Re: Unanswered Question #1

On Apr 5, 10:03 am, "Tom K." <tkor...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "LJS" <ljsche...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:fcd74073-869f-4bb6-84bf-451eb42782a2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > My best guess is that
> > Piston had coined the phrase Secondary Dominant in his theory book in
> > 1941. I think he started using the "V of" terminology in 1939 in one
> > of his writings.
>
> The secondary dominant concept is also fully detailed by Arnold
Schoenberg
> in his "Structural Functions of Harmony" using the term "Artificial
> Dominant".  For V/V, he used "II" with a line thru it.  Although written
in
> 1948, Schoenberg notes that the book was a compilation of ideas and
terms
> presented in a course he developed in 1939 at UCLA.
>
> One wonders if there was any communication between AS & WP at the time.
>
> Tom K.

Yes, I have "Music Theory and Analysis in the Writings of Arnold
Schoenberg (1874-1951)" from Google books. (a neat little help for
research!) and I think that what I have here on the subject is the
earlier writings that you are talking about. (who knows?) He has a
Brahms Rapsody in Gmin as an example. I don't really like it at all.
Of course with UC/RN you have to do something and this or something
like it is a necessity if you are talking about this modal
substitution. If you translate this analysis to UC/LC however, I find
that you see much more clearly what is going on. It doesn't take a
rocket scientist to look at an a Cmaj chord in Gmin and see that it is
outside the primary key! I am assuming that he notated dim7 chords as
Incomplete dominants or there is a misprint in mes. 3.4 as I can not
find the root of the slashed II chord as a Secondary dominant of the
SubDominant key. I am sure that this notation was easy for them, but
UC/LC is so much quicker and clearer to me! From what I have seen

I don't know if they ever encountered each other (Too bad Gretchen is
not still around to give us the inside story!) but I would not be
surprised at all if they did not! They both seemed to have their own
thing and I don't see a real connection in their writings. Austrian
born Schoenberg was very Germanic, it seems, in his views of music and
after all, Walter Pistone was Italian/American and the US is a big
place. Maybe they did, does anyone know?
LJS