Harmonic structure as adeterminant ofmelodic organization

Musiciansand nonmusiciansindicated whethera two-noteprobefollowing a tonallystructured melody occurred in the melody. The critical probes were taken from one of three locations in the melody: the two notes (1) ending the first phrase, (2) straddling the phrase boundary, and (3) beginning the second phrase. As predicted, the probe that straddled the phrase boundary was more difficult to recognizethan either of the within-phrase probes. These findings suggest that knowledge of harmonic structure influences perceptual organization of melodies in ways analogous to the influence of clause relations on the perceptual organization of sentences. They also provide evidence that training plays an important role in refining listeners' sensitivityto harmonicvariables. Music listening is a complex perceptual task that calls on specific knowledge and perceptual skills. In order to appreciate a musical work, the listener must be able to organize and integrate its parts in structurally consistent ways. To do this, the listener must be sensitive to the structural properties of music through which musical meanings are conveyed. Music theorists have described its internal structure in terms of harmonic systems that formally represent the structural regularities in traditional Western compositional practice. Harmonic structure specifies the systematic relationships underlying tonal organization. Harmony provides the structural framework of a musical "language" and, thus, functions as a part ofa musical "grammar." The present research explores the possibility that listeners use intuitive knowledge of the system of harmonic rules to organize their perception of melodies. Studies of simple pattern perception and learning (Garner, 1974; Kotovsky & Simon, 1973; Leeuwenberg, 1972; Restle, 1970; Vitz & Todd, 1969) observe that general rules and procedures govern the analysis of serial patterns regardless of modality. Using different kinds of stimuli (random tones, flashing lights, numbers, etc.), these studies demonstrate that listeners are able to

[1]  G. Suci,et al.  The Validity of the Probe-Latency Technique for Assessing Structure in Language , 1967, Language and speech.

[2]  Walter J Dowling,et al.  Recognition of melodic transformations: Inversion, retrograde, and retrograde inversion , 1972 .

[3]  Frank Restle,et al.  Serial Patterns: The Role of Phrasing. , 1972 .

[4]  D. Mewhort,et al.  Recognition memory for single tones with and without context. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[5]  M. Singer,et al.  Thematic Structure and the Integration of Linguistic Information. , 1976 .

[6]  W. Siegel,et al.  Categorical perception of tonal intervals: Musicians can't tell sharp irotaflat , 1977 .

[7]  S. Locke,et al.  Categorical perception in a non-linguistic mode. , 1973, Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior.

[8]  J. Fodor,et al.  The Psychology of Language , 1974 .

[9]  J G Martin,et al.  Rhythmic (hierarchical) versus serial structure in speech and other behavior. , 1972, Psychological review.

[10]  C. Krumhansl.  The psychological representation of musical pitch in a tonal context , 1979, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  H. Simon,et al.  Empirical tests of a theory of human acquisition of concepts for sequential patterns , 1973 .

[12]  B. White.  Recognition of distorted melodies. , 1960, The American journal of psychology.

[13]  W. R. Garner.  The Processing of Information and Structure , 1974 .

[14]  Richard Jackson Harris,et al.  Memory for Negation in Coordinate and Complex Sentences. , 1976 .

[15]  B. Leshowltz,et al.  Serial position effects for tonal stimuli , 1974, Memory & cognition.

[16]  Annabel J. Cohen,et al.  Recognition of Transposed Melodic Sequences , 1976 .

[17]  F. Restle,et al.  Serial pattern learning: Pretraining of runs and trills , 1970 .

[18]  W. D. Ward,et al.  Further studies in musical interval perception , 1975 .

[19]  Thomas G. Bever,et al.  The underlying structures of sentences are the primary units of immediate speech processing , 1969 .

[20]  J. G. Martin,et al.  Rhythmic structure in auditory temporal pattern perception and immediate memory. , 1974, Journal of experimental psychology.

[21]  W. Dowling.  Scale and contour: Two components of a theory of memory for melodies. , 1978 .

[22]  Frank Restle,et al.  Organization of Serial Pattern Learning , 1970 .

[23]  Davin Caplan.  Clause boundaries and recognition latencies for words in sentences , 1972 .

[24]  A. Gregory,et al.  Perception of clicks in music , 1978 .

[25]  Thomas G. Bever,et al.  Interclause relations and clausal processing , 1978 .

[26]  E. Leeuwenberg.  Quantitative specification of information in sequential patterns. , 1969, Psychological review.

[27]  Walter J Dowling,et al.  Rhythmic groups and subjective chunks in memory for melodies , 1973 .

[28]  Frank Restle,et al.  Theory of Serial Pattern Learning: Structural Trees. , 1970 .

[29]  Paul C. Vitz,et al.  A coded element model of the perceptual processing of sequential stimuli. , 1969 .

[30]  W. Dowling,et al.  Contour, interval, and pitch recognition in memory for melodies. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  Murray Singer,et al.  The Role of Grammatical Relations in the Abstraction of Linguistic Ideas. , 1973 .

[32]  Diana Deutsch,et al.  Memory and Attention in Music , 1977 .

[33]  M K Tanenhaus,et al.  Functional clauses and sentence segmentation. , 1978, Journal of speech and hearing research.