The Butterfly Schema in the Classical Instrumental Style: A Product of the Tendency for Congruence

Abstract

This article integrates theories that explain musical schemata as psychological and statistical associations of features with those that define schemata as collections of cognitively generated archetypes. It is proposed that styles contain a spectrum of features but tend towards congruence. This propensity is thought to originate in cognition and becomes manifest in and between the features of styles. A localised structure, termed the butterfly schema, is argued to be in part a product of the tendency for congruence which is incorporated into the Classical instrumental style. An analysis of the styles and schemata of the Baroque, Classical and Romantic periods explicates their distinct forms of congruent structuring. A survey of European instrumental music of circa 1750–1850 compares the quantity and type of butterfly schemata in samples from the first half of this time period with those from the second. It is found that butterfly schemata with highly congruent features are more common in the earlier, Classical‐period samples, suggesting that they are a product of the tendency for congruence in the particular form defined.

What Is Haydn Doing in a John Field Nocturne?

“…12 Taking the last note of each five‐note figure as the structural one, Haydn's pattern covers $$\hat 8$$–$$\hat 4$$–$$\hat 7$$–$$\hat 3$$, so that the first and third, and the second and fourth, degrees form voice‐leading pairs, with $$\hat 8$$ moving down a semitone to $$\hat 7$$ (E♭–D) and $$\hat 4$$ moving down a semitone to $$\hat 3$$ (A♭–G). This might be regarded as a variant on the Meyer schema, which is based on the succession $$\hat 8$$–$$\hat 7$$–$$\hat 4$$–$$\hat 3$$,13 or it could be understood as one possible realisation of the more encompassing pattern that Trevor Rawbone and Steven Jan (2020) have dubbed the Butterfly. Field replaces the second scale degree of Haydn's pattern, $$\hat 4$$, with a $$\hat 6$$, meaning the pitch B in D major (bar 34 2 ), and it could be argued that he was independently basing his theme on a changing‐note schema – and thus simply drawing on collective musical property – but then distorts it through the different pitch structure of the second five‐note unit.…”

Revisiting the Galant in Gjerdingenian Schemata

“…On one level, then, the coherence and historicity of Gjerdingen's schemata requires that they exist on an equal structural plane that is relevant to eighteenth‐century musicianship. To this end, a range of investigations articulating the structural and functional characteristics of galant schemata are helpful in relating the elements of the schematicon to each other and situating them within the structure of eighteenth‐century music (Froebe 2014 and 2015; Caplin 2015; Rice 2017; Rabinovitch 2020; and Rawbone and Jan 2020). For instance, Trevor Rawbone and Steven Jan (2020, p. 119) propose that Gjerdingenian schemata are constrained by a cognitively derived ‘tendency for congruence’ and thus often contain the co‐occurrence of various harmonic, rhythmic and textual features.…”

“…To this end, a range of investigations articulating the structural and functional characteristics of galant schemata are helpful in relating the elements of the schematicon to each other and situating them within the structure of eighteenth‐century music (Froebe 2014 and 2015; Caplin 2015; Rice 2017; Rabinovitch 2020; and Rawbone and Jan 2020). For instance, Trevor Rawbone and Steven Jan (2020, p. 119) propose that Gjerdingenian schemata are constrained by a cognitively derived ‘tendency for congruence’ and thus often contain the co‐occurrence of various harmonic, rhythmic and textual features. Meanwhile, Rabinovitch (2020, p. 117) shows how these schemata commonly articulate a clearly defined hierarchy of primary and subsidiary scale degrees.…”

Music in Evolution and Evolution in Music

“…Beyond this, I thank Trevor for useful discussions of schemata in music, and the extent to which they draw upon innate perceptual-cognitive factors. Trevor skilfully pulled me towards a "generative" position in a joint article we wrote (Rawbone & Jan, 2020), so he will perhaps be disappointed to see that I have reverted to type here in endorsing a more "associative-statistical" view, and thus a more full-blooded Darwinism, to understand cultural evolution, in schemata as in other types of musical patterning. Nevertheless, I did stick with his wise advice to change the title (or, rather, to make the planned subtitle the title): as well as being satisfyingly palindromic, Music in Evolution and Evolution in Music is a better reflection of the content of the book than was my original title.…”