitions) before the signal can be
considered to be in a strong state.
34. I refer only to the gap and not simply the MC because, as I argue else-
where, an MC actually consists of three stages: a harmonic preparation, a
textural gap and an acceptance by the ST. These ideas are discussed more
fully in my forthcoming article ‘Beethoven and the Obscured Medial
Caesura: a Study in the Transformation of Style’.
35. See Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), pp. 117, 117 n. 1, 48 and 36.
36. See Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), pp. 40–5. On pp. 34–5, Mozart’s K. 311
appears as these authors’ example of an MC that contains a pickup to S.
37. The terms ‘expanded caesura-fill’ and ‘flush-juxtaposed’ are from
Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), pp. 41 and 47, respectively (though they do
not apply the latter to ST beginnings).
38. I discuss obscured MCs more fully in ‘Beethoven and the Obscured Medial
Caesura’.
39. Rosen (1997, pp. 57 and 64) discusses textural change in the context of the
‘articulated phrase’, which also includes the elements of periodicity and
symmetry.
40. One movement that lacks a textural change is the finale of Beethoven’s
Pastoral Symphony, discussed in the section ‘Other Sonata Deformations
in ST Signals and Their Combination’.
41. See the discussion in the section ‘Signal 7’ for more detail on expressive
types for STs.
42. See Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), p. 93.
43. Hepokoski and Darcy (2006, p. 132) seem to suggest this idea when they
state that ‘the piano convention [to ST beginnings] may have been devised
as a means of setting this relaunch into relief’.
44. As Hepokoski and Darcy (2006, p. 136) argue, ‘S-themes that begin forte
often compensate for MCs that are unusually weak. This can occur when

TR and the MC are submitted to a dynamic deformation – when they are

articulated quietly (piano) or when a diminuendo has been applied to the
drive to the preceding MC’.
45. Examples in which this caveat changes the state which the signal would
have otherwise assumed include Mozart’s String Quartet in D major, K.
499 (piano MC in bars 29–31, forte ST at the crotchet pickup to bar 32),
and Beethoven’s String Quartet in F major, Op. 59 No. 1 (piano end to
MC elided with piano start to ST at bar 60).
46. In the context of symphonies, Koch ([1787] 1983, p. 199) describes a
‘more singing phrase’ which is heard after ‘rushing and sonorous phrases’,
surely a reference to an ST beginning after a transition; see also Galeazzi,
as cited in Churgin (1968), p. 193. Although Vogler writes of a second
‘main theme’ (Hauptsatz) in the first movements of symphonies, describing
it as ‘gentle’ (sanft) in contrast to a ‘strong’ (stark) first main theme, Stevens
(1983) has shown that this is merely textural contrast within the same
phrase, not a second theme in the modern sense. Ritzel (1968, pp. 167–70)
implies a similar point in this same reference to Vogler.
47. Although characteristic melodic material, and in turn the strength of an ST
beginning, may seem to be related to Ratner’s concept of musical topics
owing to their highly individual nature, this is probably not true. As Caplin
(2005, p. 122) has recently argued, ‘[A]s is generally the case with our
experience of formal functionality, the specific musical parameters are the
defining moments, not necessarily the generalized topical reference that
may ensue from those collections of characteristics.’ Consequently, after
examining several examples, Caplin concludes that ‘we are led to the sense
that formal functionality and expressive topicality tend to enter into infor-
mal, ad hoc relationships, ones that must be analysed on a highly individual
basis’; p. 124.
48. Larsen ([1935–85] 1988, p. 245) seems to notice the same trend when he
writes: ‘The exposition is normally divided up into two or more sections,
separated from each other by pauses, cadences, change of motion and
thematic material, dynamics and more. In many cases, especially in
Mozart, the cadencing in connection with the change of tonality from tonic
to dominant will be so much stressed that a decisive cut is felt here’.
49. See Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), pp. 44–5.
50. See Schmalfeldt (2011, p. 116) for an apt definition of her ‘process of
becoming’: ‘[T]oward the end of the eighteenth century and into the next,
new compositional approaches to certain, by then well-established conven-
tions of musical form seemed intent upon shifting our focus away from the
perception of forms as the product of successive, functionally discrete
sections within a whole. Instead, these new approaches encouraged the

36 MARK RICHARDS
idea that the formal process itself becomes “the form.” Listeners of this
kind of music are being asked to participate within that process, by listening
backward as well as in the moment – by remembering what they have heard,
while retrospectively reinterpreting formal functions in the light of an
awareness of the interplay between conventions and transformations’;
emphases in original.
51. Schachter (1990) espouses essentially the same view from a strictly
Schenkerian perspective but admits that ambiguity and multiple meanings
in tonal music ‘certainly do exist’. As Agawu (1994, p. 103) convincingly
shows, however, ‘Schachter’s own argument amounts to a decisive vote
against the plausibility of musical ambiguity’, thus demonstrating how the
two viewpoints actually converge.
52. Particularly telling in this respect is the fact that, of all the sonata-form
excerpts in her book, Schmalfeldt (2011) analyses none of the initial STs of
a movement as participating in a process of becoming. Rather, she views
them all as STs from their very beginning. This even includes the locus
classicus of her notion of becoming, the first movement of Beethoven’s
Tempest Sonata. Although Caplin (2009a, p. 103) counters Schmalfeldt in
this particular case, claiming that ‘the end of the transition “becomes” the
beginning of the subordinate theme’ in bars 42–63, Schmalfeldt defends
her point of view: ‘the undisguised turbulence at the onset there [bar 41] of
the interlocking turn figure has never quite made it possible for me to
pretend for a moment that I am simply riding the quiet wave of a postca-
dential standing-on-the-dominant’. Furthermore, she points out that
‘already by m. 45 the growing intensity and the gradual registral ascent of
the agitato idea drawn from the initial allegro gesture suggest, both pian-
istically and psychologically, an anxious struggle toward a goal, rather than
the complacency of having already achieved one’; Schmalfeldt (2011), p.
52. Although Schmalfeldt draws attention to features other than the seven
signals proposed in this essay, the fact remains that she considers the ST
beginning to take place at bar 42, and therefore to be ‘decidable’ in
Agawu’s sense despite the weakening of its harmonic support through the
dominant prolongation.
53. See Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), pp. 170–7, and (1997), pp. 145–50.
54. Hepokoski and Darcy (2006, p. 172) also state that some TMBs ‘might be
regarded as a variant of the multimodular or trimodular S, one in which an
additional MC-effect and “second” S have been planted somewhere in the
middle’. Oddly enough, the authors appear to have changed their minds
from their earlier article on the MC (1997, p. 147 n. 38), where they
instead distinguish this type of multimodular or trimodular S from the
TMB. Nevertheless, it is clear that these types of S zones are closely related
to the TMB.

55. A TMB beginning with an unequivocal ST includes a first caesura and

ST-like theme, then (usually) a transitional passage and a second caesura
followed by another ST-like theme. It thus corresponds with an earlier
concept proposed by LaRue, in which ‘a secondary section [i.e. ST group]
based on two stable new ideas (1S, 2S) might still include an episodic
transition between these two, even though a main transition (1T) had
occurred before 1S’. Strangely, however, LaRue (1992, p. 158) qualifies
his observation by stating that the procedure occurs ‘commonly in styles
other than the Classic’.
56. Consequently, the authors of such analyses hear the ST beginning with the
A major theme at bar 54. See, for instance, Marx ([1841–75] 1997), p.
144; Tovey (1931), p. 56; Dahlhaus ([1987] 1991), pp. 102–4, who
regards bars 23–53 as an ‘episode’ between the transition and the ST;
Longyear and Covington (1988), p. 465 n. 15; and Rosen (1988), pp.
246–8, who refrains from labelling an ST anywhere in this exposition,
preferring instead to focus on the tonal motion, which ‘simply’ moves
through the submediant to the dominant key. Surely, however, to down-
play the tonal strangeness of the situation to this degree is to circumvent
the whole idea behind the passage. One exception to these analyses is that
of Prout (1895, p. 151), who views the ST as beginning at bar 23.
57. Caplin (1998, p. 119) defines a ‘modulating subordinate theme’ as a theme
in which ‘the goal subordinate key, that in which the theme closes with a
perfect authentic cadence, is the dominant region of the home key. The key
in which the theme begins can vary, but the submediant region in major-
mode movements and the mediant (relative major) in minor-mode ones are
usually favored’. Horne (2006, p. 111) notes that ‘the oblique initiation of
a second group comprises any second-group beginning that tonicizes a
scale degree other than 1̂ in the second key’. He then cites Op. 10 No. 3,
among others, as an example of the phenomenon.
58. See Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), p. 176. The authors readily admit that
this exposition ‘could be read in more than one way’. See, for example, n.
6 on the same page, where they raise the possibility that the movement is
in dialogue with a type of continuous exposition in which cadential
modules are reiterated after a PAC that comes too early to constitute the
EEC (essential expositional closure, their term for the PAC which ends the
S zone).
59. Those who consider the ST to begin on the dominant of A at bar 51 (or 52)
include d’Indy (1902, vol. 2/ii, p. 228), Riemann (1902–13, vol. 1, p. 464),
Helm ([1921] 1971, p. 10), Marliave ([1928] 1961, pp. 18–19), Longyear
and Covington (1988, p. 461) by implication and Horne (2006, p. 109).
Those siding with the C major of bar 68 include Hadow (1926, p. 34),
Mason (1947, p. 42), Lam (1975, vol. 1, p. 23), Konold ([1980] 1983,

38 MARK RICHARDS
p. 104), Schneider (1994, vol. 1, p. 139), Steinberg (1994, p. 160) again

by implication and Suurpää (1999, pp. 195–6). Kerman (1966, p. 17)
suggests that bar 68 is a false ST which leaves the entire group ‘undercut’.
Burstein (1998) and Agawu (2008) are both non-committal in the assign-
ment of an ST beginning. Lastly, Ratner (1995, p. 47), regarding the
exposition strictly from the point of view of key areas, marks the ST
beginning (‘Key-area 2’) at bar 76 (!), where a staunch A major finally
arrives (though in mid-phrase).
60. Some readers may feel that bars 51–57 express the function of either a
post-cadential standing-on-the-dominant or a continuation. I find the
former interpretation unsustainable because post-cadential functions do
not, as a rule, lead to cadences. The latter interpretation I find untenable
as well, because the passage does not contain any of the four features
which, according to Caplin (1998, p. 41), define a continuation: (1)
phrase-structural fragmentation, (2) acceleration in the harmonic rhythm,
(3) acceleration in the surface rhythm and (4) sequential harmonies.
Moreover, as I argue elsewhere (2011, pp. 200–2), continuations cannot
begin phrase structures because they are exclusively a form of acceleration
(i.e. they include only the first three features above) and must therefore be
preceded by an initial unit that sets the model against which the accelera-
tion is measured. Certainly, however, the prolonged dominant in this
passage weakens the sense of beginning, since it is a feature which usually
occurs in a standing-on-the-dominant.
61. The illusory status of this C major is also suggested by Beethoven’s use of
register, in that the first violin and cello occupy more central registers here
than when the ST emerged at bar 51. When the music returns to the true
ST key of A major at bar 76, these instruments regain their original
registers. (My thanks to Ryan McClelland for this insight.)
62. The issue of closing themes is one of the most contested in recent writings
on sonata form. For Hepokoski and Darcy (2006, pp. 120 and 180–1), the
secondary-theme zone (S) ends with the essential expositional closure
(EEC) – the first PAC that proceeds to differing material – and is followed
by the closing zone (C), which may contain codettas as well as full-fledged
themes. For Caplin (1998, p. 122), the subordinate theme group may
contain any number of themes ending with PACs and moves into a closing
section only upon reaching a codetta, which is generally defined by its short
length of one to four bars. Caplin (2009c, pp. 29–30) challenges other
notions of the ‘closing theme’ in sonata expositions, and elsewhere (2009b,
p. 59) he defends his idea of the ‘closing section’ against the criticism of
Hepokoski (2009), p. 43.
63. Those advocating bar 45 include Marx ([1841–75] 1997, p. 161),
Dahlhaus ([1987] 1991, pp. 174–5), Churgin (1992, pp. 32–4), Hepokoski

and Darcy (2006, p. 143) and Horne (2006). Those in favour of bar 57
include Tovey (1935–9, vol. 1, p. 30), although he contradicts this view
elsewhere ([1944] 1956, p. 222, where he marks bar 65 as the start of the
‘second group’); Caplin (1991, pp. 36–41); and Nottebohm ([1880] 1979,
p. 51), who notes that material in the sketches corresponding to bar 57 in
the final score constitutes ‘the first part of the second group’. And those
settling on bar 83 include Kretschmar (1913, vol. 1, p. 202), Plantinga
(1984, p. 39), Sipe (1998, p. 97) and Taruskin (2005, vol. 2, pp. 659–60).
It is unclear where Webster (2001, p. 692) locates the ST beginning, since
he marks the ‘second group proper’ at bar 57, implying a previous intro-
duction to the ST (ostensibly the ‘important theme’ he hears at bar 45).
Finally, although the question of an ST was irrelevant to Schenker, he does
identify ‘the so-called second subject’ ([1930] 1997, p. 17) at bar 83.
64. Hepokoski and Darcy (2006, p. 143) locate an MC at bar 45 but do not
discuss the oddity of the absence of a textural gap before the ST beginning.
65. For this definition of a dominant arrival, see Caplin (1998), p. 79.
66. This situation appears to be a subset of Hepokoski and Darcy’s ‘self-
evident S’, which sounds without a preceding MC, though these authors
are not explicit as to the sorts of signals which are or are not present.
67. See Hepokoski and Darcy (2006), p. 49; and Caplin (2011).
68. Other examples of integrated STs include Haydn, Symphony No. 98, bar
59; and Beethoven, Piano Sonata in C minor, Op. 27 No. 2/iii, bar 21, and
Piano Trio in D major (Ghost), Op. 70 No. 1, bar 43.
69. See Hepokoski (2009), pp. 43–5; and Webster (2009), p. 50.
70. Although a V chord immediately precedes bar 42, it cannot be considered
a phrase-ending one, for the phrase actually comes to an end with the
elided I6 on the following downbeat.
71. Caplin (2009c, p. 35), rather regards bars 54 ff. as cadential in function;
but, as Webster points out (2009, p. 66 n. 8), Caplin ‘states incorrectly that
mm. 51–52 and 53–54 are not genuinely cadential, because the dominants
are in inversion. Perhaps he was misled by his piano reduction ... in which
the lowest notes represent the cellos; in the score and to the ear, however,
these dominants are unambiguously long notes in root position, sounded
by double-basses and second bassoon and doubled by the violas’. I would
therefore agree with Webster that cadential function occurs with bars
51–52 and 53–54.
72. Beethoven’s last three piano sonatas provide other good examples of the
spontaneous ST: Op. 109, bar 9; Op. 110, bar 20; and Op. 111, bar 50.
73. Recall from n. 29 that a premature dominant arrival whose V chord is
prolonged renders signal 3 (a phrase-ending chord in the transition) strong,

40 MARK RICHARDS
on account of the sense of anticipation it brings for a new phrase to begin

thereafter (whether or not the phrase is elided with the ST).
74. Hepokoski and Darcy (2006, p. 117) cite this movement as an example of
a ‘self-evident S’ which is not prepared by an MC.
REFERENCES
Agawu, Kofi, 1994: ‘Ambiguity in Tonal Music: a Preliminary Study’, in
Anthony Pople (ed.), Theory, Analysis and Meaning in Music (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press), pp. 86–107.
______, 2008: ‘Beethoven’s Op. 18, No. 3, First Movement: Two Readings,
with a Comment on Analysis’, in Danuta Mirka and Kofi Agawu (eds),
Communication in Eighteenth-Century Music (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press), pp. 230–53.
BaileyShea, Matthew, 2004: ‘Beyond the Beethoven Model: Sentence Types
and Limits’, Current Musicology, 77, pp. 5–33.
Bent, Ian, with Drabkin, William, 1987: Analysis (New York: Norton).
Bergé, Pieter (ed.), 2009: Musical Form, Forms & Formenlehre (Leuven: Leuven
University Press).
Birnbach, Heinrich, 1827: ‘Freie Aufsätze: Über die geschiedene Form grösserer
Instrumentaltonstücke aller Art und deren Bearbeitung’, Allegemeine musika-
lische Zeitung, 4/xxxv, pp. 277–81.
Burnham, Scott, 1996: ‘A.B. Marx and the Gendering of Sonata Form’, in Ian
Bent (ed.), Music Theory in the Age of Romanticism (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press), pp. 163–86.
Burstein, L. Poundie, 1998: ‘Surprising Returns: the VII-Sharp in Beethoven’s
Op. 18, No. 3, and its Antecedents in Haydn’, Music Analysis, 17/iii, pp.
295–312.
_____, 2010: ‘Mid-Section Cadences in Haydn’s Sonata-Form Movements’,
Studia musicologica, 51/i–ii, pp. 91–107.
Caplin, William E., 1991: ‘Structural Expansion in Beethoven’s Symphonic
Forms’, in William Kinderman (ed.), Beethoven’s Compositional Process
(Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press in association with the Ameri-
can Beethoven Society and the Ira F. Brilliant Center for Beethoven Studies,
San Jose University), pp. 27–54.
______, 1998: Classical Form: a Theory of Formal Functions for the Instrumental
Music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
______, 1999: ‘Harmonic Variants of the Expanded Cadential Progression’, in
Mart Humal (ed.), A Composition as a Problem II: Proceedings of the Second
Conference on Music Theory, Tallinn, April 17–18, 1998 (Tallinn: Estonian
Academy of Music), pp. 49–71.
______, 2004: ‘The Classical Cadence: Conceptions and Misconceptions’,
Journal of the American Musicological Society, 57/i, pp. 51–117.

______, 2005: ‘On the Relation of Musical Topoi to Formal Function’,

Eighteenth-Century Music, 2/i, pp. 113–24.
______, 2009a: ‘Beethoven’s Tempest Exposition: a Springboard for Form-
Functional Considerations’, in Pieter Bergé, Jeroen D’hoe and William E.
Caplin (eds), Beethoven’s Tempest Sonata: Perspectives of Analysis and Per-
formance (Leuven: Peeters), pp. 87–125.
______, 2009b: ‘Response to the Comments’, in Bergé, Musical Form, Forms &
Formenlehre, pp. 51–61.
______, 2009c: ‘What Are Formal Functions?’, in Bergé, Musical Form, Forms &
Formenlehre, pp. 21–40.
______, 2011: ‘The “Continuous Exposition” and the Concept of Subordinate
Theme’, paper presented at the Society for Music Theory Annual Meeting,
Minneapolis, MN.
Churgin, Bathia, 1968: ‘Francesco Galeazzi’s Description (1796) of Sonata
Form’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 21/ii, pp. 181–99.
______, 1992: ‘Harmonic and Tonal Instability in the Second Key Area of
Classic Sonata Form’, in Wye J. Allanbrook, Janet M. Levy, and William P.
Mahrt (eds), Convention in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Music: Essays
in Honor of Leonard G. Ratner, pp. 23–57 (Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon).
Czerny, Carl, [ca. 1840] 1848: School of Practical Composition, trans. John
Bishop, 3 vols (London: R. Cocks). Originally published as Vollständige
theoretisch-praktische Kompositionslehre.
Dahlhaus, Carl, [1987] 1991: Ludwig van Beethoven: Approaches to His Music,
trans. Mary Whittall (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Originally pub-
lished as Ludwig van Beethoven und seine Zeit (Laaber: Laaber).
d’Indy, Vincent, 1902: Cours de composition musicale, 3 vols (Paris: Durand).
Hadow, William Henry, 1926: Beethoven’s Op. 18 Quartets (London: Oxford
University Press, H. Milford).
Helm, Theodor, [1921] 1971: Beethoven’s Streichquartette, 3rd edn (Wiesbaden:
Sändig). Originally published: Leipzig: C.F.W. Siegel.
Hepokoski, James, 2009: ‘Comments on William E. Caplin’s Essay “What Are
Formal Functions?” ’, in Bergé, Musical Form, Forms & Formenlehre, pp.
41–5.
Hepokoski, James, and Darcy, Warren, 1997: ‘The Medial Caesura and its Role
in the Eighteenth-Century Sonata Exposition’, Music Theory Spectrum, 19/ii,
pp. 115–54.
______, 2006: Elements of Sonata Theory: Norms, Types, and Deformations in the
Late-Eighteenth-Century Sonata (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Horne, William, 2006: ‘The Hidden Trellis: Where Does the Second Group
Begin in the First Movement of Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony?’, Beethoven
Forum, 13/ii, pp. 95–147.
Hoyt, Peter A., 1996: ‘The Concept of développement in the Early Nineteenth
Century’, in Ian Bent (ed.), Music Theory in the Age of Romanticism
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 141–62.

42 MARK RICHARDS
Kerman, Joseph, 1966: The Beethoven Quartets (New York: Norton).

Koch, Heinrich Christoph, [1787] 1983: Introductory Essay on Composition: the
Mechanical Rules of Melody, Sections 3 and 4, trans. Nancy Kovaleff Baker
(New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press). Originally pub-
lished as Versuch einer Anleitung zur Composition (Leipzig: Adam Friedrich
Böhme).
Kollmann, Augustus Frederic Christopher, [1799] 1973: An Essay on Practical
Musical Composition, According to the Nature of That Science and the Principles
of the Greatest Musical Authors (New York: Da Capo Press). Originally
published: London: Kollmann.
Konold, Wulf, [1980] 1983: The String Quartet, from its Beginnings to Franz
Schubert, trans. Susan Hellauer (New York: Heinrichshofen Edition). Origi-
nally published as Das Streichquartett, von den Anfang bis Franz Schubert
(Wilhelmshaven: Heinrichshofen’s).
Kretschmar, Hermann, 1913: Führer durch den Konzertsaal, 2 vols, 5th ed.
(Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel).
Lam, Basil, 1975: Beethoven’s String Quartets, 2 vols (London: British Broad-
casting Corporation).
Larsen, Jens Peter, [1935–85] 1988: ‘Some Observations on the Development
and Characteristics of Viennese Classical Instrumental Music’, in Handel,
Haydn, and the Viennese Classical Style, trans. Ulrich Kramer (Ann Arbor,
MI: UMI Research Press), pp. 227–49. Originally published in German.
LaRue, Jan, 1992: Guidelines for Style Analysis, 2nd edn (Warren, MI: Harmonie
Park Press).
Lerdahl, Fred, and Jackendoff, Ray, 1983: A Generative Theory of Tonal Music
(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
Longyear, Rey M., and Covington, Kate R., 1988: ‘Sources of the Three-Key
Exposition’, Journal of Musicology, 6/iv, pp. 448–70.
Marliave, Joseph de, [1928] 1961: Beethoven’s Quartets (New York: Dover).
Originally published: London: Oxford University Press and Humphrey
Milford.
Marx, Adolph Bernhard, [1841–75] 1997: Musical Form in the Age of Beethoven:
Selected Writings on Theory and Method, ed. and trans. Scott Burnham
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Mason, Daniel Gregory, 1947: The Quartets of Beethoven (Oxford: Oxford
University Press).
Newman, William S., 1972: The Sonata since Beethoven: the Third and Final
Volume of a History of the Sonata Idea, 2nd edn (New York: Norton).
Nottebohm, Gustav, [1880] 1979: Two Beethoven Sketchbooks: a Description with
Musical Extracts, trans. Jonathan Katz (London: Victor Gollancz). Originally
published as Ein Skizzenbuch von Beethoven and Ein Skizzenbuch von
Beethoven aus dem Jahre 1803.
Plantinga, Leon, 1984: Romantic Music: a History of Musical Style in Nineteenth-
Century Europe (New York: Norton).

Prout, Ebenezer, 1895: Applied Forms: a Sequel to ‘Musical Form’ (London:

Augener).
Ratner, Leonard G., 1949: ‘Harmonic Aspects of Classic Form’, Journal of the
American Musicological Society, 2/iii, pp. 159–68.
______, 1970: ‘Key Definition, a Structural Issue in Beethoven’s Music’, Journal
of the American Musicological Society, 23/iii, pp. 472–83.
______, 1980: Classic Music: Expression, Form, and Style (New York: Schirmer
Books).
______, 1995: The Beethoven String Quartets: Compositional Strategies and Rhetoric
(Stanford, CA: Stanford Bookstore).
Ratz, Erwin, 1973: Einführung in die musikalische Formenlehre, 3rd edn (Vienna:
Universal Edition).
Richards, Mark, 2010: ‘Closure in Classical Themes: the Role of Melody in
Cadences, Closural Function, and the Separated Cadence’, Intersections:
Canadian Journal of Music, 31/i, pp. 25–45.
______, 2011: ‘Viennese Classicism and the Sentential Idea: Broadening the
Sentence Paradigm’, Theory and Practice, 36, pp. 179–224.
______, forthcoming: ‘Beethoven and the Obscured Medial Caesura: a Study in
the Transformation of Style’, Music Theory Spectrum, 35/ii.
Riemann, Hugo, 1902–13: Große Kompositionslehre, 3 vols (Berlin and Stuttgart:
Spemann).
Ritzel, Fred, 1968: Die Entwicklung der ‘Sonatenform’ im musiktheoretischen
Schrifttum des 18. und 19. Jahrhunderts (Wiesbaden: Breitkopf & Härtel).
Rosen, Charles, 1988: Sonata Forms, rev. edn (New York: Norton). 1st edn
published 1980.
______, 1997: The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, expanded edn
(New York: Norton). 1st edn published 1971.
Schachter, Carl, 1990: ‘Either/Or’, in Hedi Siegel (ed.), Schenker Studies (Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 165–79.
Schenker, Heinrich, [1930] 1997: The Masterwork in Music, Vol. 3, ed. William
Drabkin, trans. Ian Bent, Alfred Clayton, and Derrick Puffett (New York:
Cambridge University Press). Originally published as Das Meisterwerk in der
Musik, Vol. 3.
______, [1935] 1979: Free Composition, ed. and trans. Ernst Oster (New York:
Longman). Originally published as Der freie Satz (Vienna: Universal Edition).
Schmalfeldt, Janet, 2011: In the Process of Becoming: Analytic and Philosophical
Perspectives on Form in Early Nineteenth-Century Music (New York: Oxford
University Press).
Schneider, Herbert, ed., 1994: Beethoven: Interpretationen seiner Werke, 2 vols
(Laaber: Laaber).
Schoenberg, Arnold, 1967: Fundamentals of Musical Composition, ed. Gerald
Strang (New York: St. Martin’s Press).
Sipe, Thomas, 1998: Beethoven: Eroica Symphony (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press).

44 MARK RICHARDS
Steinberg, Michael, 1994: ‘The Early Quartets’, in Robert Winter and Robert
Martin (eds), The Beethoven Quartet Companion (Berkeley and Los Angeles:
University of California Press).
Stevens, Jane R., 1983: ‘Georg Joseph Vogler and the “Second Theme” in
Sonata Form: Some 18th-Century Perceptions of Musical Contrast’, Journal
of Musicology, 2/iii, pp. 278–304.
Suurpää, Lauri, 1999: ‘Continuous Exposition and Tonal Structure in Three
Late Haydn Works’, Music Theory Spectrum, 21/ii, pp. 174–99.
Taruskin, Richard, 2005: The Oxford History of Western Music, 6 vols (Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Tovey, Donald Francis, [1927] 1949: ‘Some Aspects of Beethoven’s Art Forms’,
in The Main Stream of Music and Other Essays (Oxford: Oxford University
Press), pp. 271–97. Originally published: Music & Letters, 7, pp. 131–55.
______, 1931: A Companion to Beethoven’s Pianoforte Sonatas (London: Associ-
ated Board of the Royal Schools of Music).
______, 1935–9: Essays in Musical Analysis, 7 vols (London: Oxford University
Press).
______, [1944] 1956: ‘Sonata Forms’, in The Forms of Music (New York: Merid-
ian). Originally published as Musical Articles from the Encyclopaedia Britan-
nica (London: Oxford University Press).
Webster, James, 1978: ‘Schubert’s Sonata Form and Brahms’s First Maturity’,
19th-Century Music, 2/i, pp. 18–35. Second part of article published in 1979
in 19th-Century Music, 3/i, pp. 52–71.
______, 1991: Haydn’s ‘Farewell’ Symphony and the Idea of Classical Style:
Through Composition and Cyclic Integration in His Instrumental Music
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
______, 2001: ‘Sonata Form’, in Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell (eds), The
New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2nd edn, 29 vols (London:
Macmillan).
______, 2009: ‘Comments on William E. Caplin’s Essay “What Are Formal
Functions?” ’, in Bergé, Musical Form, Forms & Formenlehre, pp. 46–50.
Winter, Robert S., 1989: ‘The Bifocal Close and the Evolution of the Viennese
Classical Style’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 42/ii, pp. 275–
337.
NOTE ON CONTRIBUTOR
MARK RICHARDS completed his doctorate in music theory at the University of
Toronto in 2011 and is currently a member of the faculty at the University of
Lethbridge. His research focuses on issues of form and style in music of the
Classical period, especially Beethoven. He has published work in Theory and
Practice, Intersections: Canadian Journal of Music and Journal of Music Theory
Pedagogy and has articles forthcoming in Music Theory Spectrum, Indiana Theory
Review and the Dutch Journal of Music Theory.

ABSTRACT
Although the second theme (ST) group is a crucial landmark in Classical sonata
form, where it is usually articulated with great clarity, in many instances its
beginning cannot be so easily discerned, especially in Beethoven. The problem
is that no matter how powerful a single rule may be, none by itself can identify
all those locations which may be considered an ST beginning. This article
therefore proposes that an ST beginning depends on the presence of several
musical signals, each of which contributes to its expression. These include: (1)
tonic harmony of the new key, (2) beginning and end functions in the manner of
one of Caplin’s theme types, (3) preparation by a phrase-ending chord, (4) the
textural gap of Hepokoski and Darcy’s medial caesura (MC) and, at the ST
beginning itself, (5) a change in texture, (6) a change in dynamic and (7)
characteristic melodic material. A sonata deformation in any of the first three
signals sets off a teleological ST process, which attempts to compensate for the
deficiencies of the signal. By contrast, the deformation of an absent MC gap can
produce an integrated ST or, if combined with an absent preparatory chord, a
spontaneous ST.


Sonata Form and The Problem of Second TH

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Sonata Form and The Problem of Second TH

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sonata Form and The Problem of Second TH

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DOI: 10.1111/musa.

SONATA FORM AND THE PROBLEM OF SECOND-THEME BEGINNINGS

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) 3

Table 1 The Seven Contributing Signals for Second-Theme Beginnings

Signal Type Strong State

1. Tonic harmony of new key Requisite I or I6 as first harmony, or on first

in the ST’s expression, a phenomenon I call an ST process. In the Classical

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

expression, if at a lower level of default.7 On the other hand, because of the

Signal 1: New-Key Tonic Harmony

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

Signal 2: Beginning and End Functions

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

implied by the preceding progression, a sense of cadential function may still be

Signal 3: Preparation by a Phrase-Ending Chord

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

Ex. 1 Haydn, Symphony No. 90 in C major/iv, bars 23–33

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

unconvincing preparatory marker for an ST group. In other words, there is no

Signal 4: Medial Caesura

[D]oes the potentially ‘acceptable’ S (perhaps starting off thematically as a sen-

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

acknowledging directly that there are cases in which an ST is expressed without

Signal 5: Textural Change

Signal 6: Dynamic Change

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

common arrangement, especially later in the eighteenth century, it nevertheless

Signal 7: Characteristic Melodic Material

Even more broadly, characteristic melodic material is a typical signal of a

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

Ex. 3 Mozart, Symphony No. 40 in G minor/i, bars 38–51

of melodic material and its location within a theme, it is rare to find an ST

The Seven Signals in Normative ST Beginnings

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

Ex. 4 Haydn, Symphony No. 99 in E major/i, bars 42–49

end of Transition MC-gap (caesura-fill)

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

Sonata Deformations and the ST Process

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

guities at all levels of structure’; moreover, ‘in situations of competing meanings,

The ST Process versus the Trimodular Block

For these authors, the concept of an ST is always a non-problematic phenom-

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

ST Processes over Multiple Themes

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

eight-bar sentence with no phrase expansion, leaving no room to sound an

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

Other Sonata Deformations in ST Signals and Their Combination

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

© 2013 The Author. Music Analysis, 32/i (2013)

Ex. 7 Beethoven, ‘Pastoral’ Symphony/v, bars 38–58

Music Analysis, 32/i (2013) © 2013 The Author.

with the two requisite signals, an ST beginning remains perceptible, though