Viennese Classicism and The Sentential I PDF

Viennese Classicism and the Sentential Idea:
Broadening the Sentence Paradigm

M ARK RI CHARDS
Despite the ubiquity of sentence form in the classical repertoire, its great importance remains
underappreciated in music scholarship. In this article, I widen the form’s definition by re-examining William
E. Caplin’s three components of presentation, continuation, and cadential, and by offering a more flexible
definition that minimally consists of a single basic idea and a continuation. This broad outline, which I call
the sentential idea, is intended to emphasize the similarity of all such structures and to demonstrate that a
sentence need not occur as a Schoenbergian theme, but may assume virtually any formal function within
a movement.
Only recently has the form of the sentence been recognized in English-language
scholarship as an important structure in the music of the classical period. This recognition
is largely due to the work of William E. Caplin, whose seminal book and several articles
on classical form revive the Formenlehre tradition upheld by Arnold Schoenberg and his
pupil Erwin Ratz.1 Many of the defining features of the sentence, as Caplin describes
it, were first established by these latter theorists.2 Schoenberg, whom Caplin credits as
the “virtual discoverer” of the sentence (1998, 9), defines the form as, in the simplest
case, “eight measures, of which the first four comprise a phrase and its repetition. The
technique to be applied in the continuation is a kind of development, comparable in
some respects to the condensing technique of ‘liquidation’….The liquidation is generally
accompanied by a shortening of the phrase….A sentence may close on I, V or III, with a
suitable cadence.” Schoenberg even provides a table of harmonic progressions that may
be found within the first four bars of the eight-measure form (most of which are various
combinations of I and V) and notes that “sequence-like procedures are very useful in
the continuation of a sentence” (1967, 58–59). Ratz’s description of the form, while
less specific in terms of harmonic construction, clearly echoes that of Schoenberg: “The
eight-bar sentence, (2 × 2) + 4, consists of a two-bar unit, its repetition, and a four-bar
development, the essence of which is that a part of the motives that were exposed in the
two-bar unit occur, and so a compression and acceleration of the musical presentation
1
But see also Bartha 1971; Fillion 1981; and Rothstein 1989, 26–27.
2
There are several possible precursors of the sentence concept. These include a type of compound phrase
mentioned by Koch (1983, 56–57); “bar form,” described by Richard Wagner in Die Meistersinger von
Nürnberg and discussed most famously by Alfred Lorenz (1924–33); and Wilhelm Fischer’s (1915, 29) notion
of the Fortspinnungstypus. Commentary on one or more of these structures is provided by Dahlhaus (1978,
24–25), Rothstein (1989, 26–27), Caplin (1986, 256; 1998, 263n1), and BaileyShea (2004, 17).
180 THEORY and PRACTICE Volume 36 (2011)
is achieved.” Ratz also notes, however, that “as a rule, an acceleration in the harmonic
rhythm also occurs in the development” (1973, 21–22).3
Caplin retains these ideas, but defines the sentence with greater specificity, especially
with regard to harmony (1998, 35–43). He views the normative sentence as an eight-
measure structure that contains three “formal functions” in successive order. The first
of these, the presentation, consists of a two-measure basic idea and its repetition, and
prolongs tonic harmony. The second, the continuation, contains at least one of four
processes: phrase-structural fragmentation (in which the size of the structural units
becomes shorter), acceleration of harmonic rhythm, an increase in surface rhythmic
activity, and sequential harmonies. Finally, the cadential function is supported by
a cadential harmonic progression (which, in its fullest form, Caplin defines as tonic–
predominant–dominant–tonic) to close off the theme. The major advantage of Caplin’s
approach is that it ensures a high degree of consistency, since all three functions must be
clearly identified before one may apply the label “sentence.”
At the same time, this highly specific definition has the disadvantage of a narrow
range of applicability. For, if Caplin’s definition is understood to encompass the entire
range of structures that may be called sentences, then other structures that contain
similar characteristics, but lack at least one of Caplin’s criteria, cannot be placed into his
sentence category. This poses a significant problem as the classical repertoire is rife with
such structures. Caplin recognizes the similarity of such passages to the sentence, but
in order to preserve the integrity of his definition, considers them to be only “sentence-
like” or “sentential” rather than genuine sentences (1998, 51).4 It must be remembered,
however, that the purpose of Schoenberg’s original definition was largely didactic
rather than analytical.5 In other words, his Fundamentals of Musical Composition is
a composition manual, not a theoretical text, and his definition of the sentence quoted
above is a “practice form” from which students were intended to learn how to write
simple eight-measure sentences rather than analyze a wide array of sentence structures
from the musical repertoire. Thus, in Structural Functions of Harmony, Schoenberg is
even more rigid in his definition of the form, particularly in the events that occur after the
repetition of the initial idea: “The school-form for the sentence (eight measures) begins
3
“Der achttaktige Satz (2 × 2) + 4, besteht aus einem Zweitakter, seiner Wiederholung und einer viertaktigen
Entwicklung, deren Wesen darin besteht, daß ein Teil der im Zweitakter exponierten Motive fallen gelassen
und so eine Verdichtung und Beschleunigung der musikalischen Darstellen erzielt wird. In der Regel findet im
Entwicklungsteil auch eine Beschleunigung der harmonischen Disposition statt.”
In connection with this point, see Caplin's discussion of the slow movement of Beethoven’s Piano Concerto
4
No. 1 in C Major, op. 15 (1998, 13–14).
BaileyShea recognizes this same point (2004, 28).

5
Mark Richards — Broadening the Sentence Paradigm 181
œ ™ œ œnœ œ.
Basic idea Basic idea
. . œ™ œ œ œ œ.
b œ. œ . nœ. œ
& b bb C œ
œ. . Œ œ. œ Œ
œ 3 3
p
œ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœ œœœ œœœ
? bbC Œ
bb ∑ Œ œœ nœ Œ Ó Œ n œœ œ œ
Continuation (Cadence)
™
fragmentation harmonic acceleration
œ™ œ œ œ œ. ˙˙ œœœœ
b b œfij œ œ œnœ œ. Œ œfi
˙˙ œ nœ U
5
nœ œ œ
b
& b
j
Œ Œ
∏∏∏∏∏
sf
n œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ p
œ
? b b Œ œœœ œœœ œœœ œ U
sf ff
œ
bb Œ œ œ œ Œ œ Œ Œ Œ
ifl iiøfl V
EXAMPLE 1
Sentence from Beethoven, Piano Sonata in F Minor, op. 2 no. 1 (mvt. I), mm. 1–8
with a two-measure unit, followed by a repetition (mm. 3–4) which can be a sequence
or else a more or less contrasting repetition. The sixth measure will be a sequence of
the fifth, and mm. 7 and 8 will be cadences to various degrees” (1954, 114). Although
Schoenberg acknowledges that “as a practice form is only an abstraction from art forms,
sentences from masterworks often differ considerably from the scheme” (1967, 60),6 it
is his eight-measure model that has been carried forth through Ratz and Caplin as the
uncontested standard of sentence form.
Another factor that has restricted the breadth of the sentence paradigm is what
may be called a “Beethoven bias,” or more specifically, an “op. 2 no. 1 bias.” As Matthew
BaileyShea has recently shown, the opening eight-measure theme of Beethoven’s Piano
Sonata in F Minor, op. 2 no. 1 has dominated as the archetypal example of the sentence
and contributed to an unfairly parochial view of the form (see Example 1).7 Schoenberg
6
Schoenberg also cites several examples from Schubert and Brahms that differ from the “practice form” (1967,
75–81).
7
BaileyShea (2004, 29n2) lists nine scholarly writings and two textbooks that utilize the op. 2 no. 1 theme as
an example of the sentence. My own compilation amounts to eighteen total appearances in scholarly sources
outside of textbooks (this includes the writings of Schoenberg, which are discussed and cited below): Cone 1968,
75; Dahlhaus 1978, 21; Frisch 1984, 12; Hasty 1997, 113–15; Kinderman 2009, 35–36; Ratz 1973, 23; Schmal-
feldt 1991, 239, who refers to Cone’s discussion of the example; Rosen 1988, 239, who describes the sentence
structure of the theme but does not refer to it as such; Stein 1962, 93; and Webern 1975, 30–31; 2002, 240–42.
cites it as his first example of the sentence in two separate chapters of his Fundamentals
(1967, 23, 63), as one of three examples from Beethoven’s piano sonatas in Structural
Functions of Harmony (1954, 115), and as his only example in his manuscripts for
The Musical Idea (1995, 179). Moreover, that the theme appears as a model sentence
in the writings of his pupils—Ratz, Stein, and Webern—suggests that Schoenberg
taught the sentence using this theme as a template to which all other instantiations
were compared. (Notice how precisely the theme conforms to Schoenberg’s definition
of the “practice form” and especially the “school-form.”) Caplin, who likewise cites the
Beethoven excerpt as the archetypal sentence, is more flexible in his approach to the
form, especially in the continuation, which he rightly states is not always motivically
related to the presentation, as it is in op. 2 no. 1 (1998, 11, 41). Thus the continuation is
not necessarily a “development” of the opening material, as Schoenberg and his followers
have generally contended. Nevertheless, all of these definitions have actively excluded
other similar structures, in large part because of the reliance on op. 2 no. 1 not just as
a model but the model.
Because the structures that Caplin’s definition identifies as sentences are, for the
most part, consistent and uncontroversial, the crux of the matter is less the definition
itself than its analytical scope. In other words, this definition describes one type of
structure (albeit an exceedingly common one) among many that, I propose, may all be
classified under a broader sentence paradigm, shown in Example 2 (parentheses indicate
optional components). This broad outline constitutes what I call the sentential idea, or
simply the sentence in its most basic form. As I argue in this essay, the defining feature of
a sentence is a continuation that accelerates motivic, harmonic, or rhythmic material in
relation to the basic idea. From this point of view, all that is required to begin a sentence
is a single basic idea to provide the frame of reference for the ensuing acceleration in the
continuation. Needless to say, two basic ideas are far and away the norm for sentences,
as is the proportional relationship of short/short/long that BaileyShea (2004, 8) observes
for the units of basic idea/basic idea/continuation.8 But, as will be seen, accelerating
phrase structures with one and three basic ideas certainly occur and may be considered
instantiations of the sentential idea. In all its diverse forms, the sentence was of such
immense importance to Viennese classical music—as epitomized by Haydn, Mozart, and
Moreover, Caplin has referred to the same excerpt numerous times as a paradigmatic sentence (1986, 241–42;
1987, 218–19; 1994, 153; 1998, 9–10; 1999, 49–50).
8
Although I view the sentence in broader terms, I would agree with two important concepts that BaileyShea
points out with respect to his short/short/long idea: (1) that the continuation is almost always longer than the
basic idea (his Ex. 11 shows one instance where the two are actually the same two-measure length); and (2) that
these proportions are “archetypal” for sentences in general (2004, 8, 21).
Basic Idea(s) + Continuation (+ Cadence or Close)
Beginning Acceleration (Ending)
EXAMPLE 2
The sentential idea
Beethoven—that it is difficult, if not impossible, to locate a movement in the repertoire

that does not employ it in some way.
I will first explore each component of the sentence in detail, beginning with the
presentation and the the possible lengths and harmonic layouts of its basic ideas. Second,
I will discuss alternative sentence types that contain one or three basic ideas rather than
the standard complement of two. The third section will explore the continuation and the
importance of defining it strictly as an acceleration. Fourth, I will examine the end of the
sentence and distinguish among sentences that achieve cadential closure, cadence-like
closure, or neither of the two. And in the final section, I will consider the other formal
functions that a sentence may assume besides that of a theme in order to demonstrate
that 1) some theme types are based on smaller-scale sentences acting as constituent formal
functions and 2) the sentence was by far the most pervasive type of phrase structure in
the classical repertoire.
I. Basic Ideas and the Presentation

Sentences Versus Sentence Themes
Caplin defines the basic idea as a unit consisting of several motives and lasting
two “real” measures as opposed to two notated measures.9 While a two-measure length
for a basic idea is unquestionably the norm in classical music, it is by no means always
the case and thus cannot be a defining feature of the basic idea. More fundamental is
Caplin’s description of the basic idea’s size as “small enough to group with other ideas
into phrases and themes but large enough to be broken down (fragmented) in order to
develop its constituent motives” (1998, 37). With this line of reasoning, Caplin argues
that the sentential construction of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in A Major, K. 331, mm. 1–4
9
Caplin defines a real measure as “a unit of musical time corresponding to a listener’s perception of a ‘full mea-
sure’ of music” (1998, 256). Thus, in slow movements, a real measure may consist of only half a notated mea-
sure; conversely, in rapid movements, a real measure may comprise two notationed measures. To describe these
relationships, Caplin uses the formulas R = 2N and R = ½N, respectively, where “R” represents real measures
and “N” notated ones (35).
Antecedent (Sentence) Continuation (Cadence)
##6 œ œ œJ œ ™ œ œ œ œ œ œj œ œ œ œœ œ œ œj
Basic idea Basic idea fragmentation
& # 8 œ™ œ J J J
œ œ
œœ œ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œœ œœj œ œj œ œj œœ
j j j
? ### 6 ™
p sf p
8 J œ™ œ J œ œJ œ œJ œ œ™
J
iifl V@ !
Consequent (Sentence) Continuation (Cadence)
### œ™ œ œ œ œ œ™ œ j j
Basic idea Basic idea harmonic acceleration
œ œ œ œ œœ œœ
5
& J J œ œ œ œ œœ œ ‰
J œ œœ
œ œ œj œœ œœj œ œj œœ œœj œ œj œ
? ### œ ™ œ
sf p
J œ™ œ œ J œ œ œ
J œ œ j ‰
J œ œ
iifl V@° ‡! I
EXAMPLE 3
Sentences not functioning as themes in Mozart,
Piano Sonata in A Major, K. 331 (mvt. I), mm. 1–8
(see Example 3) “does not contain enough content to make up a full eight-measure
theme,” and therefore is not a “genuine sentence” (1998, 51). From my own study of the
classical repertoire, sentences that function as the entire theme area of a form seem to
have a lower limit of six real measures.10 In this case, the phrase in mm. 1–4 is only the
antecedent of a larger period (and an even larger rounded binary) theme and hence would
not be considered a theme in its own right. Viewed from the standpoint of the broader
sentence paradigm that I propose here, however, Mozart’s antecedent and consequent
phrases each constitute a sentence but not a sentence theme, which, in the Schoenbergian
tradition, centers around a single tonic, ends with a cadence, and, I would add, is at
least six real measures in length.11 It must be stressed, however, that a sentence theme
10
Sentences acting as themes that appear to be shorter than this generally occur in movements where the number
of real measures follows the formula R = ½N due to a moderate or slow tempo. See, for example, the opening
sentence of Haydn’s Piano Sonata in C-Sharp Minor, Hob. XVI:36, mm. 2–6, which occupies five notated mea-
sures but is set in a Moderato tempo and hence constitutes ten real measures.
11
Schoenberg presents the most concise definition of a theme, of which he considers the two “simple” types to
be the sentence and period: “There are many different types [of sentence and period] which are similar in two
respects: they centre around a tonic, and they have a definite ending. In the simplest cases these structures consist
of an even number of measures, usually eight or a multiple of eight” (1967, 20–21). By an “ending,” he later
specifies that he means a cadence: “The end of a sentence calls for the same treatment as the consequent of the
(Caplin’s sentence) is only one category of sentence within the larger paradigm. With
this distinction, it becomes clear that the identification of a sentence does not depend on
the number of measures in the basic idea. Indeed, although most basic ideas encompass
a two-measure span, the length of a basic idea in the context of the larger sentence
paradigm is not confined to a particular length.12 This broader concept of a basic idea
is not intended to blur analytical distinctions but rather to recognize similarities among
seemingly diverse structures of any size, thus highlighting the importance of sentence
structure in music of the classical era.
The Bifold Sentence and Tonic Prolongation in the Presentation
Up to now, all definitions of the sentence have required the basic idea to be
immediately repeated. While this is certainly the most frequent arrangement in a
sentence, it is by no means obligatory. Technically, I would consider a sentence with a
dual statement of the basic idea to be a bifold sentence, but because the entire literature
on sentences is concerned only with this particular type, I will use the “bifold” term only
when necessary to distinguish these sentences from other types. Otherwise, I prefer the
neutral term “sentence.”
One of Caplin’s stipulations for a sentence presentation is that it must be supported
harmonically by a tonic prolongation.13 This idea, however, has recently been disputed.
BaileyShea’s desire to apply sentence structure to the harmonically more complex music
of the late-nineteenth and twentieth centuries leads him to abandon tonic prolongation
as a requirement for a presentation. Even in reference to classical music, BaileyShea
is guarded, admitting only that the concept “works to a certain extent” (2004, 8–9).
Similarly, James Hepokoski and Warren Darcy assert that “while many, perhaps even
most, sentence presentations are tonic-prolongational, not all of them are: we do not
regard tonic prolongation itself as a necessary feature of a presentation” (2006, 84n14).
One common type of presentation that does not feature a tonic prolongation contains two
basic ideas supported by tonic and supertonic harmony, respectively. This arrangement
occurs in the opening theme of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in G Major, op. 14 no. 2
(see Example 4). While Caplin recognizes that a full tonic prolongation is not completed
period. A sentence may close on I, V or III, with a suitable cadence” (59).
12
See, for instance, the varying lengths of basic ideas in the sentences listed in Appendix A.
See Caplin (1998, 39–40 and 262n8), in which he states that “this book adopts a considerably more restricted
13
notion of prolongation than that found in traditional Schenkerian analysis.” From Caplin’s discussion and ex-
amples on pp. 24–26, it becomes clear that, for him, a prolongational progression involves the harmonies of the
same function at both the beginning and end of the progression.
Presentation
œ œ.
& 4 œ #œ œ œ ™ œ #œ œ œ œ ™ œ œ œ#œ œ™ œ œ œ#œ œ™ œ

#2 ≈ œ œ œ œ œ
œ œ
?# 2 Œ
( p ) ligato
‰ œ ‰ œ œR œœ ‰ œ ‰ œ œR œœ
4 œJ œR œœ J œJ œR œœ J
I ii%
# œ™
harmonic acceleration + fragmentation
nœ œ œ œ œfi
œœ œ œ œœ
‰ œJ
5
& œ œœ
j
œ œ œ œ
œ œ
œ œ œ œ œ
?# ≈ œ œ ≈ œ œ ≈œ
œ
≈œœ ≈œœ ≈ œœ œœœœœœœœ
œ
Vfl V‡ I ii# V@° ‡! I
(end of tonic prolongation)
EXAMPLE 4
Tonic prolongation ending after the start of a continuation; Beethoven, Piano Sonata
in G Major, op. 14 no. 2 (mvt. I), mm. 1–8
until well into the continuation, he considers it only an exceptional case rather than a
regularity (1998, 40).14
Another common technique that avoids prolonging tonic harmony occurs
in descending fifths sequences in some form of the progression V/ii–ii–V–I, as in the
opening of the second theme group of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in C Major, K. 279, given in
Example 5. Finally, there are a significant number of presentations that prolong dominant
rather than tonic harmony, especially in Beethoven. Example 6 shows the second theme
from the finale of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in A-flat Major, op. 26, in which a two-
measure basic idea sounds only dominant harmony.15 This idea is repeated to form a
bifold presentation, then the entire presentation is itself repeated with the parts of each
hand exchanged. A brief continuation by fragmentation follows and leads to a cadential
function that is twice stymied by a deceptive cadence before closing the theme with a
14
The opening of Beethoven’s String Quartet in F Major, op. 18 no. 1 (see Example 11), is another instance of a
tonic prolongation that is completed within the continuation rather than the presentation.
15
Caplin (1998, 101) considers this presentation a standing on the dominant, ostensibly due to its prolongation
of dominant rather than tonic harmony, but he later softens this view (2009, 102), now referring to the same
stretch of music as an “initiating unit.”
Presentation
Basic Idea
˙ œ œ #œ œ
œ œ œ œ œ œ
16
r r #œ
& #œ œ œœ
œ œ
? ( Ó) #œ œœ
f
≈ #œ œ œ œ ‰ J
œ
G: V‡/ii
Basic Idea
˙ œœœœ
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœœ œœ œœœœ
18
r r #œ
œœ
œ
? œ Œ Ó ≈ œ#œ œ œ ‰ œœ
œ œ #œ
œ J &
ii V‡
Continuation
fragmentation
œ œ œ™ #œ œ œ œ œ œ ‰ œ œ œ œ œ™ #œ œ œ œ œ
20 j j
& œ J
p
& œ#œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ#œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
I
EXAMPLE 5
Descending fifths sequence in a presentation;
Mozart, Piano Sonata in C Major, K. 279 (mvt. I), mm. 16–21
perfect authentic cadence at m. 48. Thus, like the two-measure length of the basic idea,
I would consider a presentation with a tonic prolongation to be the norm for sentences
in the classical repertoire but, because it is not always the case, not a defining feature of
a sentence.
With this more flexible approach, a potential problem arises. For if a basic idea
cannot be identified either by its length or by a tonic prolongation, how is one able to
distinguish where a basic idea ends in cases where it lacks a repetition, which is the clearest
indication of its extent? In the absence of such a repetition, the end of the basic idea will be
signaled by a significant change in one or more parameters, including dynamics, rhythm,
articulation, number of voices, texture, instrumentation, accompaniment pattern, melodic
Presentation
Presentation (repeated)
n œ. œ. n œ. . n œ. œ. n œ. .
Basic idea Basic idea Basic idea
œ. œ .
œ œ œ
bbb ‰ œ ‰ nœ ‰ œJ nœ œ ‰ œ ‰ nœ ‰ œJ nœ œ œ œ n œ
32
& b J J
J J
nœ nœ œ nœ œ nœ œ nœ .
? b b œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ ‰ œ
p
bb œJ
Continuation
Basic idea fragmentation
b œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ
& b bb
37
n œ. œ. n œ. . cresc. j œ. n œ. .
? bb b ‰ nœ ‰ œ nœ œ ‰ œj ‰ nœ ‰ œ nœ œ ‰ œ nœ œœ ‰ œj
œ j
b J J n œ. œ. n œ J
œ. . œ. œ.
Cadence
.
42
bbbb œJ œnœ œ œ œ œ œ œnœ
œœœœ
& œ œ œnœ œ œ œnœ œ
œœœœ .j
j œœœœ
sf sf
b œ œ™
œœ ™
6
? bb b œ œ œ
œ œ œ
. œ™ œ œ œJ œ ™ œ œ
(sf) . sf
œ œ œœ
b œ nœ œ œ œ
& b bb
46
œ œ œ nœ ‰ œ œ œ œ
œ
? bb b œœj
. œ œ œ œ œ.j œ™
ff
p
b ™ œ œ j
œJ œœ ™ œ œ ˙œ
. sf
EXAMPLE 6
Dominant prolongation in a presentation;
Beethoven, Piano Sonata in A-flat Major, op. 26 (mvt. IV), mm. 32–48
contour, and register.16 Determining the extent of the basic idea in a sentence with only
one basic idea (discussed below) is especially important in cases where the continuation
is based on fragmentation: because the units in the fragmentation process are always
shorter than the basic idea, the basic idea provides a frame of reference against which
fragmentation is measured.
II. Other Sentence Types
Since a basic idea may or may not be repeated, a sentence may be classified by the
number of basic ideas it contains. By far the most common number encountered is two,
forming the familiar bifold sentence, but in the classical repertoire, sentences with one or
three basic ideas are fairly common. I call these alternative types monofold and trifold
sentences, respectively.17 Regardless of their total number, all complete statements of
the basic idea collectively form the presentation, which may also be described using the
monofold, bifold, and trifold terms.
Because presentations of one or three basic ideas are unable to create the satisfying
balance found in those of two basic ideas, monofold and trifold sentences are inherently
looser structures than their bifold cousins. Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven tended
to enhance this form-functional looseness within these sentence types by writing a
continuation of a different length than the presentation: in monofold sentences, the
continuation is generally longer than the presentation, but in trifold ones, shorter—a
discrepancy that is surely grounded in the harmonic makeup of each. Consider,
for instance, that in most cases the lone basic idea of monofold sentence themes is
harmonized by a single tonic chord, either stated explicitly or implied in a unison texture
(see Example 8 below). A longer continuation therefore allows for harmonic variety
within the structure before coming to a close. By contrast, in most trifold sentences the
presentation is supported by the harmonic progression I–V–V/IV (see Example 10 below),
which pushes the music forward into the continuation rather than establishing a closed
harmonic unit with a tonic prolongation. Hence the third basic idea of trifold sentences
is almost never supported by tonic harmony. In the classical repertoire, then, monofold
The notion that change determines the boundaries of a group derives from Lerdahl and Jackendoff’s Grouping
16
Preference Rule 3, which states that a group boundary is heard at relatively large changes in register, dynamics,
articulation, and length (1983, 46). Moreover, they allow for other parameters in their admission that “one might
add further cases to deal with such things as change in timbre or instrumentation” (46).
17
These terms are inspired by William Horne’s use of the term “trifold presentation” to describe sentence presen-
tations that include three statements of the basic idea rather than the normative two (2006, 135). Due to their
extreme rarity, sentences with four basic ideas (quadrifold sentences) or more are not considered here.
and trifold sentence themes differ not only from each other in terms of compositional
treatment but also from the more common bifold form. And since these differing qualities
appear to be strongly tied to the inherent imbalance of those structures, monofold and
trifold sentences are best understood as structures in their own right rather than distorted
forms of the bifold type.18
The Monofold Sentence
The notion that a sentence begins with a repetition of its initial idea originated with
Schoenberg, but to insist on this repetition as a requisite of the form obscures the close
connection that monofold sentences have with the more normative bifold type. 19 After all,
the classical repertoire abounds in structures that proceed to a continuation after a single
basic idea.20 But because individual cases can vary in the proportions of the component
parts, monofold sentences can differ widely in look and sound.21 Nevertheless, it remains
an important structure in Viennese classical music. Example 7 shows an instance from
the opening of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in E-flat Major, K. 282. The theme begins with
a basic idea of one and a half measures,22 after which there is a continuation defined
by fragmentation, the two half-measure units being shorter than the one-and-a-half-
measure basic idea. This is followed by a cadential function to close off the theme with
an imperfect authentic cadence. Hence, this sentence involves a degree of looseness due
to the slightly longer length of the latter half of the sentence (continuation and cadence).
18
This latter view of the trifold sentence is adopted by both Caplin (1998, 99), who regards such structures as
possessing “an additional repetition of the basic idea,” and BaileyShea (2002–2003, 12–13), who hears Sieg-
mund and Sieglinde’s “gaze” music in the opening act of Die Walküre as containing an “extra” statement of the
basic idea. Although I don’t hear such phrases as extensions of the bifold model, I would agree with BaileyShea
as to the sorts of expressive effects that such trifold sentences can have—in this case, the rising sequence in thirds
of the three basic ideas culminating in the continuation, which “finally begins at the point of melodic climax,
initiating an extended dissolution toward cadence” (12).
19
It is possible that Schoenberg’s repetition was influenced by Lorenz, who, taking his cue from Wagner, likewise
insists on an immediate repetition in the bar form to give the schema AAB, or “Stollen-Stollen-Abgesang” in
accordance with the form of many German Minnesinger songs (1924–33, 3:185; see especially section 1:103,
where bar form is distinguished from arch form [Bogenform, or ABA] by a repetition that occurs immediately
rather than after a contrasting unit [Gegensatz] or a “spinning out” [Fortspinnung]).
See Appendix A for a list of several monofold sentences in the classical repertoire.
20
21
No doubt, this inconsistency in structure has contributed to the lack of recognition of the monofold sentence
in the scholarly literature.
22
That the entire passage forms a sentence theme, and not merely a sentence, is clear from the tempo of the
movement: in this Adagio tempo, a real measure of music is equal to half of a notated measure (R = ½N), thus
the passage encompasses a thematic length of eight real measures.
Continuation Cadence
Basic Idea fragmentation
b c œ ™ œ œ œ œ œ œ. œr œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ™ Ÿœj j ‰
Adagio
b
& b œ
œ
susp.
œœœ
p
b
& b b c œœ œœ œœ œ nœ œ œ̇ nœ b œœ œœ b œ
?
œ œ œ̇ œ œ
ii‡ V‡ I
EXAMPLE 7
Monofold sentence; Mozart, Piano Sonata in E-flat Major, K. 282 (mvt. I), mm. 1–4
Continuation
Basic idea fragmentation + rhythmic acceleration
3
14
& 4 ˙™ ˙ œ Œ Œ Œ
œ œ œ œ™ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
ff ™ œ œ™ œ
˙ ˙
?3
4 œ œ Œ œ œ Œ œ™ œ œ Œ œ™ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
Cadence (Expanded Cadential Progression)
20
œ œ œ œœœœ œ œ œ œ
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ˙™ œ Œ Œ œœ œœ œœ œ
œ œ œ
œœœœœœ œœœœœœ œ œ œ œ œœ
? œ œ œ œœœœœœ Œ Œ
œ œ œ œœœœœœ œ œ œ œ
I fl IV V I
EXAMPLE 8
Monofold sentence; Haydn, Symphony No. 97 in C Major (mvt. I), mm. 14–25
The concept of the monofold sentence explains structures that would otherwise
be regarded as unusual. Caplin, for example, considers the opening theme of Haydn’s
Symphony No. 97 in C Major (see Example 8) to be “nonconventional” because it is
“almost impossible to demarcate a conventional basic idea and contrasting idea” and
thus does not conform to any of his theme types. Although he notes that “the theme
has a general sentential quality about it” in its rhythmic acceleration, he maintains that
“it is difficult to distinguish clearly between presentation and continuation function”

and ultimately concludes that “the theme is thus best regarded as nonconventional in
organization” (1998, 199). A closer inspection, however, reveals that a three-measure
basic idea is separated from the remainder of the theme by a quarter rest in all parts.
Subsequently, a fragmentation process and more active rhythm beginning in the fourth
measure signal the beginning of the continuation: three one-measure groups (the last
of which is elided into the next group) are followed by single-beat groups (as indicated
by the repetition of the two-note rising-fourth motive). This continuation leads to a
cadential function (more specifically, an expanded cadential progression),23 but whereas
Caplin locates it with the move to the I6 chord in m. 22, I place it a measure earlier, as
this is where the fragmentation process ends and a “new” motive enters, suggesting a
change in formal function—a cadential progression may, after all, begin with a root-
position I chord instead of a I6. Thus, rather than being “nonconventional,” this theme
is another expression of the monofold sentence, one that is considerably looser than the
Mozart example due to the greater proportional disparity between the two “halves” of
presentation (basic idea), and continuation and cadence.
The Trifold Sentence and Dissolving Statements of the Basic Idea
When a sentence begins with three statements of the basic idea, the result is a trifold
sentence. 24 In sentence themes, Caplin views such structures only in the context of second
theme groups of a sonata form, where “loosening” devices are more frequently found
than in first theme groups. In this case, the loosening device is an “additional repetition
of the basic idea,” which “makes the grouping structure somewhat asymmetrical (2 × 3)
and promotes a degree of functional redundancy” (1998, 99). But these trifold sentences
are not exclusively the product of loose second themes; rather, they are independent
structures that may be found in any area of a form. This concept becomes especially
clear when the sentence contains around eight measures and is thus suited to the more
tight-knit structures seen in first themes. Example 9, for instance, shows a trifold sentence
as the first theme of Haydn’s String Quartet in C Major, op. 50 no. 2, in which a two-
measure basic idea is stated three times. This triple statement does not move into a
continuation until m. 7, where a harmonic acceleration clearly expresses that function. In
this case, Haydn’s theme fits into a nine-measure span that is typical of tight-knit themes.
At the same time, the asymmetrical lengths of the presentation and continuation/cadence,
“Expanded cadential progression” is Caplin’s term for a cadential harmonic progression that spans four or
23
more measures (1998, 254).
See Appendix A for a list of several trifold sentences in the classical repertoire.
24
Presentation
˙ ™ bœ œ
Basic Idea Basic Idea Basic Idea
& 43 Œ˙™ œœ œœ œœœ œŒ Œœ #œ œ̇œ œœ œœ #œ œ

œ Œ Œ Œ œ œ
Œ . . . .
. .
p sotto voce fz
?3 œ Œ Œ ∑ œ Œ Œ ∑ ˙™
4
fz
Continuation / Cadence
harmonic acceleration
fz
˙ œœ œœ ˙
& b˙ ™™ œ ˙˙™™
6
œ̇ œ œœ œj œ œ
˙˙ œœ œœ
˙™
? ˙™ œ
˙™
EXAMPLE 9
Trifold sentence; Haydn, String Quartet in C Major, op. 50 no. 2 (mvt. I), mm. 1–9
along with the harmony’s move away from the tonic key in m. 5, contribute a degree of
looseness to the structure that would not be present had the theme proceeded in the more
balanced form of a bifold sentence.
Example 10 shows a similar trifold sentence from the first theme of the finale of
Beethoven’s “Moonlight” Sonata, op. 27 no. 2. As with the Haydn example, there are
three statements of the basic idea and a continuation that begins in m. 7, where there is
fragmentation and harmonic acceleration. And once again, the whole theme spans a more
tight-knit length of nine measures. Thus, rather than viewing these themes as expanded
bifold sentences, I would argue that these trifold sentences are better understood as a
related but distinct type of theme. In both of these examples, the presentation is diverted
away from the tonic towards the subdominant in the third basic idea (mentioned earlier
as the most common tactic in trifold sentences). This strategy works well in leading
to an abbreviated continuation/cadence in the final three measures, since the cadential
progression of the function may begin directly with the subdominant rather than an
initial tonic chord, which is more common in the bifold sentence. As a result, these
sentences assume a degree of looseness in their harmony and inner proportions but retain
an overall length typical of tight-knit themes.
Presentation
. œœ.
Basic idea
# ## œ œ œ œœœ
&# c œ
œ
œœœœœ œœœœ œœ
œ œ œ œœ
p
? #### c ≈ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
sf
œœ œ œ œ œ. œ œ œ œ
œ œ œ œ œ. œ. . œ. . œ. .
. . . . . . . .
. œœ.
Basic idea
3
# ## œ œ œ œœœ
&# #œ
œ œ # œ œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ
œ œ œ œœ
? #### ≈ #œ œ œ œ œ œ#œ œ œ œ
sf
œœ œ œ œ œ. œ. œ #œ œ
#œ œ œ œ # œ. œ. œ. . œ. .
. . . . . . . .
. œœ.
œ œ œ œœœœ
Basic idea
## #œ œ œœ
&##
5
œ œ œœ œ
#œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ
œ
#
? ## # ≈ œ#œ œ œ œ œ sf
œ
œ œ œ œ. œ œ œ œ œ.
nœ œ œ. . œ. œ. . œ. . œ. . œ.
. . . .
. œœ. œ. œœ. # œœ
œ œœ
fragmentation, harmonic acceleration
## . œ .œ œ œ‹œ œœ
&##
7
œ. œ œœœœ œ œ
œ‹œ
œ #œ
J
? #### ≈ œ œ œ
sf
≈ œ‹œ œ. œ
œ. œj
cresc. sf f
œ œ œ. œ. œœ œ œ.
œ œ œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ
. . . . . . . .
ivfl Gerfl V
EXAMPLE 10
Trifold sentence; Beethoven, Piano Sonata in C-sharp Minor, op. 27 no. 2,
“Moonlight” (mvt. III), mm. 1–9
Some structures in the classical repertoire may potentially be confused with trifold
sentences because they at first appear to possess three basic ideas. In one such type,
what begins as a third statement of the basic idea is very nearly completed but at some
point diverges, a type of structure that BaileyShea has aptly named a “sentence with a
dissolving third statement” (2004, 11–12). While this third statement may contain much
of the basic idea, or be nearly identical to it in its motivic content, a close inspection
reveals that it eventually breaks away from the original idea to become only a fragment
and therefore expresses continuation function.25 A change in texture is a common way of
signaling that this type of continuation is underway before the motivic content begins to
dissolve, as occurs in m. 5 of Example 11 with the IV6 chord in rich four-part harmony
after a presentation in unison texture. The harmonic acceleration in mm. 5–7 of this
example also demonstrates that the “breaking away” may be supported by further
accelerative processes that strengthen the sense of continuation function. This type of
sentence would therefore be a bifold, not a trifold, sentence. Moreover, the “dissolving
statement” technique is not confined to the bifold sentence; it may occur after any number
of basic ideas.26 If one wishes to capture the sense of transformation from basic idea to
continuation that occurs in these types of sentences, one could use the “becoming” arrow
devised by Janet Schmalfeldt for such a “process of becoming” in the form “Bi ⇒ Cont”
(2011, 9). To label the start of the dissolving idea simply as “continuation,” however,
would aptly describe the situation. The term one employs depends merely on one’s
purposes and preferences in analysis.
Another candidate for confusion with the trifold sentence is Caplin’s hybrid 4
theme of “compound basic idea + consequent” (1998, 61). The opening of Beethoven’s
first “quasi una fantasia” piano sonata, op. 27 no. 1 in E-flat Major, provides a locus
classicus of the structure (see Example 12).27 At first, this structure may appear to be
25
Locating the continuation with the onset of a dissolving basic idea rather than with the point at which the idea
begins to dissolve is akin to Hepokoski and Darcy’s notion that a “merged” sonata transition (i.e., one with the
same melodic material as the first theme group) begins at the start of a phrase rather than at the point where the
phrase diverges from its model (2006, 95). In both cases, we understand in retrospect that the unit in question
began with an earlier structural beginning and not in medias res, so to speak.
26
One example of a dissolving second statement in a monofold sentence occurs at the start of the second theme
group in Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in E-flat Major, op. 31 no. 3: mm. 46–49 = basic idea, mm. 50–53 = dissolv-
ing second statement (fragmentation and harmonic acceleration in m. 52). The underlying harmony of the entire
theme as an expanded cadential progression is certainly unusual but because my definition of a basic idea does
not depend on any particular harmonic organization, it does not affect the analysis of its form as a monofold
sentence. I therefore differ from Caplin, who regards the passage as having a purely cadential function (1998,
113–14). See the opening of Mozart’s Symphony No. 29, mm. 1–9, for an example of a dissolving fourth state-
ment in a trifold sentence.
Due to the slow Andante tempo, this example attains an eight-measure length of a true theme through the
27
R = ½N formula.
Presentation
& b 43 œ œ œ œ œ œ. œ Œ Œ œ œ œ œ œ. œ. œ Œ Œ
p
.
? 43 œ œ œ œ œ. œ. œ Œ Œ œ œ œ œ œ. œ. œ Œ Œ
b
Dissolving third statement
. .
œœœ œ ˙ œœ ™™ œ ˙
&b ™
5
œ̇ œ
˙ œœ ˙˙ œ ˙ œœ
˙™ ˙™ œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ
?b ˙™ ˙™ œ œ ˙™
œ
IVfl Vfl I vi iifl V
Harmonic acceleration
EXAMPLE 11
Sentence with a dissolving third statement of the basic idea; Beethoven, String
Quartet in F Major, op. 18 no. 1 (mvt. I), mm. 1–8
an uncontroversial trifold sentence, since the opening one-measure basic idea seems to
be stated three times before a continuation begins at m. 4. This interpretation, however,
ignores the exact repetition of the first basic idea at m. 3, which divides the theme into
two halves, much like a conventional period, and makes m. 2 now sound more like a
contrasting idea than another basic idea. For these reasons, the entire passage becomes
an instance of Caplin’s hybrid 4 theme rather than a trifold sentence.28
III. The Continuation as an Acceleration
The continuation is the most characteristic and invariable element of a sentence, for
while many classical phrase structures begin with a basic idea and end with a cadence,
a sentence always contains a continuation after one or more basic ideas. Simply put,
a sentence cannot exist without a continuation. According to Caplin, a continuation
28
As discussed in section V of this essay (“Sentences as Other Formal Functions”), wherever possible, I propose
viewing the phrases of period themes as sentences with a presentation of one or two basic ideas followed by a
continuation, rather than as a basic idea plus contrasting idea, in order to recognize the all-important acceleration
that occurs in such structures.
Compound Basic Idea

Basic idea Contrasting idea
b
Andante
& b b C œœ œœ ˙˙ œœœ œœœ ˙˙˙

œ. œ. ˙ . . ˙
œ. œœœœ
?b CÓ ≈œœœœœœœ
pp
bb J ‰ Œ œœœœ
Consequent (Monofold Sentence)
j >œ j
Basic idea Continuation / Cadence
3
b
& b b œœ œœ ˙˙ œœœ
œ
œ
Œ
œ. œ. ˙ œ œ
? bb œ. ‰ œ œ
bJ Œ ≈œœœœœ œ œœœœ œ ‰
œœ œ J
œ
V‡ I
EXAMPLE 12
Hybrid 4 Theme (Compound Basic Idea + Consequent); Beethoven, Piano Sonata
in E-flat Major, op. 27 no. 1 (mvt. I), mm. 1–4
is defined by four techniques, at least one of which must occur for the function to be
expressed: 1) fragmentation, 2) increase in harmonic rhythm, 3) increase in surface
rhythmic activity, and 4) sequential harmonies (1998, 41). In the first three of these
techniques, the accelerated motion infuses the sentence with a forward drive that accords
well with the highly goal-directed nature of the classical style. With this in mind, we
might ask whether the fourth technique, harmonic sequence, truly expresses continuation
function. Caplin includes sequences because “their inherent instability make them
especially suited for continuation function, one of whose primary goals is to destabilize
the harmonic context established by the presentation” (1998, 42). In the myriad
sentences I have encountered, however, sequences almost always occur in conjunction
with at least one of the other acceleration techniques listed above.29 Hence, when used
29
In rare cases, sequential harmonies occur after a presentation and are not paired with a type of acceleration. See,
for example, the second theme group of Haydn’s Piano Sonata in E-flat Major, Hob. XVI:49, in which mm. 28–31
are a clear bifold presentation. When a third statement of the basic idea begins in m. 32 then dissolves into differ-
ent material, there is neither fragmentation nor acceleration in harmony or rhythm. But there is sequence (mm.
33–34 = 35–36), and for that reason, many may view m. 32 as the start of a “dissolving-statement” continua-
tion. However, m. 33 begins an expansion of the phrase that takes the harmony from I (of B-flat major) to the
cadential predominant at m. 37 through a descending bass line. Indeed, mm. 33–36 could have been omitted
completely without altering the underlying harmony of the phrase. From this perspective, these measures are not
a continuation, but rather a form-functional “expansion,” for lack of another term. Nonetheless, notice that this
°59
œ™
b j
& bb œ Œ Œ Œ œ œ. œ œ œœœ œ
Œ œ œœ œ œœœ
. œ œ. œ. œ
˙™ ˙™
¢ bbb ˙™
p
˙™ ˙™
dolce
? ˙ œ ˙™
Presentation
Basic Idea Basic Idea
b œ. œ. Ÿœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ. œ. Ÿœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ
&b b Œ œ œœnœ œœbœ œ œ
œ
(p) dolce
œ œ œ œ œ œ
? bb œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœœ œœ œœ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœœ
b
Presentation (repetition)
°
Sequence of Basic Idea Sequence of
66
b œ. œ. Ÿœ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ. œ.
& bb œ Œ œ œ œœœœ œ
œ nœ œ œ bœ œ
b œ
¢
.œ œ. œ œœœ œ œ œ œ
? bb ˙ œ œ Œ Œ Œ Œ œ
b
b
& b b œ œnœ œ œbœ œ œ œ œ œ œ ‰ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
œ
? bb œ œ œ œ œ œ Œ Œ ˙™ ˙™
b ˙ œ ˙™
EXAMPLE 13
Sequence of a presentation as presentation rather than continuation function;
Beethoven, Piano Trio in C Minor, op. 1 no. 3 (mvt. I), mm. 59–83
in continuations, sequences appear to be merely a vehicle for these techniques, especially

fragmentation, which often contains a sequential repetition of a unit that is shorter than
the basic idea. This is likely why Schoenberg, in his eight-measure “school-form” of the
sentence mentioned earlier, prescribed that “the sixth measure will be a sequence of the
fifth”—it is a foolproof way of obtaining fragmentation into one-measure units if, as
he also stipulates, “the sentence…begins with a two-measure unit.” It must also be said
that sequences are not confined to continuations but may occur in any component of
theme is still a sentence because a continuation/cadence enters at m. 37 with the typical fragmentation down to
one-measure units.
(extension) Continuation
°72
Basic Idea
b Ÿœ œ œ œ œ œ
& bb bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ
œ œ nœ œ œ bœ œ bœ œ nœ œ œ ˙™ ˙
œ œ œ œ œ bœ
¢
p espressivo
? bb Œ œ. œ. œ œ
b Œ Œ Œ ∑ ∑
b
& b b œ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ œ œœœ Œ Œ Œ
nœ œ
Œ œ
œ
œ œ œ œ
p
˙™
? b ˙™
bb ˙ œ œ Œ Œ Œ Œ
°78 b œ œ œ
& bb ˙ œ Œ Œ
œ œ Œ
œ œ Œ
œ œ Œ
œ œ
¢
? bb ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑
b
T b
b j
œ œ ‰ œ œ bœ ‰ bœJ b˙ bœ œ œ œ Œ
&b b Œ œ œ
Œ
œ œ
œ œ œœ œœ œœ œœ œ œ
espressivo
? bb œ Œ œ œ Œ œ Œ bœ œ Œ Œ Œ œ œ
b
b
EXAMPLE 13
(cont’d.)
the sentence.30 Consequently, a sequence per se cannot indicate continuation function.

Rather, a continuation is based solely on the three types of acceleration listed above.31
But what function is expressed if an entire presentation is sequenced and is bereft
of accelerative processes? Example 13 gives the opening of the second theme group from
Beethoven’s Piano Trio in C Minor, op. 1 no. 3, which begins with a presentation of two
For a presentation that includes a sequence, see the opening theme of the finale of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in
30
B-flat Major, K. 281. For a cadential function that includes sequence, see Beethoven’s Symphony No. 1 in C
Major, op. 21 (mvt. I), mm. 226–27.
31
In some cases, a continuation can be difficult to perceive because fragmentation is expressed not by the melody
but by the accompaniment. See, for example, the opening of the development section in Mozart’s Piano Sonata
in F Major, K. 332 (mvt. I), mm. 94–101, in which there are two clear basic ideas of two measures, then a con-
tinuation due to one-measure groups as determined by the sounding of each chord only on the first beat of each
of the last four measures.
four-measure basic ideas in E-flat major. This presentation is then repeated in sequence
in the subdominant key, A-flat major. Does this sequence represent a repetition of
presentation function or the start of continuation function? Because a tonic prolongation
is not always expressed by presentation function, the non-tonic key of this sequence does
not help to discern the function. All the same, the fact that the sequence is a transposed
version of the presentation strengthens the sense of initiation that was provided there.
After all, if a presentation may be based on a sequence of I–ii (as in Example 6), why
not I–IV, as it is here? The function of this sequenced passage is therefore presentation
rather than continuation. Notice, however, that a true continuation based on harmonic
acceleration does enter immediately after this sequenced presentation.
One other important consequence of excluding the sequence from the definition of a
continuation is that a continuation cannot begin a phrase structure. The three accelerative
processes that define a continuation are always heard in relation to at least one basic
idea. Thus a preceding basic idea is a sine qua non for a continuation. If this initial idea
is absent, then there is no way to measure an acceleration, since an acceleration must
include an increased rate of change in the harmony, rhythm, or length of structural units.
The primary difference in viewing a sequential opening as a number of basic ideas rather
than a continuation is that the formal function of such an opening becomes initiating
rather than medial.32 This initiating function, however, is usually significantly looser than
those that have a tonic prolongation (as in most presentations) because the sequence most
often tonicizes a non-tonic key. Moreover, one will most often find that the structure is
a sentence, in that a true continuation with one or more accelerative processes appears
after the basic ideas. In Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in A Major, op. 2 no. 2, shown in
Example 14, Caplin states that the second theme group, which begins in m. 58, “lacks a
sense of structural initiation” and instead starts with a continuation that is expressed by
the use of the opening four measures as a model that is twice sequenced (1998, 112–13).
But as noted above, sequence per se cannot express continuation function. Moreover,
the sense of initiation in this case is expressed by the start of a new accompaniment
figure, the resolution to a tonic chord after a much prolonged dominant (not shown), and
the overtly characteristic nature of the melodic material. While the minor mode of the
theme’s opening and its surprising sequence into the remote key of B-flat major create a
loose type of second theme, as Caplin points out, its phrase structure is not at all unusual.
First, a four-measure basic idea is stated and immediately repeated in sequence. While
32
In this connection, Steven Vande Moortele views a sequence at the opening of a structure as the initiating units
(i.e., presentation) of a large sentence in Liszt’s Die Ideale (2009, 70–71). Although Liszt postdates the classical
era, it seems unlikely that the same formal pattern would be heard differently according to the historical period
in which a composition was written.
Presentation
œ™
Basic idea
58
### ‰ œJ #œ œ
nœ œ œ™ œœ#œ œ nœ nœ
J
& œ
œ œ œ
? ### nœœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ nœœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœn œ œœ œ œœ œ œœn œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ nœœn œ œœ œœ œœ
(p ) espressivo sf
nœ ™ nœ ™
Basic idea
63
### œ nœ œ œ œœœ œ nœ bœ
J
&
œ œ œ œ n œ œ œ b œ sfœœ œ œœ œ n œœ b œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ b œœ b œ œœ n œ œœ œ œœ œ
? ### nœœ œœ œœ œœ œ œ
Continuation (dissolving third statement)
™
fragmentation + harmonic acceleration
œ b œ œ œ b œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ Tn# n œ
67
# #
&# nœ
b œœ n œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ sf sf
? ###
& bœ nœ œ #œ œ œ œ œ n œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
nœ œ œ œ # œ œ œ œ œ n œœ œœ œœ
œ T# œ œ T# œ
# #
œ œ œ #œ
71
### œ œ œ #œ œ
& œ
##
sf sf
& # #œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ #œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ #œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœnœ œœ œ
EXAMPLE 14
Sequence at the start of a theme that denotes presentation rather than continuation
function; Beethoven, Piano Sonata in A Major, op. 2 no. 2 (mvt. I), mm. 58–92
(continued on next page)
œ #œ #œ œ #œ œ #œ œ #œ œ
75
### œ #œ #œ ‰ œ
‰J #œ ‰ ‰ J ‰J ‰J
&
n œ œœœ œ n œ œœœ œ
p pp
### nœ œ œ œ
ff (ff)
& œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ ‰ ? nœ œœœ œ Œ Œ ‰ nœ œœœ œ Œ Œ &nœœœ Œ nœœœ
Cadence
#œ œ œ œ
82
## J œ œœ œ œ œ
&# Œ Œ ‰ ‰ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
œ œ
œœ
(ff) 3
## # œ œ œ ˙
sf sf
& # Œ nœœœ ∑ Œ œ œ ˙˙
n ˙˙
#
?
∑ #˙
˙
## œ œ œ œ ˙˙ œ œ ˙ œ
#˙
88
&# ‰ œ œ œœœ œ œœ œœ œ J
? ### œ œ œ œ
sf sf
3
∑ & #˙ n˙
œœ Œ ˙ œœœ
PAC
Evaded Cadence
EXAMPLE 14
(cont’d.)
it may seem that a third complete basic idea enters in m. 66, it is in fact a continuation
by a dissolving statement, since there is an increased harmonic rhythm to one chord per
measure in m. 69 and a “breaking away” from the original idea in m. 70 that creates
fragmentation. The sense of continuation is enhanced by further fragmentation into
two-measure units at m. 70, then one-measure units at m. 80. Finally, as Caplin notes,
a cadential function enters at m. 84, the melody’s final tonic note is evaded, and the
cadential function is repeated through what Schmalfeldt has termed the “one more time”
technique (1992), ending with a perfect authentic cadence at m. 92. Considered together,
then, these functions combine to form an example of a bifold sentence theme, albeit one
with loose characteristics.
IV. The End of the Sentence
In most discussions of sentences, a cadence is generally required in order for a

structure to qualify as a sentence.33 Widening the borders of the sentence paradigm,
however, to include similar structures that lack a cadence not only recognizes the affinity
that all such structures have, but also, for those sentences without a cadence, encourages
hermeneutic inquiry into the reasons for such non-cadential endings. Thus a cadence is not
a requirement at the end of a sentence, but rather an optional component that provides a
strong means of closure. Even in the context of themes, where a cadence is expected, one
encounters three types of sentences that may be differentiated by the manner in which
they end. A closed sentence ends with one of three cadences (complete with its final
chord, or what Caplin [1998, 43] calls the cadential arrival): a perfect authentic cadence
(PAC), a half cadence (HC), or sometimes an imperfect authentic cadence (IAC); a semi-
closed sentence lacks cadential function but achieves closure on V or I through the use
of a cadence-like progression (explained below); and an open sentence contains neither
cadential nor cadence-like closure, either because it fails to reach an expected cadential
arrival or because it lacks a closing function altogether. While these three types of ending
may theoretically apply to any sentence, they are most pertinent to sentences acting as a
theme or theme-like unit.34 This section of the essay will therefore deal exclusively with
these types of sentences.
In a closed sentence, the cadential function (or what I will sometimes refer to
only as the “cadence”) may be approached in a number of ways, depending on how
long the accelerative processes of the continuation are maintained. And because these
processes give the sentence its sense of forward drive, the effect of a sentence’s ending
may differ considerably depending on where the acceleration ends and how it interacts
33
Although BaileyShea lists cadential function as one of the “essential elements” of a sentence, he gives it more
flexibility than the traditional Schoenbergian model by permitting not only half and authentic cadences, but
deceptive and evaded ones as well (2004, 27). In discussing late-nineteenth-century works, Vande Moortele
apparently does not regard the cadential requirement as binding; see, for instance, his analysis of the opening of
Zemlinsky’s Second String Quartet, in which the continuation contains no cadence at all (2009, 180). In applying
the sentence concept to the music of Bartók, Broman does away with the cadential requirement altogether,
remarking that “in many [of Bartók’s] works, …there is no notion of cadence, at least not in the tonal, or even
modal sense. Instead the articulation of phrase will have that function, regardless of pitch center” (2007, 123).
34
Caplin distinguishes between a theme and theme-like unit by the need for a cadence: the former requires a
cadence, whereas the latter does not (1998, 257). Thus, for Caplin, themes occur in main or subordinate theme
groups, and theme-like units in transitions and developments. He has an interesting caveat, however, for codas,
which he views as containing one or more “coda themes” rather than theme-like units (see p. 179), presumably
because these structures generally remain grounded in the tonic key. For this reason, I extend the idea of a theme
to any area of a form, so long as the structure in question is at least six real measures and centers around a single
key. If it is not tied to one key, I refer to it as a theme-like unit.
a) “Continuation (Cadence)” b) “Continuation/Cadence” c) “Continuation, Cadence”

(embedded cadence) (fused functions) (separate functions)
Cont Cont Cont Cad
Cad Cad
EXAMPLE 15
Three types of continuation with a cadence
with the cadence.35 Example 15 shows the three ways in which the continuation and
cadential functions may occur at the end of a sentence. In Example 15a, the cadential
function is embedded within the latter part of the continuation, and the accelerative
processes persist throughout the cadence, driving the sentence forward all the way to
its end. In these cases, the cadential function may be identified with parentheses, as in
“(Cadence)” or “(Cad),” to indicate its subordinate status. In Example 15b, the cadence
extends throughout the entire continuation, and the sense of acceleration and ending
are perceived mutually in what Caplin calls form-functional fusion (1998, 45). For these
situations, I suggest the label “Continuation/Cadence” or “Cont/Cad” to indicate that
neither function takes precedence over the other, since both are present throughout the
passage.36 Finally, in Example 15c, the accelerative processes of the continuation come
to a complete halt immediately before or just as the cadential function begins. Thus
the continuation and cadence are treated as separate functions that, as Caplin notes,
“are accorded their own distinct groups, as defined by their melodic-motivic content,
rhythmic patterning, accompanimental figuration, and so forth” (100). In such cases, the
continuation is often sealed off with a final chord that clearly ends the acceleration before
diving into the cadence, which is usually supported by an expanded cadential progression.
Because the techniques shown in Examples 15a and 15b do not require a broad expanse
to be expressed, they are typical of sentences around eight measures in length, which are
35
Determining precisely where cadential function begins can be a difficult matter. For Caplin, the indicator for
the start of cadential function is most often a I6 (or sometimes I) chord, since a complete cadential progression,
which consists of tonic–predominant–dominant–tonic, contains an initial tonic chord. Nevertheless, in order to
reflect the musical experience of perceiving significant melodic and textural changes as new formal functions, in
analysis I prefer to locate the beginning of the cadential function at the start of a new texture or melodic gesture,
rather than in its middle, as often occurs if only the harmony is taken into consideration. Recall Example 8,
for instance, in which I locate the cadential function as beginning at m. 21 in contrast to Caplin, who marks it
one measure later (1998, 198–99). I discuss this idea in greater detail in a forthcoming article for Intersections:
Canadian Journal of Music.
Caplin proposes the label “Continuation ⇒ Cadential” for such situations to indicate that “what we expect to
36
be a continuation phrase…is understood retrospectively to be a cadential phrase based on an expanded cadential

progression, a phrase that nevertheless contains continuational characteristics” (1998, 47). To prioritize the ca-
dence over the continuation function, however, does not capture the simultaneous perception of both functions.
most often found in the first theme group of sonata forms, where themes tend to be more
tight-knit. The technique shown in Example 15c, by contrast, usually requires more space
than a mere eight measures, and for this reason, is more typical of second theme groups
and development sections, where themes tend to be looser and longer than those of the
first theme group. These same three techniques also appear in semi-closed sentences,
which substitute a cadence-like close for a true cadence.37
Semi-closed sentences achieve closure without the use of a cadence, ending instead
with a V or I chord that generates closure through a preceding cadence-like progression.
Such a progression follows the same pathway as a normative cadence but lacks true
cadential status because the V chord is inverted or because the final chord is either a V7
(precluding a true half cadence) or is approached by a pedal point, which undermines
the independence of the cadential chords.38 As Caplin has recently clarified, none of these
situations constitutes a true cadential function (2004, 70, 88–89). Naturally, semi-closed
sentences are common in the “non-thematic” areas of a form (i.e., those that do not
typically contain tonally stable themes) such as transitions and developments, where a
cadence is not a necessity. But one may find them even in “thematic” areas such as first
and second theme groups, which usually close each of their constituent themes with a
cadence. It would seem, then, that the perception of a theme can remain intact even when
a structure contains the other features of a theme—it is at least six real measures and
centers around a single key—but has no concluding cadence. However, while a semi-closed
sentence more often takes the form of a theme-like unit, it does occur as a theme with
enough frequency to merit attention. The opening of Beethoven’s Appassionata Sonata is
a prime example (see Example 16).39 Here, mm. 1–16 form what would otherwise be a
normative sixteen-measure sentence theme of the closed bifold type—were it not for the
fact that the structure ends with the progression VI6–V6, which is not a cadence due to the
inverted V chord. Moreover, because the structure occupies the first theme group and is
organized as a sentence, it clearly claims its rights as a theme, but because of the lack of a
One may therefore simply substitute “Cad” in the previous labels with “Close.”
37
38
From this point of view, it may seem incongruous that a phrase that ends on V with a half cadence is closed
whereas one that ends on I with a cadence-like progression is only semi-closed. Closed sentences, however, are
distinguished from semi-closed ones only by the former’s stronger harmonic closure by an independent cadential
progression ending with a root-position V(7)–I or simply a root-position V. Hence, despite the obvious fact that I
chords bring a sense of finality and V chords openness, a phrase ending on I can, from the perspective of closural
strength, be understood to be weaker than a phrase ending on V.
The concept of an open theme is not to be confused with what Hepokoski and Darcy call “underdetermined”
39
P-themes (first themes), which lack only a PAC, but not necessarily an HC (2006, 73–74). They cite the opening
of the Appassionata as an example of such an underdetermined P-theme.
Presentation
œ™ j œ ™ œ ™ nœ œ
n Ÿ~~~~~~
Compound basic idea
b b 12 œ œ™ œ nœ œ
&b b 8 œ œ œ ˙™ œ™ œ œ œ™ J œ
œ™ œ œ
œ ™ n˙˙˙ ™™™
œ
? bb b 12
pp
œ ™ n˙˙˙ ™™™
b 8 œ œ œ
œ œœ ™ ™ œ œ œ œ™
˙ œ
bœ ™ ™ Ÿ~~~~~~
Compound basic idea
bœ ™ œ œ œ™
b œ j œ™ œ™ œ œ
b œ œ œ œ
4
œ
& b b ‰ Œ ‰ Œ ‰b œ œ J œ
œ ˙ ™ œ™ œ œ œ
bœ ™ œ™ ˙˙ ™™ bn˙˙˙ ™™™
œ ˙™
? bb b nœœ ‰ Œ ‰ Œ ‰
œ bœ ™
b œœ œ
b ˙ ™ œ™
bœ œ œ œ œ
Continuation
™ ™ ™ ™ œ ™ œœœ
Ÿœ~~~~~~~
fragmentation
n Ÿ~~~~~
b b œ ™ nœ jœ œ nœ œ ™ nœ œ œ
8
&b b ‰ Œ ‰ Ó œ™ œ J
œ œ œ ‰ Œ ‰Ó J
™ ˙ ™™ ˙˙˙ ™™™
œ
? bb b b œœ ‰ Œ ‰ Ó™ ˙ ™ n˙˙˙ ™™™ nœœ b œ œ œ ‰ Œ & ˙˙ ™
pp
& n˙ ™ ‰ ?
b
. . . œ.
œ œœ œ
(rhythmic acceleration)
œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œœ n œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
b nœ
& b bb ‰ ‰ Œ ‰ œœœ ‰ Œ™ Œ™
12
Œ
pp
bb œ poco ritar dan do f a tempo
& b b œœ ‰ ? ‰Œ ‰ Œ ‰ ‰Œ ‰ ∑
œ. œ. œ. œ. œœœœ
EXAMPLE 16
Semi-closed sentence; Beethoven, Piano Sonata in F Minor, op. 57,
“Appassionata” (mvt. I), mm. 1–16
(Close)
b nœ œ œ œ œ
15
& b bb œ nœ œ œ
œ U
j fœj ™ œœ ™™
œ œ nœ œ œ ‰ Œ œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ œœ ‰ ‰ n˙˙˙˙ ™™™ œœ ™™
p
? bb ∑
bb ‰ ‰œ œ n œ œ œ ‰ Œ ‰ œ ‰ ‰ n ˙ ™ œ™
œ œJ u
VIfl Vfl
non-cadential
EXAMPLE 16
(cont’d.)
cadence, must be considered a semi-closed sentence theme.40 In extreme cases, cadential

closure is continually postponed and becomes a compositional “problem” that is worked
out over the course of the movement.41
Closed sentences may occur in any part of a form, but are much more common than
either semi-closed or open sentences in thematic areas of classical forms. Undoubtedly, it
is because of the focus on closed sentences in such thematic areas that the sentence has, up
to now, largely been considered a type of theme.42 Closed sentences often occur, however,
in the less tonally stable non-thematic areas of a form.43 In fact, Ratz’s notion of the “core
of the development” (Kern der Durchführung) is tantamount to a sentence (1973, 33).
Caplin describes Ratz’s “core” in the following manner: “The phrase-structural technique
most characteristic of a development involves the establishment of a relatively large
model, which is repeated sequentially one or more times. Subsequent fragmentation leads
Other examples of semi-closed sentence themes occur in Beethoven’s Piano Trio in C Minor, op. 1 no. 3
40
(mvt. I), mm. 11–30 (bifold sentence) and Haydn’s Piano Sonata in C Major, Hob. XVI:50 (monofold sentence).
41
Beethoven was particularly fond of this technique, as is evident over the entire first movement of the
Appassionata, which avoids expected cadential closure in the exposition at m. 16 (inverted V), m. 45 (evaded
cadence), and at the analogous points in the recapitulation, m. 151 (inverted V and this time with a V pedal in
its approach), and m. 184 (evaded). Even the PAC at the end of the exposition at m. 61 (and analogously in the
recapitulation at m. 200) is considerably weakened by the silencing of the melody at the moment of cadential
arrival. (This dropping out effect of either melody or bass as a weakening of closure has been cited by Schmal-
feldt [1992, 9] and by Hepokoski and Darcy [2006, 169], both of whom consider such situations to be evaded
cadences.) Strong, unequivocal cadential closure in the tonic key is finally achieved with a PAC in the coda at
m. 239, thus resolving the problem of cadential closure in the movement as a whole.
BaileyShea notes that, in addition to possessing thematic function, a sentence may alternatively assume the
42
“interthematic rhetorical functions” of introductory, transitional, and closing/cadential (2004, 27).
See for example, the transition of Beethoven’s op. 2 no. 1, mvt. I, in which Caplin identifies a basic idea in
43
C minor, a subsequent continuation by fragmentation, and a half cadence in A-flat major (1998, 17–19). The
passage thus qualifies as a closed monofold sentence (though not a sentence theme).
to a half cadence (or dominant arrival) of either the home key or a development key”
(1998, 141).44 Although neither Ratz nor Caplin describes the developmental core as a
sentence, the structure outlines a sentential idea: the model and sequence form the basic
ideas, the fragmentation defines the continuation, and the cadence or dominant arrival
forms the ending. Thus, while it may be large in scale and occupy more measures than
sentences found in other areas, the development core is nevertheless either a closed or
semi-closed sentence. A closed sentence in such a non-thematic area, however, may form
a sentence theme if it remains bound to a single key (i.e., it begins and ends in the same
key), as occurs within some development sections and non-modulating transitions.45 In
these cases, it becomes useful to distinguish such closed sentences as themes because they
constitute a tonally stable structure within a section that is ordinarily tonally unstable.
As themes or theme-like units, open sentences are admittedly quite rare in the
classical period. But they merit inclusion here in order to demonstrate that thematic
structures can sometimes end without the closure afforded by closed and semi-closed
sentences. Instead, open sentences end in one of two ways: either without the preparatory
signal that is provided by cadential and cadence-like progressions or with an evaded
cadence. Because harmonic closure via cadences or even cadence-like progressions is of
paramount importance to classical themes, one would expect never to find open sentences
in the thematic areas of a form. And yet there are some notable exceptions, perhaps the
most striking of which is the second theme from the slow movement of Beethoven’s
“Les Adieux” Piano Sonata, op. 81a (see Example 17).46 This theme is structured as
a bifold sentence beginning with a four-measure presentation and proceeding with a
continuation by fragmentation at m. 19 that, most importantly, contains no cadential or
cadence-like progression. At m. 21, however, there is a return to first-theme material (in
the subdominant key!) after a local iv chord, marking an abrupt end to the second theme’s
sentence, but without harmonic closure. In other cases, an open sentence is created by an
evaded cadence, which promises closure with a cadential progression but fails to reach
the final chord, thus leaving the structure harmonically open.47
“Dominant arrival” is Caplin’s term for a non-cadential ending on a V chord due to an inverted form of the
44
V chord or the addition of a dissonant seventh to form V7 (1998, 79).
See for example the opening of the development of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in B-flat Major, K. 333 (mvt. I),
45
mm. 64–71, which contains a tight-knit sentence theme in the dominant key that is immediately repeated.
Thanks to L. Poundie Burstein for directing me to this particularly clear example of an open sentence.
46
47
Beethoven again provides the best example of this type of sentence in the second theme group of the finale of
his Fifth Symphony, which contains two bifold sentence themes that both end with an evaded cadence, as Caplin
has shown in an extensive analysis (1999, 63–71). In the recapitulation, the second of these sentences actually
receives cadential closure, but only after more than one hundred measures of a greatly expanded cadential func-
tion.
Presentation
Basic idea
b œ œ#œ œ œ
15
&b b nœ œ nœ œ œ #œ œ œnœ œ œ nœ. nœ.

cantabile cresc.
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
? b #nœœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ nœœ œœ nœœ œœ œœ œœ œœ nœœ #œœ œœ
bb
Basic idea
b nœ œ j nœ
& b b #œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ
17
nœ
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
p
? bb #nœœ œ œ œ œ œœ nœœ œœ
b
Continuation
fragmentation
œ œ
b Ÿ œ ≈ œ ≈ n œœ ≈ œœ
œ#œ œ œ œ
18
&b b œ #œ nœ œ œ nœ. bœ. R R R

. .
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ . œ. # œ œ œ. œ.nœ. œ. . œ. œ. . . œ. œ. .
cresc. sf dimin.
? bb nœ œ œ œ œ bœœ #œœ œœ œœ #œœ œœ œ

b
First theme (from m.5)
b œ œœ œœ œœ bœ̇˙˙ ™ nœ œ™
20
&b b ≈ œœ ≈ œ ≈ œR ≈ œR
R. . dimin. R
. œ œ œ. . . b ˙œ
? bb œœ. œ œ. .
sf
œ œ œ. . œ. .œ œ. œ. œ œ. b˙ nœ œ œ
b nœœ
EXAMPLE 17
Open sentence; Beethoven, Piano Sonata in E-flat Major, op. 81a (mvt. II), mm. 15–21
While closed sentences are without question the most common type of sentence
among themes and theme-like units, semi-closed and open sentences may certainly be
found. But in the case of the latter two options, the weakened or absent closure generally
forms part of a compositional strategy in the larger movement or work as a whole. In
some instances, a semi-closed or open sentence enhances the improvisatory quality of a
thematic structure in a movement that has a fantasy-like character, as in the Beethoven
op. 81a theme above.48 In most cases, however, it postpones the stronger closure provided
by a cadence until later in the movement, as in the finale of Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony
(see n. 47). Not surprisingly, then, most instances of semi-closed and open sentences in
the classical repertoire seem to occur in the more intensely teleological works of the early
nineteenth century by Beethoven.
V. Sentences as Other Formal Functions
I conclude this study of sentence structure with an examination of the other formal
functions that a sentence may assume. Until now, the sentence has been identified largely
as a type of theme, but sentences may assume other formal functions such as introductions,
basic ideas, and codettas, to mention only a few. There are two distinct advantages to
viewing these functions as sentences when so constructed. First, it becomes clear that
the internal makeup of larger formal functions may be based on a sentence rather than
combinations such as a basic idea plus a contrasting idea. (This is especially true of
period structure.) Secondly, it allows the ubiquity of sentence structure in the classical
repertoire to become readily apparent. This is perhaps the more important consequence;
far from being solely a type of theme, the sentence is a fundamental structure for both
phrases and parts of phrases. As a result, it may occupy manifold formal functions, large
or small, within a single composition.49
Besides that of a theme, one of the most common functions a sentence may adopt
is an antecedent and/or consequent within a standard period of around eight measures.
Because sentence themes regularly serve as antecedents and consequents in sixteen-measure
compound periods (Caplin 1998, 65), there is not much of a conceptual leap in applying
the same principle to periods on a smaller scale. Recall the opening of Mozart’s Piano
See also Mozart’s Fantasia in D Minor, K. 397, mm. 29–33, in which a bifold sentence ends not with cadential
48
or even cadence-like closure but with a questioning, prolonged diminished seventh chord, rendering the sentence
open.
49
Because none of the formal functions discussed in this section operates as an entire theme or theme-like unit,
there is no expectation that these sentences will close with a cadence or even a cadence-like progression. Thus
there is no reason to distinguish among closed, semi-closed, and open sentences in these contexts.
Sonata K. 331 (Example 3), in which the antecedent phrase is composed of a repeated
one-measure basic idea, a continuation by fragmentation and harmonic acceleration,
and a half cadence. Because the sentence is strictly a type of theme in Caplin’s view, he
considers this and similar instances to be only “sentence-like” or “sentential,” reserving
the true sentence label for sentence themes. Thus he analyzes the two one-measure basic
ideas as a single two-measure basic idea (Bi), and the continuation as a contrasting
idea (Ci). Although he admits that “a contrasting idea often contains characteristics of
continuation function, such as fragmentation, an accelerated harmonic or surface rhythm
(or both),” because such features are not always present, they are not required for his
contrasting idea (51). Consequently, sentence structures are easily overlooked when the
“Bi + Ci” label is used for all antecedents and consequents. Certainly, there are many
periods that do not at all express a sentence design, and for these “Bi + Ci” is entirely
appropriate, since the “Ci” is simply that—a contrasting idea to the initial basic idea,
but one that does not contain accelerative features.50 But by including antecedents and
consequents under the larger sentence paradigm, not only do we create a consistency
between the analyses of periods both large and small, we also make clear that periods
composed of sentences occur just as frequently, if not more so, than those composed of
a true “Bi + Ci”.51
Like the antecedent and consequent, Caplin’s compound basic idea (Cbi) is
structured as “Bi + Ci”, the only difference being that antecedents and consequents end
with a cadence whereas compound basic ideas do not. And, like the phrases of a period,
there are a great many sentences occurring as a Cbi that may remain latent with the “Bi
+ Ci” label.52 Haydn’s Piano Sonata in E-flat Major, Hob XVI:49, for instance, begins
with a four-measure Cbi that Caplin’s theory would consider a two-measure Bi plus a
two-measure Ci (see Example 18). But a closer look reveals that this “Bi” consists of
50
See Caplin 1998, 50, Example 4.2 (the opening of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in B-flat Major, K. 281), in which
both antecedent and consequent are constructed as “Bi + Ci” but do not express an underlying sentence struc-
ture, since there is neither fragmentation nor harmonic or rhythmic acceleration in the Ci.
51
When an antecedent, consequent, or the very similar compound basic idea (discussed in the following para-
graph) is constructed as a sentence, the bifold type constitutes the vast majority of cases, but monofold ones
may also be regularly found (e.g., the fourth movement of Haydn’s Symphony No. 94, “Surprise," mm. 1–8).
Conversely, trifold sentences are extremely rare, perhaps because it is difficult to reconcile the space required
for such structures within the usual four-measure span. The lack of symmetrical division that generally occurs
between the presentation and continuation may also be a prohibitive factor.
52
Although Humal identifies a similar structure with his “evolving presentation,” which “has the grouping struc-
ture similar to…that of the entire sentence [in diminution: 1+1+2=(2+2+4):2]” (italics original), his concept
remains questionable as an analytical tool because his functional components of the sentence depend exclusively
on their proportions and not their phrase-structural relationship to one another (1999, 38). His notion of a
continuation, for instance, does not take into account the fundamental concept of acceleration; rather, it seems
to be something that merely follows a basic idea.
Presentation
Compound basic idea (Bifold sentence)
Basic idea Basic idea Continuation
b j
& b b 43 j‰ Œ œ œ œ œ œj ‰ ‰
œœ
œ œ œœœ
œ œ™ œ œ. ‰ œ œ œ œ
fz ™
œœ ™ œœ œœ œ
œ œ œ œ œ. .
? bb 3 Œ j‰ œœ ‰ Œ j‰ œœ ‰ Œ œ œœ Œ Œ
b4 œœ J œœ J
Continuation/
Cadence
Compound basic idea (Bifold sentence)

rhythmic
œ
Basic idea Basic idea Continuation
b œ. ‰ œ œ œ
œ™ œ J
j
5 acceleration
& b b œj ‰ Œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœœ
œ. ‰ ‰ œ œ œ
œœ™™ œœ œ œ
œœœœ
.
? bb j ‰ œœj ‰ Œ j œœ œœ
fz
bœ j ‰ œœ ‰ Œ Œ Œ
œ œœ harmonic acceleration
b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œnœ nœ œ. œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ
fragmentation
9
b
& b J œ œ œ œ œ.j ‰ Œ ‰
? b ˙ ™™ œœ ™™
b b ˙˙ ™ ‰ Œ Œ Œ œœ ‰ œ œ œ j
œ.
Ifl IV (ii#) V‡ I
EXAMPLE 18
A sentence as a compound basic idea; Haydn, Piano Sonata in E-flat Major,
Hob. XVI: 49 (mvt. I), mm. 1–12
two smaller one-measure basic ideas to form a two-measure presentation and the “Ci”
contains a harmonic acceleration to form a continuation. Thus the entire four-measure
Cbi is a bifold sentence (without a cadence). Moreover, the Cbi is repeated to form a
presentation within a larger sentence, demonstrating one of the ways that smaller-scale
sentences may be nested inside larger ones. A sentence may also take the form of a regular
two-measure basic idea (Bi) if its own smaller basic idea (bi) is particularly short, as
occurs in Mozart’s Piano Sonata in B-flat Major, K. 333 (see Example 19). The small bi
here, which is a mere half-measure long, is repeated to give a presentation before it moves
Presentation
Basic idea (Bifold sentence)
basic idea basic idea continuation (harmonic acceleration)
. .
39
b
œ œ . . œ œ . .
nœ œ œ œ œ. œ. œ œ n œ œ œ œ
&b
œ œ œ œ fpœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ f œ œ œ œ
? b nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ #œ œ œ œ
fp
b
fp fp f
Basic idea (Bifold sentence)

basic idea
. .
basic idea continuation (harmonic acceleration)
41
bb œ œ nœ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ n œ œ œ œ
&
œnœ œ œ œ œ œfp œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #fœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
fp
? bb nœ œ nœ œ
fp fp f
Continuation
fragmentation harmonic accel.
˙ b˙ ˙ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ
b n˙ œ œ
˙ ‰ nœ
43
& b n˙
b ˙ ˙
œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ
? bb ‰bœœœ ‰ nœ ‰ nœ ‰
p
& Œ œ œ̇ œ ˙˙
p b œ
EXAMPLE 19
A sentence as a basic idea; Mozart, Piano Sonata in B-flat Major,
K. 333 (mvt. I), mm. 39–46
into a continuation by harmonic acceleration. The larger Bi is then repeated to form a

presentation of a larger sentence, once again giving a nested sentence design. Sentences
tend not to occur as normative two-measure contrasting ideas since, if that idea is the
same length as the preceding basic idea, any acceleration therein instead renders it a
continuation. If it is longer than the basic idea, however, then a true contrasting idea
structured as a sentence is possible.53
53
See, for example, the opening of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, K. 280, in which mm. 3–6 are a monofold
sentence acting as a contrasting idea.
Cadential (Bifold Sentence)

Presentation
œœ œœ œœ. œ œœ. œ. œ. # œ.
Basic idea
œœ œœ. œ.
æ æœ
#œ
æ æ
œ œ œ
69
& œ œ œ #œ
œœ œ œœ œ œœ. œœ #œ œœ. œ œ œ. œœ. œœ. œœ. œœ.
f
æ
f
æ æ
f
? æ œ œ
Ifl (V$ I V%)
œ. n œ œœ. œ. œ. # œ.
Basic idea
œ
œ œ œ #œ œœ œœ. œ.
&æ æ æ æ æ æœ
œ
71
œ œ œ #œ
œ œ œœ. #œ œœ. œœ œ œœ. œœ. œœ. œœ. œœ.
? æœ æ
œœ
æ
f f
æ æ
f
æ
Ifl
Continuation
œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
fragmentation
œ æ œ nœ œ œ œ n œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
&æ
73
œ nœ œ œ
? œ ™™ œ™ œ œ œ œ #œ
sf
sf
œ œ œ bœ nœ
œ œJ œ œ bœ nœ œ™ œJ œ œ œ #œ
Ifl (IV
œ. œ. œ.
(Cadence)
œ œ # œ
75 œ
#œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœœ œœœ #œœœ. œœ
& #œ œ œ œ œ œ
œ
ff
? œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ
œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ.
V) Ifl ° ‡ IV V@ ! I
EXAMPLE 20
A sentence as a cadential function; Beethoven, Symphony No. 1 in C Major (mvt. I), mm. 69–77
Indeed, nested sentences occur when any function of a larger sentence is itself
structured as a sentence. A continuation composed as a sentence is a phenomenon
recently given prominence by BaileyShea (2004, 12–16), and is an extremely common
type of continuation in the classical repertoire (as occurs in Beethoven’s op. 2 no. 1,
shown in Example 1).54 But whereas BaileyShea’s examples are limited to the bifold
type, I would expand the concept to include sentences with any number of basic ideas
(though, as usual, the bifold is the most common type).55 A sentence as a cadential
function is most likely to appear in the context of an expanded cadential progression,
which spans four or more measures. Caplin identifies such a structure in the second
theme group of Beethoven’s First Symphony, mm. 69–77 (see Example 20), where a failed
consequent phrase leads to an expanded cadential progression that supports a bifold
sentence (1987, 234–36). Closes with cadence-like progressions tend not to be structured
as a sentence because their length is usually rather short and thus does not allow for the
more expansive treatment offered by a sentence.
Because the formal functions of standing on the dominant and codetta are based
primarily on their harmonic content, their inner phrase structure, which is often a
sentence, has tended to be overlooked. Within both of these post-cadential functions,
a sentence can contribute greatly to the overall expressive character. If functioning as
a standing on the dominant, a sentence heightens the sense of anticipation that the
prolongation of the dominant harmony already provides (see Example 21). It is perhaps
for this reason that instances of standing-on-the-dominant sentences are simply legion in
the classical style. In the case of a codetta, which frequently occurs at the end of a sonata
exposition, a sentence can provide a welcome sense of accelerating towards a conclusion
on the local tonic harmony after a particularly lengthy second theme group, as in the
finale of Haydn’s Symphony No. 98, shown in Example 22.
A sentence may even take on the function of an introduction before the start of a
theme or theme-like unit, what Caplin calls a “thematic introduction” as opposed to a
slow introduction.56 Such structures typically feature a unison texture and are longer
Prior to BaileyShea, Rothstein (1989, 289) had indicated the phenomenon in the opening sentence of Beethoven’s
54
op. 2 no. 1 (though he did not use the term “continuation”).
55
For a continuation structured as a monofold sentence, see the opening of Haydn's Piano Sonata in E-flat
Major, Hob XVI:45, mm. 3–4 (resides within a larger monofold sentence theme). Interestingly, when this theme
is repeated in mm. 5–11, Haydn recomposes the continuation as a trifold sentence.
Caplin views a thematic introduction as “two to four measures at most” and argues that “the melodic-motivic
56
component of such an introduction is either weakly defined or entirely absent, so that the expression of a genuine
basic idea can be saved for the structural beginning of the theme” (1998, 15). Certainly, this is usually the case.
But, as explained below, a sentence functioning as an introduction will usually be longer than four measures.
Sentences as introductions are thus more akin to Rothstein’s notion of a “small prefix,” of which he states that
Standing on the Dominant (Bifold Sentence)

Presentation
œ™
Basic idea
16 œ™ œœ œ bœ bœ œ #œ
& œ w
œ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
( p)f
? œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
f
œ™
Basic idea
18 œ œ™ œœ œ bœ bœ œ #œ
& œ w
œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
p
? œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
Continuation
fragmentation
20 œ œ œ œbœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œbœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ ‰ ∏∏∏∏∏∏∏
œ œ œ œ œ œ
? œœ
f
‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ
J œ J œ J œ œ œ
œœ
EXAMPLE 21
A sentence as a standing on the dominant;
Mozart, Piano Sonata in A Minor, K. 310 (mvt. I), mm. 16–22
than the one or two measures typical of introductions, since a sentence most often
requires more space to unfold. As a result of this increased length, a sentence as an
introduction may appear to be part of a theme proper. Distinguishing between these
“a small prefix need not be short in length….The first sixteen measures of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony—the
open fifth on A moving, prematurely as it were, to an open fifth on D—form a small rather than a large prefix,
because a complete phrase is not performed” (1989, 70). Beethoven’s small prefix (i.e., thematic introduction),
which is composed as a bifold sentence, is therefore much longer than Caplin’s maximum of four measures for
a thematic introduction.
Codetta (Bifold Sentence)

Presentation
œ. œ. . œ. œ. .
œ nœ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. nœ. œ nœ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. nœ.
138
b œ œ
&b
nœsfœœ ™™™ œœ ™™™ nœsfœœ ™™™ œœœœ ™™™™
? b œœ ™™ ™ œ œ™ nœœœ ™™ œœ ™™ œ™ nœœœ ™™
b œœ ™™ œ ™™ œœ ™™ œ ™™
œ
Continuation
œ. œ. . . . œ.
fragmentation
œ. œ. œ. œ
Œ™ œœ ‰ Œ ™ œœ ‰ Œ ™ Œ™ ‰
142
œ
b nœ. . .
œ œ œ nœ œœ œœ U
&b ‰
nœsfœœ ™™™ sf ™
nœœœ ™™
? bb œœ ™™ œ™ œœ ™™ œ™ Œ™ œœ ‰ Œ ™ œœ ‰ Œ ™ Œ™ ‰
U
œœ ™™ œœ ™™
œœ ‰
œœ œœ œœ
EXAMPLE 22
A sentence as a codetta; Haydn, Symphony No. 98 (mvt. IV), mm. 138–147
Introduction (Bifold Sentence)

Presentation Continuation
œ.
Basic idea Basic idea fragmentation
.
### 2 œ œ ‰ œ. œ. ‰ œ. œ. œ
œ œ
& 4 œJ œ
. œœ œ œ ‰ œJ œ œœœ œ œ ‰ J œ œ œ. œ.
œ
œ.
œ. œ. ‰
œ œ.
p.
? ### 24 œJ œ. ‰
.
œ. ‰ œœœ œ ‰ œ. œ.
œœ œ œ œ ‰ œJ œ
J œ. œ. œ.
œ œ ‰
œ œ
. .
EXAMPLE 23
A sentence as an introduction; Beethoven, Piano Sonata in A Major, op. 2 no. 2 (mvt. I), mm. 1–8
situations depends on the type of function that follows an opening sentence with a unison
texture. Example 23 shows the opening eight measures from Beethoven’s Piano Sonata
in A Major, op. 2 no. 2, in which eight measures of a unison texture are structured as a
bifold sentence. Caplin views this passage as “the primary initiating unit of the theme” in
a larger antecedent phrase (1998, 200–1). However, because what follows in mm. 9–20
(not shown) constitutes a symmetrical monofold sentence theme, I would argue that
Basic idea (fragmentation)
basic idea continuation (rhy. accel.) basic idea
b n˙ ™
˙ œ nœ œ
&b b C ˙ œ œœ™ œ œ ˙ œ
œ Œ ˙™ œœ œ
nœ œ b˙
. .
˙ n˙ ™ œ nœ œ œ Œ Œ œ œ œ
p
?b C˙
bb nœ œ b˙ œ ˙
ii #
continuation
. . .
basic idea (harm. accel.)
6
b œ œ œ ‰œ œ œœ œ œ™ œ œ œj ‰
& b b ˙™œ œ™ œ œ ˙ œ œ œ œ œ˙ ™ œ Ó
œ
. . œ œœ œ œ œ
? bb Œ œ œ œ Œ œ œ Ó
bœ œ ˙ œ œ Œ Ó
V@° ‡! I
IAC
Continuation / Cadence (Repeated)
basic idea basic idea continuation (harm. accel.)
9
b œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œ
œ œ œ™ œ œ ˙
& b b ˙™ œ œ œ™ œ œ ˙
œœœœ ˙™ œ œœ ˙
. . . . ˙
cresc.
œ œ œ œ œ œ Œ œ̇ œ œœ ˙˙
f
?b Œ œ ˙ Œ
bb œ œ ˙ œ
ii # V@° ‡! I
PAC
EXAMPLE 24
A sentence in a unison texture that is not an introduction;
Mozart, String Quartet in E-flat Major, K. 428 (mvt. I), mm. 1–12
mm. 1–8 rather serve as an introduction to this theme. A passage like the opening of
Mozart’s String Quartet in E-flat Major, K. 428, shown in Example 24, presents a rather
different scenario. Here, the opening four measures, which again are in a unison texture,
comprise a monofold sentence. But because mm. 5–12 express fragmentation and are
built on an expanded cadential progression, they form a continuation/cadence in relation
to the opening four-measure unit, which can now be said to form a large basic idea
within a monofold sentence theme through mm. 1–12. Also note that, in this particular
example, the continuation/cadence is itself structured as a bifold sentence.57 Thus, when
a sentence assumes a formal function within a larger structure, one must always consider
its relationship to the surrounding musical material to determine the identity of that
function.
Conclusion
Throughout this study, I have attempted to widen the boundaries of the structure
that Schoenberg first termed the sentence by offering a more encompassing definition
than those of Schoenberg, Ratz, or Caplin. I have, however, retained Caplin’s sentence
and used his notion of a theme to distinguish between sentences as themes and sentences
as other phrase structures. Sentence themes contain at least six real measures of music,
center around a single key, and most often achieve cadential closure (though, as discussed,
this is not always the case). More generally, sentences may be expressed in a variety
of ways that I categorize according to the constituent components. Thus I distinguish
among the monofold, bifold, and trifold sentence, depending on the number of basic
ideas it contains. I have also argued that a tonic prolongation is not required for the
presentation, nor is a repetition of the basic idea necessary for a sentence—these are only
the most common features.
At the core of the sentence is the continuation, which is always defined by one
of three types of acceleration: fragmentation, harmonic acceleration, or an increase in
surface rhythmic activity. Sequences, by contrast, facilitate fragmentation and therefore
occur frequently in continuations but per se do not contribute to continuation function.
Indeed, sequences of presentation material that lack any accelerating features serve
merely to extend presentation function. Hence, a sequence that begins a phrase would
be a presentation with loose characteristics rather than a continuation. When an ending
function is present, the continuation may overlap with, fuse with, or be separated from it
to close off the sentence. Closed sentences, the most common type in themes and theme-
like units, contain a cadence; semi-closed ones contain a similar-sounding cadence-like
progression; and open sentences contain neither type of closure. Also considered were
the various other formal functions a sentence may adopt besides that of a thematic unit,
the antecedent and consequent being especially important because of their extremely
common construction as a sentence.
A similar instance of a unison texture forming a presentation rather than an introduction occurs at the opening
57
of Beethoven’s op. 18 no. 1 (shown in Example 11).

Struc ture/Component Defined b y
The Sentential Idea Basic Idea(s) + Continuation (+ Cadence or Close)

Sentence Theme (Caplin’s Sentence) Minimum 6 real measures, centers around single key;
most often ends with a cadence
Basic Idea The initiating unit of the sentence (usually repeated)

Continuation Acceleration: 1) Fragmentation; 2) Harmonic acceleration;
3) Faster surface rhythm
Cadence Cadential progression at end of sentence
Close Cadence-like progression at end of sentence
Monofold Sentence One basic idea

Bifold Sentence Two basic ideas
Trifold Sentence Three basic ideas
Cont (Cad) Cadence embedded in latter portion of a continuation

Cont/Cad Continuation built entirely on a cadential progression
Cont, Cad Separate functions for continuation and cadence
Cont (Close) Cadence-like close embedded in latter portion of a continuation

Cont/Close Continuation built entirely on a cadence-like progression
Cont, Close Separate functions for continuation and cadence-like close
Closed Sentence Closing cadence

Semi-Closed Sentence Closing cadence-like progression
Open Sentence Lack of cadence or cadence-like progression (though an evaded
cadence is possible)
Sentence as
Antecedent
Consequent
Compound Basic Idea
Basic Idea
Sentences acting as formal functions besides a theme or
Contrasting Idea
theme-like unit
Continuation
Cadence
Thematic Introduction
Standing on the Dominant
Codetta
EXAMPLE 26
Summary of Sentence Categories and Components
Although I have limited my scope of discussion to music of the classical period,

these broader notions of sentence might be applied to either earlier or later repertoires.
After all, the stricter definition of a sentence as a repeated opening idea plus a longer
continuation is, as BaileyShea argues, “a common compositional impulse, one shared—
perhaps unconsciously—by countless composers from the seventeenth to the twentieth

century” (2004, 8; italics original). Furthermore, this idea is borne out (at least in the
forward direction) by a number of recent studies that have adapted Caplin’s definition of
the sentence to repertoires later than the classical.58
But above all, I hope to have demonstrated that, while often greatly divergent in
shape, size, and individual detail, the structures called sentences in this study all share
an elemental foundation consisting of at least one basic idea and a continuation—or
what I have designated the sentential idea. The features of each of its components and
the various types of sentences they create are summarized in Example 25. When the
sentence is viewed from this perspective, it becomes clear that structures so organized
not only merit inclusion within the sentence paradigm due to their strong similarity to
previous conceptions of the sentence, but are also so ubiquitous in the repertoire that the
sentential idea may well be understood as one of the most—if not the most—important
phrase-structural principle in the music of Viennese classicism.
Works Cited
BaileyShea, Matthew. 2002–2003. “Wagner’s Loosely Knit Sentences and the Drama of Musical
Form.” Intégral 16–17: 1–34.
———. 2004. “Beyond the Beethoven Model: Sentence Types and Limits.” Current Musicology
77: 5–33.
Bartha, Dénes. 1971. “On Beethoven’s Thematic Structure.” In The Creative World of Beethoven,
ed. Paul Henry Lang, 257–76. New York: W. W. Norton. First published 1970 in Musical
Quarterly 56: 759–78.
Broman, Per F. 2007. “In Beethoven’s and Wagner’s Footsteps: Phrase Structures and Satzketten
in the Instrumental Music of Béla Bartók.” Studia Musicologica 48/1–2: 113–31.
Caplin, William E. 1986. “Funktionale Komponenten im achttaktigen Satz.” Musiktheorie 1/3:
239–60.
———. 1987. “The ‘Expanded Cadential Progression’: A Category for the Analysis of Classical
Form.” The Journal of Musicological Research 7/2–3: 215–57.
———. 1991. “Structural Expansion in Beethoven’s Symphonic Forms.” In Beethoven’s
Compositional Process, ed. William Kinderman, 27–54. Lincoln: University of Nebraska
Press in association with the American Beethoven Society and the Ira F. Brilliant Center for
Beethoven Studies, San Jose University.
———. 1994. “Hybrid Themes: Toward a Refinement in the Classification of Classical Theme
Types.” Beethoven Forum 3: 151–65.
For discussions of the sentence in Wagner, see BaileyShea (2002–2003); in Bartók: Broman (2007); in Liszt,
58
Strauss, and Schoenberg: Vande Moortele (2009).

———. 1998. Classical Form: A Theory of Formal Functions for the Instrumental Music of
Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. New York: Oxford University Press.
———. 1999. “Harmonic Variants of the Expanded Cadential Progression.” In A Composition as
a Problem II: Proceedings of the Second Conference on Music Theory, Tallinn, April 17–18,
1998, ed. Mart Humal, 49–71. Tallinn: Estonian Academy of Music.
———. 2004. “The Classical Cadence: Conceptions and Misconceptions.” Journal of the
American Musicological Society 57: 51–117.
———. 2009. “Beethoven’s Tempest Exposition: A Springboard for Form-Functional
Considerations.” In Beethoven’s Tempest Sonata: Perspectives of Analysis and Performance,
ed. Pieter Bergé, Jeroen D’hoe, and William E. Caplin (Leuven: Peeters), 87–125.
Cone, Edward T. 1968. Musical Form and Musical Performance. New York: W. W. Norton &
Company.
Dahlhaus, Carl. 1978. “Satz und Periode: Zur Theorie der musikalischen Syntax.” Zeitschrift für
Musiktheorie 9/2: 16–26.
Fillion, Michelle. 1981. “Sonata-Exposition Procedures in Haydn’s Keyboard Sonatas.” In Haydn
Studies, ed. Jens Peter Larsen, Howard Serwer, and James Webster, 475–81. New York:
W. W. Norton.
Fischer, Wilhelm. 1915. “Zur Entwichlungsgeschichte des Wiener klassischen Stils.” Studien
zur Musikwissenschaft 3: 24–84.
Frisch, Walter. 1984. Brahms and the Principle of Developing Variation. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Hasty, Christopher F. 1997. Meter as Rhythm. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hepokoski, James, and Warren Darcy. 2006. Elements of Sonata Theory: Norms, Types, and
Deformations in the Late-Eighteenth-Century Sonata. New York: 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 13/2: 95–147.
Humal, Mart. 1999. “Structural Variants of Sentence in Main Themes of Beethoven’s Sonata
Form.” In Composition as a Problem II: Proceedings of the Second Conference on Music
Theory, Tallinn, April 17–18, 1998, ed. Mart Humal, 34–48. Tallinn: Estonian Academy of
Music.
Kinderman, William. Beethoven. 2nd edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Koch, Heinrich Christoph. 1983 [1787]. Introductory Essay on Composition: The Mechanical
Rules of Melody, Sections 3 and 4. Trans. Nancy Kovaleff Baker. New Haven: Yale University
Press.
Lerdahl, Fred, and Ray Jackendoff. 1983. A Generative Theory of Tonal Music. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press.
Ratz, Erwin. 1973. Einführung in die musikalische Formenlehre. 3rd ed. Vienna: Universal
Edition.
Richards, Mark. "Closure in Classical themes: The Role of Melody and Texture in Cadences,
Closural Function, and the Separated Cadence." Intersections: Canadian Journal of Music
31/1 (forthcoming).
Rosen, Charles. 1988. Sonata Forms. Rev. ed. New York: W. W. Norton.
Rothstein, William. 1989. Phrase Rhythm in Tonal Music. New York: Schirmer Books.
Schmalfeldt, Janet. 1991. “Towards a Reconciliation of Schenkerian Concepts with Traditional

and Recent Theories of Form.” Music Analysis 10: 233–87.
———. 1992. “Cadential Processes: The Evaded Cadence and the ‘One More Time’ Technique.”
The Journal of Musicological Research 12/1–2: 1–52.
———. 2011. In the Process of Becoming: Analytical and Philosophical Perspectives on Form
in Early Nineteenth-Century Music. New York: Oxford University Press.
Schoenberg, Arnold. 1954. Structural Functions of Harmony. New York: W. W. Norton.
———. 1967. Fundamentals of Musical Composition. Ed. Gerald Strang. New York: St. Martin’s
Press.
———. 1995. The Musical Idea and the Logic, Technique, and Art of Its Presentation. Ed. and
trans. Patricia Carpenter and Severine Neff. New York: Columbia University Press.
Stein, Erwin. 1962. Form and Performance. London: Faber and Faber.
Vande Moortele, Stephen. 2009. Two-Dimensional Sonata Form: Form and Cycle in Single-
Movement Instrumental Works by Liszt, Strauss, Schoenberg, and Zemlinsky. Leuven:
Leuven University Press.
Webern, Anton. 1975. The Path to the New Music. Ed. Willi Reich. New Jersey: Universal
Edition.
———. 2002. Über musikalische Formen: Aus den Vortragsmitschriften von Ludwig Zenk,
Siegfried Oehlgiesser, Rudolf Schopf und Erna Apostel. Ed. Neil Boynton. New York: Schott.
Appendix A
Monofold Sentences (as Themes)
Haydn, Piano Sonata in A Major, Hob. XVI:30 (mvt. I), mm. 1–8 (Bi = 2 measures)
Haydn, Piano Sonata in B Minor, Hob. XVI:32 (mvt. I), III, mm. 38–51 (Bi = 4 measures)
Haydn, Piano Sonata in A-flat Major, Hob. XVI:43 (mvt. I), mm. 1–6 (Bi = 2 measures)
Haydn, String Quartet in C Major (mvt. I), op. 9 no. 1, mm. 1–3, (Bi = 1 measure)
Mozart, Piano Sonata in C Major (mvt. I), K. 309, mm. 1–8 (Bi = 2 measures)
Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, K. 332 (mvt. I), mm. 1–12 (Bi = 4 measures)
Mozart, String Quartet in E-flat Major, K. 428 (mvt. I), mm. 1–12 (Bi = 4 measures; see Ex. 19)
Beethoven, Piano Trio in C Minor (mvt. I), op. 1 no. 3, mm. 1–10 (Bi = 4 measures)
Beethoven, Piano Sonata in E-flat Major, op. 7 (mvt. III), mm. 1–8 (Bi = 4 measures)
Beethoven, Symphony No. 3 in E-flat Major, op. 55 (mvt. I), mm. 15–23 (Bi = 4 measures)
Trifold Sentences (as Themes)
Haydn, Piano Sonata in D Major, Hob. XVI:24 (mvt. II), mm. 1–5 (Bi = 1 measure [R = ½N])
Haydn, Piano Sonata in C-Sharp Minor, Hob. XVI:36 (mvt. I), mm. 12–17 (Bi = 1 measure [R
= ½N])
Haydn, Symphony No, 98 (mvt. IV), mm. 43–62 (Bi = 2 measures)
Mozart, Piano Sonata in C Major, K. 279 (mvt. III), mm. 23–30 (Bi = 2 measures)
Mozart, Piano Sonata in D Major, K. 576 (mvt. I), mm. 28–41 (Bi = 2 measures)
Mozart, Piano Concerto in D Minor, K. 466 (mvt. I), mm. 115–124 (Bi = 2 measures)
Beethoven, Piano Sonata in C Minor, op. 13 (mvt. I), mm. 51–89 (Bi = 8 measures)
Beethoven, Piano Sonata in E-flat Major, op. 27 no. 1 (mvt. II), mm. 1–16 (Bi = 4 measures)
Beethoven, Symphony No. 6 in F major, op. 68 (mvt. II), mm. 2–7 (m. 1 = introduction) (Bi = 1
measure [R = ½N])
Beethoven, String Quartet in A Minor, op. 132 (mvt. II), mm. 5–12 (Bi = 2 measures)

Viennese Classicism and The Sentential I PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Viennese Classicism and The Sentential I PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Viennese Classicism and the Sentential Idea:

Broadening the Sentence Paradigm

No. 1 in C Major, op. 15 (1998, 13–14).

BaileyShea recognizes this same point (2004, 28).

Basic Idea(s) + Continuation (+ Cadence or Close)

Beginning Acceleration (Ending)

Beethoven—that it is difficult, if not impossible, to locate a movement in the repertoire

I. Basic Ideas and the Presentation

Antecedent (Sentence) Continuation (Cadence)

Consequent (Sentence) Continuation (Cadence)

The Bifold Sentence and Tonic Prolongation in the Presentation

period. A sentence may close on I, V or III, with a suitable cadence” (59).

& 4 œ #œ œ œ ™ œ #œ œ œ œ ™ œ œ œ#œ œ™ œ œ œ#œ œ™ œ

(end of tonic prolongation)

& œ#œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ#œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

II. Other Sentence Types

The Monofold Sentence

Basic Idea fragmentation

Basic idea fragmentation + rhythmic acceleration

Cadence (Expanded Cadential Progression)

“it is difficult to distinguish clearly between presentation and continuation function”

The Trifold Sentence and Dissolving Statements of the Basic Idea

more measures (1998, 254).

& 43 Œ˙™ œœ œœ œœœ œŒ Œœ #œ œ̇œ œœ œœ #œ œ

Basic idea Basic idea

III. The Continuation as an Acceleration

Compound Basic Idea

& b b C œœ œœ ˙˙ œœœ œœœ ˙˙˙

Consequent (Monofold Sentence)

in continuations, sequences appear to be merely a vehicle for these techniques, especially

the sentence.30 Consequently, a sequence per se cannot indicate continuation function.

Continuation (dissolving third statement)

& # #œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ #œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ #œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœnœ œœ œ

& œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ ‰ ? nœ œœœ œ Œ Œ ‰ nœ œœœ œ Œ Œ &nœœœ Œ nœœœ

IV. The End of the Sentence

In most discussions of sentences, a cadence is generally required in order for a

a) “Continuation (Cadence)” b) “Continuation/Cadence” c) “Continuation, Cadence”

be a continuation phrase…is understood retrospectively to be a cadential phrase based on an expanded cadential

cadence, must be considered a semi-closed sentence theme.40 In extreme cases, cadential

“interthematic rhet­orical functions” of introductory, transitional, and closing/cadential (2004, 27).

V chord or the addition of a dissonant seventh to form V7 (1998, 79).

&b b nœ œ nœ œ œ #œ œ œnœ œ œ nœ. nœ.

&b b œ #œ nœ œ œ nœ. bœ. R R R

? bb nœ œ œ œ œ bœœ #œœ œœ œœ #œœ œœ œ

First theme (from m.5)

V. Sentences as Other Formal Functions

Compound basic idea (Bifold sentence)

Basic idea (Bifold sentence)

fragmentation harmonic accel.

into a continuation by harmonic acceleration. The larger Bi is then repeated to form a

Cadential (Bifold Sentence)

op. 2 no. 1 (though he did not use the term “continuation”).

Standing on the Dominant (Bifold Sentence)

Codetta (Bifold Sentence)

Introduction (Bifold Sentence)

basic idea continuation (rhy. accel.) basic idea

Continuation / Cadence (Repeated)

basic idea basic idea continuation (harm. accel.)

of Beethoven’s op. 18 no. 1 (shown in Example 11).

Struc ture/Component Defined b y

The Sentential Idea Basic Idea(s) + Continuation (+ Cadence or Close)

Basic Idea The initiating unit of the sentence (usually repeated)

Monofold Sentence One basic idea

“interthematic rhetorical functions” of introductory, transitional, and closing/cadential (2004, 27).