# Haydn - Sonata in F major (Hoboken XVI:23) - First movement



## Faell

I hope I post this thread in the correct forum. If no, then the moderators may move it to the correct one.

At the moment I'm studying the Sonata in F major (Hoboken XVI:23) of Joseph Haydn. If I'm studying a classical piano sonata I always analyse all the movements. Certainly the sonataform ones. At the moment I have a rough analytic interpretation. The primary theme ends in bar 12 after a clear perfect authentic cadence in the tonic tonality F major. Immediately after the primary theme a transition which refers to the primary theme at the beginning follows and modulates to the dominant tonality C major.The transition ends on a half cadence in bar 20 and the subordinate theme starts in bar 21.

If this interpretation is correct. I have a question about the primary theme. What kind of theme is it? Is it a sentence, period or hybrid? I would choose for the last one. I have the feeling that we hear a antecedent ending on a weak cadence (imperfect authentic cadense) followed by a continuation function which we would expect in a primary theme that is built like a sentence.

Do you all agree? Or do you have an other interpretation of the theme/sonataform?

The score: http://conquest.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/c/c9/IMSLP00137-Haydn_-_Piano_Sonata_No_23_in_F.pdf


----------



## Ramako

I haven't looked at Caplin's methodology in enough detail recently, so I may be wrong, but I hear:

2 bar basic idea
2 bar 'contrasting' idea ending on an imperfect authentic cadence (this combined with the previous basic idea forms the 'antecedent')
2 bar repetition of the original basic idea with variation
Then approximately 2 bars continuation, 2 bars cadence.

So I largely agree with your interpretation. The only difference is that I hear the repetition of the basic idea after the antecedent as significant: I say the continuation begins only in bar 7 after a varied repetition of bars 1-2 in bars 5-6. In terms of classification, I suppose my interpretation lies half-way between a Hybrid and a compound sentence, therefore.

As for your analysis of the sonata form as a whole, I agree wholeheartedly with that.


----------



## Faell

I agree with your interpretation. Only I would say now after reading Ramako's response and reading the chapter of compound themes in Caplin's book it is a compound sentence with compressed continuation. Thus instead of a 8 measure continuation phase or continuation becomes cadential phase there is the normal 4 measure continuation (becomes cadential) phase as expected in a tight-knit sentence theme. So my revised interpretation of the primary theme is:

m 1-4: cbi
m 5-8: cbi'
m 9-12: continuation becomes cadential

Although Caplin gives in his book only examples with an repetition on another scale degree which doesn't fit in this case. The repetition of the (slightly variated) cbi is on the same scale degree as the first cbi in this case. But this is possible, in my viewpoint. I interprete the repetition of the cbi as an (almost) exact repetition (more in harmonic terms) which is possible for a repetition of the basic idea in a sentence. Do you agree with this interpretation?

I am also curious why you say that a hybrid is still an option.
Ramako, thanks for answering my question.


----------



## Oopopi

Thanks for your gift in music its been helpful


----------



## Ramako

I should apologise - in my previous reading I have somehow missed out 2 bars entirely!

1-4: c.b.i.
5-6: varied repetition of bars 1-2
7-8: ???
9-12: continuation and cadential functions

The crux of the problem is whether bars 7-8 count as a repetition of bars 3-4. They do resemble each other in significant ways, but bars 7-8 also bear classic hallmarks of being continuation (chiefly motivic fragmentation and being sequential in nature).

So what is the theme? If bars 7-8 repeat, varied, bars 3-4, then bars 1-12 are a plain, albeit compressed, compound sentence. If they are continuation, then what we have does not fit easily into the category of formal types, but still strongly resembles a compound sentence (having re-read the section on Hybrid themes, I no longer see how an interpretation based on the Hybrid types is tenable) just a bit less strictly. My analysis of the theme would therefore be as a compound sentence, with a proviso that bars 7-8 have a strong continuational character.


----------



## EdwardBast

There are other less conventional ways of analyzing melodic structures. One that has been unjustly neglected is Denes Bartha's "quaternary stanza structure." The relevant essay is in The Creative World of Beethoven (late 60s?). Bartha's construct deals well with such third phrases of a fragmentary character.


----------



## Faell

Thanks, for your answer Ramako. You helped me a lot with the form analysis of this primary theme. So I agree with you entirely! 

After the primary theme we have a transition which is 'sentential' (not a sentence in strict Caplian terms). There is an idea in bars 12-14, a kind of repetition of the idea in bars 14-16 and then until the medial caesura after the half cadence in C we have something that looks like a continuation becomes cadential phase.

After the transition we have a secondary theme which is built like a sentence:
21-22 = basic idea
23-24 = (almost) exact repetition of the basic idea
25-29 (downbeat) = continuation becomes cadential phase. There is an acceleration in harmonic rhytm, but there is a deceptive cadens.
I think my interpretation until m29 is quite correct. But then the problems start... How can I analyse the bars 29 - 39 (downbeat = Essential Exposition Closure)? Bars 39-46 are a short c-zone in my opinion.

Do you agree with this incomplete analysis of the subordinate theme?


----------



## Ramako

I agree with your analysis of the essentially sentential transition and subordinate theme up to bar 29.

Bars 29 onwards, however, seem quite difficult, and I'm afraid this post is quite long. The difficulties hinge on the interpretation of bars 29-32/33. It's good to bear in mind that subordinate themes are often subject to formal loosening, and as such we should not expect them to fit into formal types easily.

Bars 33-46 are not so difficult to read on their own. I see a b.i. in bars 33-34 (going into 35) repeated in bars 35-36 (going into the downbeat of 37), a continuation in bars 38-40, cadential function in bars 40 into a PAC on the downbeat of bar 42, which is then repeated (the 'one more time' technique) in bars 42 into the final PAC closing the theme in bar 44 (which I believe is the EEC). The rest of bar 44 to 46 is then a codetta. Thus bars 33-44 would be a sentence subject to considerable formal loosening, with a codetta 44-46.

Bars 29-32 almost seem like a separate unit altogether. The downbeat of 29 seems to be a deceptive cadence ending the previous theme, and bar 32 seems cadential: a half-cadence. So if bar 32 ends a section, what does it end? Having read the relevant pages on the loosening of cadential function in subordinate themes in Classical Form (starts p101 in my book), I thought that bar 29 might actually a kind of evaded cadence: a deceptive cadence which bars 29-32 then 'transform' into the half-cadence at bar 32. I take this from Caplin's footnote (number 24 in my edition) on the section on deceptive cadences, which says:

"If the final chord of the progression groups with the subsequent material and thus represents not a goal but, rather, a new beginning, then the potential authentic cadence is _evaded_"

I'm a bit uneasy with this reading. Does bar 29 truly represent a 'new beginning'? The deceptive cadence in bar 29 does seem to give at least partial closure to the previous theme, and it's main motive seems to be related to, perhaps even fragmented from, the b.i. of bars 21-22. What further complicates the matter is the fact that bars 30 and 31 repeat the idea of bar 29 over different harmonies, and that even the b.i. in bars 33-34 seem, in some ways, to represent a continuation to this idea, bearing two major hallmarks of the function: fragmentation of the motive of bar 29, and an acceleration of harmonic rhythm.

Thus my overall interpretation of the subordinate theme section of this exposition is of two sentential themes - from bar 21 to the deceptive cadence on the downbeat of 29, and from bar 33 to the PAC on the downbeat of 44 - with a short connective passage (bars 29-32) and a codetta (bars 44-46). The precise function of the connecting passage is obscure, but seems to be compromise the end of the previous theme and the beginning of the following one, resulting in a more continuous flow from the beginning of the subordinate theme section in bar 21 to the PAC in bar 44. It does this by bringing a double end to the theme beginning in bar 21: is bar 29 its true end, or 32? By 32 it is certainly over. Similarly, the continuational relation of bar 33 to bar 29 makes the theme in bar 33 sound like it starts in the middle. Notwithstanding, I do think bars 21-29, and 33-44 are basically satisfactory sentences.

Raising the idea of the EEC brings us into Hepokoskian territory, and I fear this post is already too long without going into that area, however I am fairly confident that bar 44 is the EEC. The first PAC after the MC is bar 42, but the repetition of S material after this first PAC means that bar 44 must be the EEC.

If you have access and time, I recommend browsing 'Musical form, forms and Formenlehre: three methodological reflections' (by Caplin, Hepokoski and Webster). Caplin's essay is good, and the discussion between him and Hepokoski I think is revealing.


----------



## Faell

Thanks Ramako! Thank you very much for your help! I will certainly read the article you've recommended me.


----------



## Faell

I have now analysed the development and the recapitulation too. This is my interpretation:

Development: I am not sure that this interpretation is correct!
Precore = m. 47-50
Core = m. 50-79
Retransition = m. 79-85

Recapitulation:
Primary theme: m. 86-96
Transition liquidated
Subordinate theme: m. 97-125, again 2 sentences: m. 97-111 (the cadential progression is expanded and the cadens isn't deceptive, but an IAC) again followed by a connective passage (m. 111-114 (downbeat = IAC)). Then there is the second sentence (m. 114-122), again one more time and a clear PAC in 125 which is again followed by a codetta.

Some important cadences which structure the form:
Exposition:
FPC = IAC (m.11-12)
MC = V:HC (m. 16) immediately followed by a very short caesura fill.
EEC = VAC (m.43-44)

Recapitulation:
FPC = MC (thanks too liquidation of transition) = I:HC (m.96) again followed by a very short caesura fill.
ESC = IAC (m.124-125)


----------



## Ramako

I think your analysis of the recapitulation is correct, and your remarks about the overall structure.

I have consulted _Classical Form_, and from what I can glean on the section on developments, which is not entirely clear, he says that core technique, while very common in developments, is not always present, and is less common in Haydn than in Mozart and Beethoven. He does not specify it, that I could see, but one is left assuming that one should analyse the development in terms of standard phrase structures.

The idea of a 'core' is, according to Caplin's definition, a large phrase (about 4 bars) which is then treated sequentially. This technique, does not seem to be in use here: although there is much sequence, it treats rather small fragments.

I would thus analyse the development as such:

47-50 - presentation of initial c.b.i. - without a repetition!
50-57 - continuation (including a modulation) and cadential into a HC in d minor on the downbeat of 58
58-60 - standing on the dominant

This makes up a very loosely-knit compound sentence.

61-62 - newish b.i. based on previous material
63-64 - b.i. repetition
65-67 - continuation
68-76 - a further continuation in which the motives are totally liquidised into the arpegaic figure. Leads into a PAC in d minor on the downbeat of bar 77.

This is thus an even more loose sentence. The development we should expect to be even less tight-knit than the subordinate theme. This is implicit in the core technique, which is somewhat loose, however I think he does say this specifically somewhere, although I'm not sure where. It does seem intuitive though.

77-78 is a model, which, linked by 79, is repeated in sequence in bars 80-81, and then extended into bar 82. Bars 83-5 constitute further standing on the dominant in F major.

Bars 76-85 I thus make the retransition.

Your analysis of pre-core, core and retransition, certainly captures the large-scale structure and mood of the development, however, as far as I can tell, it does not do so within Caplin's definitions, seeming more similar to Hepokoski's plan of the development, consisting of 'entry zone', 'central action zone' and retransition.


----------

