My thanks to Laurie Schwartz for her help in bringing the English version of this article to its present form, and to William Drabkin for kindly providing translations of three passages from Schenker's Der Tonwille.Google Scholar

1 See Dahlhaus, Carl, ‘Schoenberg and Schenker’, Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association, 100 (1973–4), 209–15; Jonathan M. Dunsby, ‘Schoenberg and the Writings of Schenker’, Journal of the Arnold Schoenberg Institute, 2 (1977), 26–33; Bryan R. Simms, ‘New Documents in the Schoenberg/Schenker Polemic’, Perspectives of New Music, 16 (1977), 110–24; Hellmut Federhofer, ‘Heinrich Schenkers Verhältnis zu Arnold Schönberg’, Sonderabdruck aus dem Anzeiger der philosophisch-historischen Klasse der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 118 (1981), 369–90; Charlotte E. Erwin and Bryan R. Simms, ‘Schoenberg's Correspondence with Heinrich Schenker’, Journal of the Arnold Schoenberg Institute, 5 (1981), 23–43.Google Scholar

2 Epstein, David, Beyond Orpheus: Studies in Musical Structure (Cambridge, MA, 1979).Google Scholar

3 Schmalfeldt, Janet, ‘Towards a Reconciliation of Schenkerian Concepts with Traditional and Recent Theories of Form’, Music Analysis, 10 (1991), 233–87.Google Scholar

4 Smith, Charles J., ‘Musical Form and Fundamental Structure: An Investigation of Schenker's Formenlehre’, Music Analysis, 15 (1996), 191–297; see also Allen Cadwallader, ‘Form and Tonal Process: The Design of Different Structural Levels’, Trends in Schenkerian Research, ed. Allen Cadwallader (New York, 1990), 1–21.Google Scholar

5 Schenker, Heinrich, Free Composition (Der freie Satz), ed. and trans. Ernst Oster, 2 vols. (New York, 1979).Google Scholar

6 Schoenberg, Arnold, Models for Beginners in Composition (New York, 1943); Structural Functions of Harmony (New York, 1954); Fundamentals of Musical Composition, ed. Gerald Strang and Leonard Stein (Boston, MA, and London, 1967); The Musical Idea and the Logic, Technique and Art of its Presentation, ed. Patricia Carpenter and Severine Neff (New York, 1995).Google Scholar

7 Schmalfeldt, , ‘Towards a Reconciliation’, 235.Google Scholar

8 See Rufer, Josef, Composition with Twelve Notes Related Only to One Another, trans. Humphrey Searle (London, 1954); ‘Begriff und Funktion von Schönbergs “Grundgestalt”’, Melos, 38 (1971), 281–4; ‘Von der Musik zur Theorie: Der Weg Arnold Schönbergs’, Zeitschrift für Musiktheorie, 2 (1971), 1–3.Google Scholar

9 See Ratz, Erwin, Einführung in die musikalische Formenlehre (Vienna, 1951; 3rd edn, rev. and expanded, 1973).Google Scholar

10 See Berg, Alban, Glaube, Hoffnung und Liebe: Schriften zur Musik (Leipzig, 1981); Anton Webern, The Path to New Music, ed. Willi Reich, trans. Leo Black (Bryn Mawr, PA, [1963]).Google Scholar

11 See Leibowitz, René, Schoenberg et son école: L'étape contemporaine du langage musical (Paris, 1947), trans. Dika Newlin as Schoenberg and his School: The Contemporary Stage of the Language of Music (New York, 1949); Qu'est-ce que la musique de douze sons? Le concerto pour neuf instruments op. 24 d'Anton Webern (Liège, 1948); Introduction à la musique de douze sons: Les Variations pour l'orchestre, op. 31 dArnold Schoenberg (Paris, 1949); ‘Traité de la composition avec douze sons’ (Basle, Paul Sacher Foundation, unpublished MS, 1950). Theodor W. Adorno, Der getreue Korrepetitor: Studien zur musikalischen Praxis, Gesammelte Schriften, xv, ed. Rolf Tiedemann (Frankfurt am Main, 1976), 157–402. Leibowitz began an intense correspondence with Schoenberg in 1945 and had the opportunity to spend various periods with him during the winter of 1947–8 and the spring of 1950. Adorno studied with Berg in 1925 and kept up a frequent correspondence with him until his death; see Theodor W. Adorno/Alban Berg: Briefwechsel 1925–35, ed. Henri Lonoitz (Frankfurt am Main, 1997). On the relationship between Adorno and Berg, see Borio, Gianmario, ‘Der Aufbruch der Zwölftontechnik: Zum Briefwechsel Adorno/Berg’, Musik und Ästhetik, 2 (1998), 110–15.Google Scholar

12 See Réti, Rudolf, The Thematic Process in Music (New York and London, 1951).Google Scholar

13 See the introduction to Schoenberg, The Musical Idea, 1–74.Google Scholar

14 Heinrich Schenker, ‘Beethoven: Sonate Opus 2 Nr. 1‘, Der Tonwille, 7 vols. (Vienna, 1921–4; repr. with a Foreword by Hellmut Federhofer, Hildesheim, 1990), ii, 25–48 (Urlinietafelpp. 3–4).Google Scholar

15 See Schoenberg, , Fundamentals, 21–2, 58–63 and 180; idem, Models, Example 207, p. 19; Ratz, Einführung, 23; Anton Webern, Über musikalische Formen: Aus den Vortragsmitschriften von Ludwig Zenck, Siegfried Oehlgiesser, Rudolf Schopf und Erna Apostel, ed. Neil Boynton (Mainz, forthcoming; my thanks to the editor for allowing me to consult the proofs of this important volume).Google Scholar

16 See Dahlhaus, Carl, ‘Satz und Periode: Zur Theorie der musikalischen Syntax’, Zeitschrift für Musiktheorie, 9 (1978), 17–26.Google Scholar

17 Schoenberg, , Fundamentals, 1; see also idem, The Musical Idea, 118–22.Google Scholar

18 Schon die Urlinie gehorcht dem Zeugungs-, das ist dem Wiederholungsgesetz und fügt sich mit solchem Urtrieb in die stets wachsende, sich mehrende Natur als ein lebendiges Stück derselben ein. Während vor unserem Ohr Motive und Melodien sich in Wiederholungen tummeln, die leicht wahrnehmbar sind, zeugt sie in ihrem Ur-Schoß Wiederholungen verborgener höchster Art.’ Heinrich Schenker, ‘Die Urlinie (eine Vorbemerkung)’, Der Tonwille, i, 22–6 (p. 22).Google Scholar

19 'Kommt dem Zögern das Hinausschieben auf schwache Takte zugute, so fehlt es auch dem Vorstoß nicht an mehreren wieder nur ihm gemäßen Begleiterscheinungen; diese sind: Verkürzung der Brechungen, ausgedrückt durch die kurzen Vorschläge in T. 5 und 6 und unterstrichen durch die beiden sf -Akzente; dann in T. 7 das Arpeggio, als die kürzeste Art eine Brechung zu durchlaufen, im Zeichen eines ff.’ Schenker, ‘Beethoven: Sonate Opus 2 Nr. 1’, 25.Google Scholar

20 Schoenberg, Arnold, Coherence, Counterpoint, Instrumentation, Instruction in Form, ed. with an introduction by Severine Neff, trans. Charlotte M. Cross and Severine Neff (Lincoln, NE, 1994), 27.Google Scholar

21 Schoenberg, , Fundamentals, 58.Google Scholar

22 See Schmitz, Arnold, Beethovens ‘zwei Prinzipe’ (Berlin and Bonn, 1923), 8. Schoenberg, who probably did not know Schmitz's definition, hints at an analogous procedure which provides contrast by way of derivation from a given theme (primarily in the development), calling it ‘related contrast’ (see Schoenberg, Fundamentals, 201).Google Scholar

23 For these basic concepts, see Schoenberg, , Fundamentals, 184, 204; idem, The Musical Idea, 178–9; Ratz, Einführung, 21.Google Scholar

24 On the notion of a ‘new path’, see Dahlhaus, Carl, Ludwig van Beethoven: Approaches to his Music, trans. Mary Whittall (Oxford, 1991), 166–80.Google Scholar

25 It is in this way that the analyses of Schubert's sonata D.840 and Mahler's Sixth, Seventh and Ninth Symphonies can be read; see Ratz, Erwin, Gesammelte Aufsätze (Vienna, 1975), 75–92, 123–64.Google Scholar

26 Schmalfeldt, , ‘Towards a Reconciliation’, 265.Google Scholar

27 Rufer, , Composition with Twelve Notes, 38 (see also the ‘basic shape analysis’ in the appendix).Google Scholar

28 See Stephan, Rudolf, ‘Zum Terminus “Grundgestalt”’, Vom musikalischen Denke: Gesammelte Vorträge, ed. Rainer Damm and Andreas Traub (Mainz, 1985), 138–45; for a reconstruction of the history of this term, see Beiche, Michael, ‘Grundgestalt’, Handwörterbuch der musikalischen Terminologie, ed. Hans Heinrich Eggebrecht (Stuttgart, 1983–4), ii; an idiosyncratic interpretation of this term is to be found in Patricia Carpenter, ‘Grundgestalt as Tonal Function’, Music Theory Spectrum, 5 (1983), 15–38.Google Scholar

29 Rufer, , Composition with Twelve Notes, 28.Google Scholar

30 Schoenberg, , The Musical Idea, 170.Google Scholar

31 Ibid., 354.Google Scholar

32 The analysis of many of Schoenberg's 12-note compositions shows that the most important motivic-thematic figure need not coincide with the Grundgestalt of the row or with any of its derived forms; the melody of the first theme of the Adagio of the Third Quartet, op. 30, for example, is based on non-segmental intervals.Google Scholar

33 See Schoenberg, , Fundamentals, 59 (with graph on p. 63), 202–3, 205, 208, 211; Models for Beginners in Composition (New York, 1942), 19; Structural Functions of Harmony, 132 (Example 136/c).Google Scholar

34 See Ratz, , Einführung, 148–9.Google Scholar

35 See Webern, , Über musikalische Formen, ed. Boynton.Google Scholar

36 See Rufer, , Composition with Twelve Notes, 28, 39. Note in addition that for the Schoenberg school the terms ‘antecedent’ and ‘consequent’ are adequate only to designate the circular relationship between the two halves of the period, and do not make sense if applied to a sentence.Google Scholar

37 See Schenker, , Free Composition, ed. and trans. Oster, ii, Figure 154/3, and Schmalfeldt, ‘Towards a Reconciliation’, 272–3.Google Scholar

38 Schoenberg, , Fundamentals, 58.Google Scholar

39 See Webern, , Über musikalische Formen, ed. Boynton. These grace notes in turn refer to the grace notes c“ – e♭” of bar 9; if one sees the model of the liquidation as a fusion of the augmentation of the initial rhythm of motive b with motive d, then the grace notes could be understood, by analogy with that of bar 5 of the first movement of op. 2 no. 1, as a ‘recuperation’ of motive a, which was lost in the thematic fragmentation.Google Scholar

40 See Ratz, , Einführung, 148–9.Google Scholar

41 Schmalfeldt, , ‘Towards a Reconciliation’, 268.Google Scholar

42 Schoenberg, , Fundamentals, 205.Google Scholar

43 Schenker, , Free Composition, ed. and trans. Oster, ii, Figure 154/3. In the first volume of Das Meisterwerk in der Musik (Munich, 1925), 189–90 (trans. Ian Bent as The Masterwork in Music: A Yearbook, Volume I, 1925, ed. William Drabkin, Cambridge, 1995, 106), Schenker dedicated a graph and a more detailed commentary to the principal theme which, for him, extended from bar 1 to bar 21.Google Scholar

44 See Examples 12 and 14 in Schmalfeldt, ‘Towards a Reconciliation’, 266–7, 272–3.Google Scholar

45 Ibid., 273.Google Scholar

46 They share a melodic profile as well as a harmonic sense with bars 53–5.Google Scholar

47 See Schoenberg, , Fundamentals, 208. Schenker drew a graph of the development (Free Composition, ed. and trans. Oster, ii, Figure 154/7) which brings to light the eccentricity of this section; in his exegesis (i, 137), however, he insists that the ‘diminutions’, derived from the main section of the sonata form, should not be understood as an elaboration which leads to something new, but as a reconfirmation of the articulation of the Urlinie.Google Scholar

48 Schenker, , Free Composition, ed. and trans. Oster, i, xxi.Google Scholar

49 Ibid., i, 131. Schenker explains here that he had been thinking about the subject for a long time. To me, at least, it seems that the first traces of the project may be found in his analysis of the variations of the sonata op. 109, where he defers more thorough investigation to ‘the sketch of a new morphology’. See Schenker, Heinrich, Erläuterungsausgaben der letzten fünf Sonaten Beethovens, Op. 109 (Vienna, 1913), 41.Google Scholar

50 Schenker, , Free Composition, ed. and trans. Oster, i, 162 (passage excised from p. 128, trans. John Rothgeb).Google Scholar

51 Scherzo form disappears, while slow-movement form, which Schoenberg's students called Adagio or Andante form, is redefined as ‘four-part form’ (ibid., 141).Google Scholar

52 Ibid., 205. This is the element which distinguishes the tripartition of sonata form from that of the Lied, which can also be realized through a mixture of major and minor or through an auxiliary note.Google Scholar

53 See Schenker's graph of the first movement of op. 57 (Free Composition, ed. and trans. Oster, ii, Figure 154/4); Schoenberg, Fundamentals, 181, 185, 187; idem, Structural Functions, Example 143/c; Webern, Über musikalische Formen, ed. Boynton; Ratz, Einführung, 155–9.Google Scholar

54 See Schenker, , Free Composition, ed. and trans. Oster, ii, Figure 154/3 (cf. note 37 above).Google Scholar

55 Ibid., 134.Google Scholar

56 See Schenker, Heinrich, ‘Beethoven: Sonate Opus 57‘, Der Tonwille, iv/1, 3–33 and attached Urlinietafel, particularly the graph of the development (p. 9).Google Scholar

57 Schenker employs here with a certain audacity a term which, for him, should be an oxymoron: Urliniemotiv.Google Scholar

58 ‘Eine überraschende Verdüsterung […] durch die Wendung zur Dominante von as-moll’ (Ratz, Einführung, 157).Google Scholar

59 Schenker, , Free Composition, ed. and trans. Oster, i, 137.Google Scholar

60 This problematic aspect is also mentioned by Smith (‘Musical Form and Fundamental Structure’, 236). In his 1924 analysis, Schenker emphasizes the shift to F major without, however, providing any explanation for it, apart from a vague reference to the fact that ‘already with the changing notes in bar 156 onward, the colours of the minor mode reappear’ ('Beethoven: Sonate Opus 57’, 12: ‘schon bei den Durchgängen T. 156ff. treten wieder die Mollfarben vor').Google Scholar

61 See the formal outline of the first movement of op. 57 in Ratz, Einführung, 159.Google Scholar

62 ‘Die Terzsprünge sind nur Durchgänge, somit darf weder von Stufen, noch von einem Tonartwechsel gesprochen werden, selbst dann nicht, wenn man den As-Klang vorerst noch als Dominante der Des-Dur-Tonart zu nehmen neigte’ (Schenker, ‘Beethoven: Sonate Opus 57‘, 9).Google Scholar

63 See Lewin, David, ‘Inversional Balance as an Organizing Force in Schoenberg's Music and Thought’, Perspectives of New Music, 6 (1968), 1–21, and David W. Bernstein, ‘Symmetry and Symmetrical Inversion in Turn-of-the-Century Theory and Practice’, Music Theory and the Exploration of the Past, ed. Christopher Hatch and David W. Bernstein (Chicago, 1993), 377–407. A different point of view regarding harmonic motion in the first movement of op. 57 is expressed by Carpenter in ‘Grundgestalt as Tonal Function’; see in particular the illustration based on Schoenberg's regions in Figure 2, p. 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

64 The same motive reappears, transposed and in inversion (E–F), as the main voice in the dramatic opening of the concluding section (bar 239). At the end of the preceding diminuendo it is heard in its original form, so that here the inversional movement is exhibited in close-up: E–F counterbalanced at the fifth, D♭–C.Google Scholar

65 See Federhofer, Hellmut, Beiträge zur musikalischen Gestaltanalyse (Graz, Innsbruck and Vienna, 1950), and Felix Salzer, Structural Hearing: Tonal Coherence in Music (New York, 1952). From the point of view of the history of twentieth-century music theory, the treatment of the formal question in these two texts can be seen as the parallel in the Schenkerian school of the attempt to transfer the principles of functional morphology from tonality to dodecaphony, which was undertaken in the same period by Leibowitz (‘Traité de la composition avec douze sons’, 1950) and Rufer (Composition with Twelve Tones, 1952); this last issue is the subject of my essay ‘Zwölftontechnik und Formenlehre: Zu den Abhandlungen von René Leibowitz und Josef Rufer’, Autorschaft als historische Konstruktion: Arnold Schoenberg – Vorgänger, Zeitgenossen, Nachfolger und Interpreten, ed. Andreas Meyer and Ulrich Scheideler (Stuttgart and Weimar, 2001), 287–321.Google Scholar

66 'Es ist jedoch die thematisch-rhythmische Gliederung, welche diesem Gebilde das notwendige Profil verleiht und es damit zum Leben bringt.’ Felix Salzer, Strukturelles Hören: Der tonale Zusammenhang in der Musik (Heinrichshofen, 1960), 186. In the English version (see Salzer, Structural Hearing, 224), ‘thematisch-rhythmische Gliederung’ appears as ‘design’ and ‘Gebilde’ as ‘pattern’.Google Scholar

67 ‘Dehnung eines im Klanglichen geborgenen Tonraumes’ (Federhofer, Beiträge zur musikalischen Gestaltanalyse, 38).Google Scholar

68 For example, in the preface to his Harmonielehre, Schenker writes: ‘I should like to stress in particular the biological factor in the life of tones. We should get used to the idea that tones have lives of their own, more independent of the artist's pen in their vitality than one would dare to believe’ (Heinrich Schenker, Harmony, ed. Oswald Jonas, trans. Elisabeth Mann Borgese, Chicago, 1954, xxv).Google Scholar

69 Wittgenstein, Ludwig, Philosophical Investigations, trans. G. E. M. Anscombe (2nd edn, Oxford, 1958), 81^e.Google Scholar