The Reception of Heinrich Schenker’s Concepts Outside the United States as Indicated by Publications Based on His Works: A Preliminary Study

PART I: INTRODUCTION

The influence of Heinrich Schenker on professional musical discourse cannot be overstated. It is now almost seventy years since Schenker passed away; his approach to musical hearing and musical analysis has grown steadily since the posthumous publication of Der freie Satz in 1935. Witnesses to this are the burgeoning secondary literature and the reprints and translations of his principal theoretical works. His ideas have made their way from the outer fringes into the mainstream of music-theoretical discourse. In a 1988 article, Allen Forte remarked, ”it is difficult to pick up a recent professional journal or book without finding an article which has musical illustrations that contain Schenkerian beams, slurs, and other notational apparatus.”[1] Six years later, David Gagné summed up the situation this way:

The theories of Heinrich Schenker are taught in the graduate programs of most American schools of music; where courses range from one to three semesters in length and are often required for theory majors and elective for those in other degree programs. That familiarity with Schenker’s ideas does not tend to be required for performers, conductors, or ”education” majors is disheartening inasmuch as Schenker intended his theories to be especially useful (indeed explicitly intended) for the performer and conductor. Over the last few decades, Schenker’s analytical approach has moved into the forefront of music-theoretical discourse, at least in the United States, and nearly all of his major works have been translated into English, as the following table shows:[3]

Thus it seems that ”Schenkerian analysis” is, ironically, an American music-theoretical tradition. But how have his ideas been received in the rest of the world? It is well known that Schenker was an intellectual elitist, as well as a fervently nationalistic Austro-German citizen. As such, he would likely not have approved of the widespread dissemination of his ideas to America, France, Russia, East Asia, Scandinavia, and Eastern Europe. In this article, I survey the publications on Schenker and his analytical method in countries outside the United States, which have been drawn from my recent research guide on Schenker.[4] The countries represented will be Austria and Germany, Brazil, Bulgaria, China, Croatia, The Czech Republic, Finland, France, Great Britain, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, Poland, Russia, Slovenia, and Spain.

At present, Schenker’s final work, Der freie Satz has been published, in its entirety, in five languages: German (1935, rev. 1969), English (Ernst Oster, 1979), French (Nicolas Meeús, 1993), Chinese (Chen Shi-Ben, 1997), and Russian (Boris Plotnikov, 2004). These also exists a translation of one chapter exists in Polish (Krzysztof Mazur, 1998). Instructive texts on Schenker’s approach to analysis exist in Italian (William Drabkin, Susanna Pasticci and Egidio Pozzi, 1995), Polish (Stanisław Będkowski, Agnieszka Chwiłek, and Iwona Lindstedt, 1997), and Chinese (Yu Su-xian, 1993). It is the sincere hope of this writer that some of the prominent Schenkerian scholars in other parts of the world (especially Italy, Finland, and the Czech Republic) take the opportunity to bring Schenker’s ideas to their countries in the language of their people, whether in exegeses of Schenker’s analytical method or in translations of his primary works.

Schenker’s Vienna was slow to accept his revolutionary ideas, even after his death. The theories of Hugo Riemann were too firmly ensconced in the Austro-German academies and conservaries. Despite the efforts of some of his prominent students on his behalf, Schenker never held an academic position. Rather, he supported himself through private teaching in piano and theory. Many of his students were influential musicians: scholars and pedagogues, conductors, and composers, notably Felix-Eberhard von Cube (1903-1987), John Petrie Dunn (1878-1933), Anthony von Hoboken (1887-1983), Oswald Jonas (1897-1978), Erwin Ratz (1898-1973), Hermann Roth (1882-1934), Felix Salzer (1904-1986), Otto Vrieslander (1880-1950), Hans Weisse (1892-940), and Victor Zuckerkandl (1896-1965). These men all studied with Schenker and his influence is evident in their writing and teaching.[5]

Two significant books that employed Schenker’s method emerged in the 1930s: Oswald Jonas’s Das Wesen des Musikalisches Kunstwerkes (Universal Edition, 1932) and Felix Salzer’s Sinn und Wesen des Abendländischen Mehrstimmigkeits (Saturn-Verlag, 1935). These two men would go on to collaborate on a short-lived periodical, Der Dreiklang, which contained analyses of individual pieces by Schenker’s students, articles of a theoretical nature, and reviews of books and concerts.

Felix-Eberhard von Cube, one of the few Schenker students who remained in Germany during the Second World War, authored a Lehrbuch der musikalsichen Kunstgesetze between 1934 and 1955. This work was published in 1988 in an English translation, but remained unpublished during Von Cube’s life. Von Cube, along with Moriz Violin, founded the ”Schenker-Institut” in Hamburg (1931) later to be called the ”Heinrich-Schenker-Akademie” in 1951 (having been closed upon the ascendancy of the NSDAP).

In recent years, the work of Hellmut Federhofer has provided access to Schenker’s lesser-known writings, such as his diaries, letters, and articles for the periodical press. His two books, Heinrich Schenker nach Tagebüchern und Briefen and Heinrich Schenker als Essayist und Kritiker are of immense value to researchers, for they reveal much about Schenker’s early aesthetic outlook (especially the latter book) as well as his reaction to contemporaneous events. Federhofer, moreover, has catalogued Schenker’s letter and diary entries according to (1) biography; (2) connections to artists, scholars, and writers on music; (3) music critics; (4) opinions about authors, philosophers, writers and literary works; (5) Schenker's worldview; and (6) Schenker in the intellectual context of his time.

There have been, to my knowledge, only two articles on Schenker in Bulgarian (excepting the Kholopov book cited above). Both are by Milena Bozhikova, Professor at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, and appear in Българската музцкознанце [”Bulgarian Musicology”]. The first article is called ”Хайнрих Шенкер и Диагозата му за Музикално Съвършенство” [”Heinrich Schenker and His Diagnosis for Musical Perfection”], which examines Vassil Kaznadjiev’s music using the Schenker approach. Bozhikova has also authored a monograph on Kaznadjiev (published by the Academy in 1999). Her second article on Schenker applies the method to Bulgarian folk music and discusses the extensions of the Schenker theory made by Felix Salzer, Roy Travis, Joseph Straus, and James Baker.

Two of the most prominent music schools in mainland China are the Shanghai Conservatory of Music and the Central Conservatory of Music in Beijing (established in 1927 and 1950 respectively) both of which publish scholarly journals. As might be expected, the bulk of the articles deal with scholarship in Chinese music, with western music theory (and Schenker in particular) being the exception rather than the rule. According to Wai-Ling Cheong’s assessment of the situation, ”articles on theory are at best marginally original in approach. They serve mainly to introduce various theoretical ideas rather than to open up new directions.”[6] Furthermore, Cheong suggests, the policy of the conservatories are to train composers and performers, not to produce scholars.

Of paramount importance to the dissemination and understanding of Schenker’s ideas is the 1997 translation by Chen Shi-Ben of Der freie Satz, Schenker’s final work. Shi-Ben is (or was) a professor at the Central Conservatory in Beijing. It has been suggested by Wai-Ling Cheong that Alexander Goehr[7] may have introduced Schenkerian theory to the conservatory during his 1980 visit, and that the conservatory began offering courses in Schenkerian analysis in 1987.[8]

One article conspicuous for its breadth is a six-part piece by Yang Yan-Di entitled, ”A critical survey of analytical theories in twentieth-century musicology” which appeared in The Art of Music: Journal of the Shanghai Conservatory of Music (ISSN 1000-4270) (also known as ”Yinyueh ishu”) in 1995-1996. The six parts are: (1) a historical overview of musical analytic techniques; (2) Schenkerian analysis; (3) expansion and modification of Schenkerian analysis; (4) motivic analysis of Schoenberg; (5) psychological approaches, e.g., of Leonard B. Meyer; and (6) conclusions.

The Journal of the Central Conservatory of Music (ISSN 1001-9871) contains three articles on Schenker by Yu Su-xian, the author of an introduction to Schenker’s theory in the Chinese language. The first article, from 1989 is an analysis of the Fugue in C from Hindemith’s Ludus Tonalis. A second article serves as a general introduction to Schenker’s method, and the third seems to examine the extension of Schenker’s method to pre- and post-tonal theory as well as traditional Chinese music. Su-xian’s introduction to Schenker includes chapters on harmonic analysis, contrapuntal analysis, melodic analysis, structure and prolongation, double function (i.e., chords functioning as both contrapuntal and harmonic), mixture, application of contrapuntal prolongation and structure, form, and tonality. It contains numerous musical analyses, mostly drawn from Felix Salzer’s Structural Hearing.[9]

In the early 1980s, two articles by Aleksandra Wagner appeared in the Croatian journal Zvuk [”Sound”]. The first (1981) examines Schenker’s analysis of Chopin’s op. 10/8 and explains basic tenets of Schenkerian theory, focusing on the biological metaphors Schenker employs. Wagner cites criticisms of Schenker by Charles Rosen, which center on Schenker’s apparent neglect of rhythm. In her second article (1984), Wagner discusses again the basic ideas of Schenker’s theory and discusses Schenker’s analysis of Schumann’s Aus meinen Tränen spriessen from Dichterliebe, examining semiological and semantic approaches as well.

Sources on Schenker in the Czech Republic are limited to one short monograph and an article. The monograph, Lubomír Spurný’s Heinrich Schenker - dávný neznámý [”Heinrich Schenker – The Old Unknown”] was published in 2000 and is an introduction to Schenker’s ideas and analytic method. It contains excerpts from Harmonielehre and Der freie Satz in additions to translations of an analytical essay from Der Tonwille and four of Schenker’s critical essays. Spurný discusses Schenker’s theories in the context of Sechter and Riemann, and discusses the polemic of Federhofer and Dahlhaus regarding their reactions to voice-leading analysis. He then proceeds to explain Schenker’s organic model from Der freie Satz, followed by a discussion of Schenker’s thought vis-à-vis Goethe and Hegel. The work concludes with a Polish-Czech glossary of Schenkerian terms.

Tom Christensen’s article, ”Hudební teorie v programu americké muzikologie” in Hudebni veda [”Musicology”] contains an overview of American methods of analysis, including the ideas of Milton Babbitt, George Perle and Heinrich Schenker.

The primary institution in Finland for the acquiring a knowledge of Schenkerian analytical techniques is the Sibelius Academy, the only institution in that country to provide a thorough curriculum in music theory. Three professors at the institution, Lauri Suurpää, Olli, Väisälä, and Veijo Murtomäki have published analyses that apply Schenker’s ideas, with Suurpää being probably the most orthodox in his outlook, having written a thorough exegesis of Schenker’s theoretical ideas (1993) as well as analytical studies on Brahms, Mozart, Mendelssohn, and Sibelius. Olli Väisälä has published an article exploring whether the idea of prolongation can be applied to a non-tonal work (exemplified in Schoenberg’s op. 19/2) which has been published in both English and Finnish journals.

According to Nicolas Meeùs, Professor of Music at the Sorbonne, the spread of Schenkerian ideas in France began with Célestin Deliège’s 1984 book Les fondements de la musique tonale: Une perspective post-schenkérienne. Meeùs suggests that Deliège may have encountered Schenker’s ideas at a conference at the IRCAM (i.e., Institut de Recherche et Coordination Acoustique/Musique) where Fred Lerdahl spoke. In his book, Deliège explains and critiques Schenker’s approach to tonal music. The fist part of the book is an explanation of Schenker’s analytical concepts, and the second is devoted to topics that Deliège feels are neglected by Schenker’s approach: prosody, thematic analysis, semantics, and musical style. In his review of the book, Joseph Swain sums up Deliège’s ”amendments” to Schenker’s theory as (1) a revision of the Ursatz (allowing for a structural middle voice), (2) a revision of the three hierarchic levels (Deliège tends to use five or six rather than three); and (3) ”a new emphasis on recursive melodic and harmonic patterns in musical structures”.[10] Deliege followed this book with an article (1986) that examines Schumann’s Träumerei. He suggests that Schenker’s theory is ”close to the ideal” because it has a ”perceptual basis.”

A more thorough study of Schenker’s life and works was published in 1993: Nicolas Meeùs’s Heinrich Schenker: Une Introduction. Designed to be a companion book to his translation of Der freie Satz, Meeùs discusses (1) the man and his works; (2) the theory of Free Composition; and (3) evaluations and criticisms of the theory. He includes a most excellent (albeit un-annotated) bibliography of primary and secondary materials, arranged chronologically, as well as a French-German glossary of terms.

According to Jonathan Dunsby, the emergence of Schenkerian theory in Great Britain, was partly due to a more ”disciplined” approach to composition and theory brought back by those who had studied abroad in the decades following the Second World War. In his assessment of Schenkerian theory in Great Britain, Dunsby writes, ”those who had studied in Paris or Princeton legitimized the disciplined approach to music-making and, vicariously in most cases, legitimized the inherently disciplined approach to tonal theory and analysis offered, more than anyone else, by Schenker.”[11] Dunsby goes on to note that the Schenker approach was ”disseminated primarily through the University of London” and primarily via Felix Salzer’s Structural Hearing. More recently (1993), a Schenker seminar was held at Royal Holloway in 1993 conducted by Robert Samuels and Howard Wilde. Someof the writers cited in this article were in attendance, including Lubomír Spurný, Stanislaw Bedkowski, Iwona Lindstedt, Agnieszka Chwilek, N. Gligo, Leon Stefanija and Alicja Jarzebska, making England is one of the gateways through which Schenker’s ideas have reached the rest of the world. The British journal, Music Analysis regularly published articles on (or employing) Schenkerian analytical techniques.

The single Hungarian source available is not explicitly Schenkerian, but does cite Schenker’s ideas, as expressed in his Beitraz zur Ornamentik, on the proper performance of the various types of 4-note turn. Examples are taken from the opening tenor aria of Mozart’s Die Entführung aus dem Serail, and the three types of turns occur (1) above a note, (2) below a note, and (3) above a dot. Each type, the author suggests, requires a different interpretation in performance.

According to Josef Goldenberg, Schenkerian theory was brought to Israel by Jonathan Kramer and was practiced mainly at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Four dissertations or master’s theses were produced in 1986, 1998, and 2001, two of which (Sara Pavlov and Luba Russakovsky) are in Hebrew and two of which (Josef Goldenberg and Napthali Wagner) are in English. Wagner’s dissertation (1986) examines how apparent tonics are used in tonal music of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and provides a theoretical framework for determining whether a given chord is a true or an apparent tonic. Pavlov’s thesis examines the different ways in which Chopin used the Neapolitan chord (as a harmonic, melodic, and contrapuntal entity) and shows how the position of the chord (five-three or six-three) affects the structural voice leading. Russakovsky’s dissertation combines more traditional analytic procedures with Schenker's voice-leading approach, and suggests that the re-transitional dominant is of crucial importance, and that its delay causes a redistribution of areas of tension and relaxation. Goldenberg’s dissertation discusses the problems of seventh-chord prolongations; states that it (1) violates the control of strict counterpoint over free composition; and (2) violates the normative distinction between horizontalization of chordal tones in skips and stepwise motion via non-chordal tones (since the seventh and octave are adjacent tones within the same harmony).

Although none of Schenker’s major theoretical works have been translated into Italian, there exist a great number of translations of English articles, for example by Ian Bent, William Drabkin, and Rick Cohn, or translations of German articles by Hellmut Federhofer. The most significant work, as far as translations of Schenker are concerned, is the article by Giorgio Sanguinetti, ”L'opera italiana nella critica musicale di Heinrich Schenker,” which contains translations of ten of Schenker’s early essays on Italian opera. Sanguinetti is the most prolific Schenkerian scholar in Italy, having recently authored articles examining the relationships between Rudolph Réti and Schenker as well as the translations cited above. One very important contribution is the short exegesis of Schenker’s analytical method (Analisi Schenkeriana, 1995) authored collaboratively by William Drabkin, Susanna Pasticci and Egidio Pozzi. Short introductory essays on Schenker’s approach can be found in the writings of Elena Modena and Franco Scarpellini Pancrazi.

One of the earlier translations of Schenker’s work, dating from 1979 is a Japanese translation of Ein Beitrag zur Ornamentik by Akiko Noro and Akiko Tamamoto. This work is cited in RILM (accession no. 79-01597-bt), but repeated attempts to procure it have been unsuccessful. This is the only known Japanese translation of one of Schenker’s works. A short thesis (ca. 50 pages) exploring Schenker’s Harmonielehre and comparing Schenker’s ideas to those of Riemann was written in 1982 by Erisa Yakoto for Ochanomizu Women’s University (one of only two all-female Japanese Universities, the other being Nara college). In her thesis, Yakoto eludicates Schenker’s ideas and explores the limits of their applicability (functional harmony), stressing the connection between the analytical method and what one actually hears in the music.

In Holland, as in France, Schenkerian research seems to be thriving. Although there exists no Dutch translation of primary source materials, the Tijdschrift voor Muziektheorie [”Dutch Journal of Music Theory”] routinely (at least in the last few issues) publishes articles on Schenkerian topics in Dutch, English, or German by native Dutch scholars or by invited guest authors. Many of these articles stem from conferences devoted to Schenker, such as the Symposium Heinrich Schenker at the University of Utrecht held May 12-13 of 2001, which featured seven papers, five of which were published in the subsequent journal.

In Poland, the journal Muzyka (volume 31/4, 1986) was devoted entirely to Schenkerian articles by Maciej Gołąb, Zofia Helman, and Hellmit Federhofer (translated by Halmen and Gołąb). The issue also includes reviews of the popular American Forte-Gilbert Schenkerian textbook, Célestin Deliège’s Fondements cited above, and Federhofer’s book comparing the systems of Kurth, Schenker, and Riemann. Two other important Polish works are Krysztof Mazur’s translation of Chapter 3 of Der freie Satz (in Muzyka 43/1: 79-92) and the exegesis of Schenker’s ideas, Analiza schenkerowska, which was authored by Stanisław Będkowski, Agnieszka Chwiłek, and Iwona Lindstedt and based on the Allen Forte-Steven Gilbert textbook, widely in use in the United States.

RUSSIA

One of the most prominent music theorists in twentieth-century Russia was Yuri Kholopov (1932-2003) who, during his lifetime published more than 700 articles. His first publication on Schenker was a 178-page monograph in the Bulgarian language consisting of an introduction to Schenker’s concepts and a packet of hand-copied examples from Schenker’s Der freie Satz, Harmonielehre, and Salzer’s Structural Hearing. The following year he produced a shorter article (the only one in the Russian language) can be found in a collection of essays, Әстетические очерки [”Essays on Aesthetics”], published in 1979 by the Marxism-Leninism chair of Moscow Conservatory. The article is in three parts: an overview of Schenker’s aesthetics, basic tenets of the theory, and a summary of the merits of the approach. In the first part, Schenker’s aesthetics are discussed along with ideas of Oswald Spengler and Friederich Nietzsche. The second part describes Schenker’s metaphysics as being inextricably linked to his analytical ideas (which are presented generally and matter-of-factly). In the third section, Kholopov points out two crucial reasons why, irrespective of ”conservative and, sometimes, utterly reactionary aesthetic-philosophical position of the author, his theory seems, to a great extent, true and fruitful. Firstly, the music theory system is not only derived from a definite aesthetic philosophical platform, but possesses comparative independence” (252) and ”secondly, the value of Schenker’s achievements in the theory proves that, in his system of views, there probably are, though perhaps in garbled presentation, elements of truth. (253).[12]

Two shorter articles on Schenker have appeared in the pages of The Russian periodical, Муыкалъная академця [”Musical Academy”] and its predecessor Советская музіка [”Soviet Music”] by Victor Barskii and Levon Akopian. Barskii’s is one of the few Soviet-era, Russian-language publications about Schenker, which presents basic concepts in a nontechnical manner and includes a discussion about Schenker’s aesthetic ideas. Barskii also mentions the work of Schachter, Epstein, Benjamin, and Yurii Kholopov. Akopian’s article is in two parts and Akopian uses the term ”structural hearing,” taken from Felix Salzer, as a category encompassing a wide range of theoretical ideas (both Western and Russian) that he places under the category of ”formal approaches.” These should show ”conceptual clarity,” ”standardization,” and ”generalization” (part 1, 181-182). Schenkerian theory appears only in part 2. The author’s approach is based largely on the work of Felix Salzer, but cites Schenker and others as well. It presents a brief, but skillful summary and evaluation of the theory. Included is a graph of the Mittelgrund of Chopin’s Ballade in G minor, taken from Der freie Satz. An additional long section of the article concerns various extensions of and responses to Schenkerian theory, including the work of Epstein and Narmour. Particular emphasis is given to the generative theory of Lerdahl and Jackendoff. Since Akopian’s audience would have had very little access to Schenkerian theory during the Soviet era, a part of his goal appears to be to place a variety of unfamiliar ideas in a conceptual landscape in relationship to each other.[13] One final article from Муыкалъная академця, by Maciej Gołąb, is entitled ”Анализ н Произвдение” [”analysis and work”]. This is a translation from the Polish and is a critique of Schenker’s concepts.

The most active Schenkerian scholar in Russia today is Boris Plotnikov, whose translation of Der freie Satz was recently published by the Krasnoyarsk Academy of Music and Theatre. Plotniklov has been active since the late 1990s and specializes in the blending of Schenkerian techniques with various other analytical techniques (such as semiotics, musical dramaturgy, and Asafiev’s intonational theory). His teaching stresses the connection between Schenker’s analytical technique as ”pure theory” and its performance implications. His recent monograph, Очеки и Зтюдьі по Методологии Музьікального Анализа [”Essays and Studies on Methods of Musical Analysis”] contains discussions of Schenker’s analytical method as applied to music of Debussy, Shostakovich, and Rimsky-Korsakov (sometimes combined with other methods). Plotnikov’s writings include exegesis of Schenker’s ideas aimed at performers, suggesting to them that, ”the ultimate goal [of studying and producing graphs] consists in teaching students to graph in imagination, to trace lines that can be heard and produced by individuals on their instruments” (Plotnikov, 2000: 124).

The lone Slovenian article is by Leon Stefanija. Stefanija’s article discusses the various understandings of compositional structures from ancient Greek mathematical ratios to language-based theories of music. He examines Schenker’s writings in conjunction with Koch, Forkel, and various musical treatises from the tenth through the twentieth centuries.

One of Schenker’s most important early works, the Harmonielehre of 1906 has been translated into Spanish by Ramon Barce. As is typical with most of the translations, the examples are reproduced photographically from the original rather than being re-engraved. Other Spanish or Portuguese sources of interest include an article by Marcos Lacerda on the contributions of Schenker and Schoenberg to musical analysis and an article by Pablo Fessel on the relationship between Kant and Schenker. Fessel, according to the abstract, ”questions Schenker's rejection of the traditional concept of harmonic modulation [and objects] to the derived character of meter and rhythm with respect to the tonal dimension.” He then addresses these objections in light of Kant’s ”conception of time, as formulated in his Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1781).” Another interesting article, by Pedro Purroy Chicot, examines various traditions of harmonic analysis, including Rameau, C. P. E. Bach, and Schenker (via Salzer).

EPILOGUE

I have attempted to show in this article the extent to which Schenker’s ideas have been carried beyond his native German-speaking countries and the United States, where émigrés and refugees from Austria and Germany began to spread his once-revolutionary ideas. It is uncertain what Schenker himself would think, given the tenacity with which he held the idea of German cultural superiority. More than likely he would not be pleased to see his analytical method, intended to elucidate the subtle unfoldings of tonal harmonies and long-range motives, used to explain works of Stravinsky, Schoenberg, or Palestrina, let alone the music of other cultures, both the folk and the art tradition, which he held in disdain. In the opinion of this writer, however, it is encouraging to see the widespread appeal of Schenker’s powerful and profound method of analysis, and it is my sincere hope that this trend continues and that Schenker’s ideas, and translations of his writings, continue to enjoy a prominent place in music-theoreticel literature of many countries.

PART III: BIBLIOGRAPHY

2002 Lipp, Gerhard. Das musikanthropologische Denken von Viktor Zuckerkandl. Musikethnologische Sammelbände 18. Tutzing: Schneider. ISBN 3-795-21073-9.

1998 Hilgendorf, Simone. ”Die Analyse des ‘Phrase Rhythm’ von William Rothstein: Ein Amerikanische Modell zum Verständnis tonaler Musik.” Musik als Text: Bericht uber den Internationalen Kongress der Gesellschaft fur Musikforschung, Vol. 2, ed. by Hermann Danuser and Tobias Plebuch. Kassel: Bärenreiter: 123-129. ISBN 3-7618-1402-X.

1997 Van Beek, Johan. ”Der zweite Takt des Rezitativs in Beethovens Klaviersonate As-Dur opus 110.” Musiktheorie 12/3: 235-54.

1997 Suppan, Wolfgang, and Victor Zuckerkandl. ”Musik der Menge: ‘Volk’ und ‘Volksmusik’ in den Schriften Heinrich Schenkers und seines Schülers Viktor Zuckerkandl. Mit einem Anhang: Viktor Zuckerkandls bisher ungedruckter Aufsatz über Das Staunen. Verhältnis von Mensch und Musik.” In Festschrift Christoph-Hellmut Mahling zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. by Axel Beer and Kristina Pfarr: 471-91. ISBN 3-7952-0900-5.

1996 Redmann, Bernd. ”Zum (Schein-)Antipodentum von Hugo Riemann und Heinrich Schenker.”  in Zur Geschichte der musikalischen Analyse. Schriften zur musikalischen Hermeneutik, Vol. 5, ed. by Gernot Grüber (Laaber, Germany: Laaber-Verlag): 131-44. ISBN 3-89007-316-6.

1996 Köhler, Rafael. ”Linie und Urlinie: Zur Methodendiskussion in der energetischen Musiktheorie.”  In Zur Geschichte der musikalischen Analyse. Schriften zur musikalischen Hermeneutik, Vol. 5, ed. by Gernot Grüber (Laaber, Germany: Laaber-Verlag): 157-75. ISBN 3-89007-316-6.

1996 Kalisch, Volker. ”Zum Verhältnis von Analyse und Musiktheorie zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts.” In Zur Geschichte der musikalischen Analyse, Schriften zur musikalischen Hermeneutik, Vol. 5, ed. by Gernot Grüber (Laaber, Germany: Laaber-Verlag): 119-30. ISBN 3-89007-316-6.

1996 Federhofer, Hellmut. ”Das Verhältnis von Guido Adler und Heinrich Schenker zur musikalischen Analyse.” in Musik und Geschichte: Aufsätze aus nichtmusikalischen Zeitschriften. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag: 546-54 ISBN: 3-487-10199-8. Reprinted in Zur Geschichte der musikalischen Analyse. Schriften zur musikalischen Hermeneutik, Vol. 5, ed. by Gernot Grüber (Laaber, Germany: Laaber-Verlag): 145-56. ISBN 3-89007-316-6.

1996 Eybl, Martin. ”Zweckbestimmung und historische Voraussetzungen der Analytik Heinrich Schenkers.” in Zur Geschichte der musikalischen Analyse, Schriften zur musikalischen Hermeneutik, Vol. 5, ed. by Gernot Grüber. Laaber, Germany: Laaber-Verlag: 145-56. ISBN 3-89007-316-6.

1995 Eybl, Martin. Ideologie und Methode: Zum Ideengeschichlichen Kontext von Schenkers Musiktheorie. Tutzing: Schneider. ISBN 3-795-20816-5.

1994 Thiemel, Matthias.   Tonale Dynamik: Theorie, musikalische Praxis und Vortragslehre seit 1800,  Berliner Musik Studien, Vol. 12  Köln: Tank. ISBN 3-89564-027-1.

1994 Thiemel, Matthias.   ”Tonale Dynamik: Theorie, musikalische Praxis und Vortragslehre seit 1800.”  Ph.D. diss., Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Breisgau.

1994 Federhofer, Hellmut. ”Heinrich Schenker (1868-1935) und Arnold Schönberg (1874-1951) als Musiktheoretiker.” In Studien zur Musikwissenschaft, vol. 43. Tutzing: Schneider: 319-40.

1993 Federhofer, Helmut. ”Johann Joseph Fux (1660-174l) und die Kontrapunktlehre.” Die Musikforschung 46/2: 157-70.

1993 Federhofer, Hellmut. ”Die Verhältnis von Intervall und Akkord zum strengen und freien Satz.” Musiktheorie 8/3: 211-5.

1993 Grunsqeig, Werner. ”Vom ‘Schenkerismus’ zum ‘Dahlhaus-Projekt’: Einflusse deutschsprachiger Musiker und Musikwissenschaftler in den Vereinigten Staaten- -Anfänge und Ausblick.” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 48/3-4: 161-70.

1991 Schubert, Giselher.  ”Ludwig Rottenberg über Schenker: Zwei Dokumente.” Hindemith-Jahrbuch 20: 152-8.

1991 Jost, Peter.  ”Heinrich Schenker und Mozart.”  Mozart-Jahrbuch: 606-12.

1991 Johns, Donald. ”Aimez-vous Brahms?: Ein Hindemith-Schenker Briefwechsel.” Hindemith Jahrbuch 20: 141-51. Reprinted in Über Hindemith: Aufsätze zu Werk, Ästhetik und Interpretation. Mainz: Schott: 283-93. ISBN 3-7957-0285-2.

1991 Deutsch, Walter.   ”Anmerkungen zur Melodientypologie.” Jahrbuch für Volksliedforschung 36: 18-28.  

1990 Webster, James. ”Zur Form des Finales von Beethovens 9. Symphonie.” In Probleme der symphonischen Tradition im 19. Jahrhundert. Tutzing: Schneider: 157-86.

1990 Federhofer, Hellmut. Heinrich Schenker als Essayist und Kritiker: gesammelte Aufsätze, Rezensionen und kleinere Berichte aus dem Jahren 1891-1901, Studien und Materialien zur Musikwissenschaft 5. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag. ISBN 3-487-07960-7

1990 Barcaba, Peter. ”Domenico Scarlatti oder die Geburtsstunde der klassischen Sonate.” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 43/7-8: 382-90.

1989 Federhofer, Hellmut.   ”Methoden der Analyse im Vergleich.” Musiktheorie 4/1: 61-9. 

1989 Blume, Jürgen.   ”Analyse als Beispiel musiktheoretischer Probleme: Auf der Suche nach der angemessenen Beschreibung chromatischer Harmonik in romantischer Musik.” Musiktheorie 4/1: 37-51.

1988 Eybl, Matrin. ”Heinrich Schenkers frühe Veröffentlichungen, 1891-1898 DMP Diplomarbeit. Universität Wien.

1986 Kucukalic, Zija. Die Struktur des Kunstwerks: mit besondere Berücksichtigung der Musik. Lier & Boog Studies 3. Amsterdam: Rodopj. ISBN 90-6203-608-2.

1985 Federhofer, Hellmut. Heinrich Schenker: Nach Tagebücher und Briefen in der Oswald Jonas Memorial Collection, University of California, Riverside, Studien zur Musikwissenschaft, Vol. 3. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag. ISBN 3-487-07462-X.

1984 Thaler, Lotte.   Organische Form in der Musiktheorie des 19. und beginnenden 20. Jahrhunderts,   Berliner musikwissenschaftliche Arbeiten, Vol. 25. München and Salzburg: Katzbichler.

1983 Eibner, Franz. ”Schenker – quo vadis?” Tritonus ”Reproduzent 1984 – Besinnung zur Kunst,” December: 36-9.

1982 Federhofer, Hellmut.   Heinrich Schenkers Verhältnis zu Arnold Schönberg,  Mitteilungen der Kommission für Musikforschung, Vol. 33. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

1981 Federhofer, Hellmut. ”Was ist ein Generalbaß-Satz?” Muzikološki Zbornik 17: 57-64.

1981 Federhofer, Hellmut. Akkord und Stimmführung in den musiktheoretisch Systemen von Hugo Riemann, Ernst Kurth und Heinrich Schenker 1981, Veröffentlichung der Staatlichen Instituts für Musikforschung, Vol. 21. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. ISBN 3-700-10385-9.

1980 Albersheim, Gerhard.   Die Tonsprache, Mainzer Studien zur Musikwissenschaft, Vol. 15. Tutzing: Schneider, 1980.

1979 Plum, Karl-Otto. Untersuchungen zu Heinrich Schenkers Stimmführungsanalyse. Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung. Regensburg: Gustav Boße Verlag.

1978 Stephan, Rudolf.   ”Zum Thema Schönberg und Bach.”  Bach-Jahrbuch 64: 232-44.

1976 Jonas, Oswald.   ”Ein Brief Bernhard Paumgartners an Heinrich Schenker.” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 31/7-8: 371-2.

1976 Goldschmidt, Harry, and   Clemens Brenneis.   ”Aspekte der gegenwärtigen Beethovenforschung.” Beiträge zur Musikwissenschaft 18/1: 3-38.

1974 Flechsig, Hartmut.  ”Studien zu Theorie und Methode musikalischer Analyse.” Ph.D. diss., Universität Heidelberg.

1973 Hauschild, Peter.   ”Bemerkungen zu Beethovens Klaviernotation.” Beethoven Jahrbuch 9: 147-65.

1968 Eibner, Franz. ”Die musikalischen Grundlagen des Volkstumlichen Österreichischen Musiziergutes.” Jahrbuch des Österreichischen Volksliedwerkes 17: 1-21.

1967 Kaufmann, Harald. ”Aushöhlung der Tonalität bei Reger.” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 128: 28-33.

1966 Federhofer, Hellmut. ”Zur neuesten Literatur über Heinrich Schenker.” In Saarbrücker Studien zur Musikwissenschaft 1, ed. by W. Wiora. Festschrift J. Müller-Blattau : 69-78.

1965 Kaufmann, Harald. ”Fortschritt und Reaktion in der Analysenlehre Heinrich Schenkers.” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 126: 8-9. Reprinted in Das Orchester 13 (1965): 44-9 and Spurlinien: Analytische Aufsätze über Sprache und Musik. Vienna: Elisabeth Lafite, 1969: 37-46. Reviewed by C. Dahlhaus in Musik und Bindung 2/9 (1970): 395.

1965 Eibner, Franz. ”Die aktuella Arbeit im Heinrich Schenker – Seminar an der Akademie für Musik und darstekllender Kunst im Wien.” In Österreichischer Musikrat, Mitgleid des Conseil International de la Musique der Unesco 1: 10-3

1964 Jonas, Oswald. ”Heinrich Schenker und grosse Interpreten.” Österreichische Musikzeitung 19/12: 584-9.

1963 Jonas, Oswald. ”Zur realen Antwort in der Fuge bei Bach.” In Bericht über den internationalen musikwissenschaftlichen Kongreß, Kassel 1962. Bärenreiter: Kassel: 365ff.

1962 Federhofer, Hellmut. ”Heinrich Schenker.” In Anthony van Hoboken: Festschrift zum 75. Geburtstag, ed. by Joseph-Schmidt-Görg. Mainz: Schott.

1961 Jonas, Oswald. ”Die Kunst des Vortrags nach Heinrich Schenker.” Musikerziehung 15/3: 127-29.

1960 Eibner, Franz. ”Die Stimmführung Chopins in der Darstellung Heinrich Schenkers.” Congress Copenhagen: 155-8.

1958 Schmid, Edmund. ”Autographie und Originalausgaben Beethovens: Auswertung eines vergleichs.” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 119/12: 746-7.

1958 Kolneder, Walter. ”Sind Schenkers Analysen Beiträge zur Bacherkenntnis?” Deutsche Journal für Musikwissenschaft 3: 59-73.

1958 Hirschkorn, Kurt. ”Die Stimmführung als Leitstern des Geigers: Die Bedeutung Heinrich Schenkers.” Musikerziehung 12: 233-4.

1958 Federhofer, Hellmut. ”Die Funktionstheorie Hugo Riemanns und die Schichtenlehre Heinrich Schenkers.” Bericht über des International Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongreß Wien, 1956: 183-90.

1957-8 Eibner, Franz. ”Tonleiter, Tonart, Tongeschlecht und Diatonie.” Muzikerziehung 11: 96-113.

1957-8 Eibner, Franz. ”Die Obertonreihe als Erscheinung und als Idee.” Musikerziehung 11: 83-5.

1954 Furtwängler, Wilhelm. ”Heinrich Schenker: Ein zeitgemasses Problem.” In Ton und Wort (Wiesbaden: F. A. Brockhaus): 198-204.

1952 Hartmann, Heinrich. ”Heinrich Schenker und Karl Marx.” Österreichische Zeitung für Musikwissenschaft 7/2: 46-52.

1950 Wingert, Hans. ”Über die Urlinie und Ihrer Schöpfer. Eine Würdigung.” Zeitschrift für Musik 111: 244-6.

1950 Federhofer, Hellmut. Beiträge zur musikalischen Gestaltanalyse. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt.

1947 Federhofer, Hellmut. ”Die Musiktheorie Heinrich Schenkers.” Schweizerliche Musikzeitung 87/2: 265-8.

1937 Jonas, Oswald, and Felix Salzer, eds. Der Dreiklang: Monatschrift für Musik. Vienna: Krystall Verlag (April 1937–February 1938). Reprint ed. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1989. ISBN 3-487-09074-0.

1936 Jonas, Oswald. ”Das Wiener Photogramm-Archiv.” Anbruch 18/1: 6-7.

1935 Zuckerkandl, Victor. ”Bekenntnis zu einem Lehrer.” Anbruch 17/5: 121-3.

1935 Salzer, Felix. Sinn und Wesen der abendlandischen Mehrstimmigkeit. Vienna: Saturn-Verlag.

1935 Reich, Willi. ”Ein Meister der Musikforschung.” Anbruch 19[?]: 14-16.

1934 Reich, Willi. ”Kant, Schenker, und der Nachläufer.” Dreiundzwanzig 15/16: 29-32. (Response: 1934 Eine Wiener Musikzeitschrift 15/16 (JC XXXVIII: 54 (O. Jonas).

1932 Jonas, Oswald. Einführung in die Lehre Heinrich Schenkers: Das Wesen des musikalischen Kunstwerks. Vienna: Universal Edition. U-E 26.202.

1930 Vrieslander, Otto. ”Heinrich Schenker” Kunstwart 43/9: 181-9.

1930 Riezler-Stettin, Walter. ”Die Urlinie.” Die Musik 22/7: 502-10.

1930 Albersheim, Gerhard. ”Heinrich Schenker: Grundlegen und Bedeutung Seines Werkes.” Rheinische Theater-und Musik-Zeitung: 15/16: 259-61.

1926 Vrieslander, Otto. ”Heinrich Schenker.” Die Musik 19: 33-8.

1926 Roth, Hermann. Elemente der Stimmführung (Der Strenge Satz). 1. Heft: Ein- und Zweistimmigkeit. Stuttgart: Carl Grüninger Nachf. Ernst Klett.

1926 Bamberger, Carl. ”Das Schenker-Institut am neuen Wiener Konservatorium.” Anbruch 18/1: 7-8.

1925 Vrieslander, Otto. ”Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach als Theoretiker.” Von Neuer Musik: 222-79.

1925 Carrière, Paul. ”Schenker's Urlinie.” Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 52/7-8: 139-40, 163-65.

1923 Vrieslander, Otto. ”Heinrich Schenker und sein Werk.” Anbruch 15/2-3: 41-4.

1923 Dahms, Walter. ”Heinrich Schenkers Persönlichkeit.” Allgemeine Musik Zeitung 32/32: 511-2.

1922 Moorman, Ludwig. ”Das Werk Heinrich Schenker: Eine Übersicht.” Die Musikantgilde 1/7: 80-4.

1920 Halm, August. ”Heinrich Schenker, Neue musikalische Theorien und Phantasien.” Der Merker 11: 414-17, 505-7.

1918 Dahms, Walter. ”Heinrich Schenker zu seinem 50. Geburtstag am 19. Juni 1918.” Konservative Monatschrift 9: 647-9.

1917 Halm, August. ”Heinrich Schenker.” Die Freie Schulgemeinde 7: 11-5.

1998 Barbose, Joel Luis. ”Estudo para clarineta de Gaetano Donizetti.” Urucungo 1/1 http://www.svn.com.br/urucungo/barbosa/barbosa1.htm

1997 Lacerda, Marcos Branda.  ”Breve resenha das contribuições de Schenker e Schoenberg para a análise musical.” Revista eletrônica de musicologia 2. http://www.cce.ufpr.br/~rem/REMv2.1/vol2.1/BreveResenha/BreveResenha.html

1995 Lacerda, Marcos.   ”Breve resenha das contribuiçoes de Schenker e Schoenberg para a análise musical.” Art: Revista da Escola de Música e Artes Cênicas da UFBA 23: 65-79.

1995 Gerling, Cristina. ”Schenker e seus discípulos na América: Os ortodoxos.”  Art: Revista da Escola de Música e Artes Cênicas da UFBA 23: 81-7.

1989 Gerling, Cristina Capparelli. ”A teoria de Heinrich Schenker: Una breve introdução.” Em pauta 1/1.

1999 Божцкоба, Мцлена. ”Методът на Редукция на Хайнрих Шенкер по Примери от Българската Музика.” Българската музцкознанце 23/2: 79-82. [1999 Bozikova, Milena. ”The Analytical Method of Heinrich Schenker (applied to) Examples of Bulgarian Music.” Balgarsko muzikoznanie 23/2: 79-82.]

1996 Божцкоба, Мцлена. ”Хайнрих Шенкер и Диагозата му за Музикално Съвършенство.” Българската музцкознанце 20/3: 23-55. [1996 Bozikova, Milena. ”Heinrich Schenker and His Diagnosis for Musical Perfection.” Balgarsko muzikoznanie 20/3: 23-55.]

1978 Холопов, Юрий. Музыкально-теоретическая система ha Х. Шенкера (болг. яз.). София, 1978. [Kholopov, Yurii. ”Musical-thoretical System of H. Schenker (published in Bulgarian). Sofia, 1978.

Wang, PoWei.”Schenker.” http://powei.hypermart.net/Articles/Schenker.htm

1997 Chen, Shi-Ben. Free Composition.  Beijing: People’s Music Publications. ISBN 7-103-01431-0.]

1995 Yan-Di, Yang. ”A Critical Survey of Analytical Theories in Twentieth-Century Musicology (2): Schenkerian Analysis.” The Art of Music: Journal of the Shanghai Conservatory of Music 61: 42-52

1995 Yan-Di, Yang. ”A Critical Survey of Analytical Theories in Twentieth-Century Musicology (3): The Expansion and Modification of Schenkerian Analysis.” The Art of Music: Journal of the Shanghai Conservatory of Music 62: 54-62.

1993 [1993 Yu, Su-xian. Introduction to Schenkerian Analytical Concepts. Beijing: People’s Music Publications.]

1989 Gligo, Niksa. ”O problemu glazbene analize.” Zvuk 3: 29-40.

1984 Wagner, Aleksandra. ”Na puta ka novoj teoriji muzike – Heinrich Schenker.” Zvuk 3: 17-29.

1981 Wagner, Aleksandra. ”Heinrich Schenker ili kakva je zapravo Biologija tonova.” Zvuk 2: 68-73.

2004 Spurný, Lubomír: ”Heinrich Schenker: Der Antiheld der Moderne? Über einige Formen der Angst in der Musik.”Horror novitatis. International Musicological Colloquium, 37:88-93.

2000 Spurný, Lubomír: ”Goethe und Schenker.” Goethe in Olmütz. Beiträge zur mährischen deutschsprachigen Literatur: 163 - 167.

2000 Spurný, Lubomír: Heinrich Schenker - dávný neznámý. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého – vydavatelství. ISBN 8-0244-0055-3

1990 Christensen, Thomas.   ”Hudební teorie v programu americké muzikologie.” Hudební veda 27/3: 245-252.

2001 Suurpää, Lauri. ”Toonikan vakiintuminen Brahmsin kolmannen sinfonian ensiosan codassa.” Muualla täällä [a Festschrift to Erkki Salmenhaara], ed. Helena Tyväinen, Seija Lappalainen, Tomi Mäkelä, and Irma Vierimaa (Jyväskylä: Atena Kustannus): 153-64.

1999 Suurpää, Lauri. ”Tonaalisen musiikin analyysi: historiaa ja lähtökohtia.” Tieteessä Tapahtuu 1. http://www.tsv.fi/ttapaht/991/suurpaa.htm

1998 Suurpää, Lauri. ”Viisi näkökulmaa Brahmsin lauluun Der Tod das ist die kühle Nacht, op. 96/1: Schenkeriläinen näkökulma” Musiikki 28/1: 68-80.

1996 Murtomäki, Veijo. ”Lisztin Faust-konsertto: Semanttinen analyysi.” Musiikki 4: 469-88.

1993 Suurpää, Lauri. ”Äänenkuljetus ja koherenssi: Johdatus Schenker-analyysiin.” Musiikki 23/3-4 45-78.

1993 Suurpää, Lauri. ”Sonaatti ja sinfonia Mozartin jousikvarteton K. 387 ensiosassa.” Sic 4: 75-96.

1990 Murtomäki, Veijo. ”Sinfoninen ykseys: Muotoajattelun kehitys Sibeliusken sinfonioissa.” Ph.D. diss., University of Helsinki.

English-Language Articles by Finnish Scholars

2000 Suurpää, Lauri. ”The Path from Tonic to Dominant in the Second Movement of Schubert’s String Quartet and in Chopin’s Fourth Ballade.” Journal of Music Theory 44/2: 451-85.

1999 Väisälä, Olli. ”Concepts of Harmony and Prolongation in Schoenberg’s Op. 19/2.” Music Theory Spectrum 21/2: 230-59.

1999 Suurpää, Lauri. ”Continuous Exposition and Tonal Structure in Three Late Haydn Works.” Music Theory Spectrum 21/1: 174-199.

1997 Suurpää, Lauri. Music and Drama in S ix Beethoven Overtures: Interaction between Programmatic Tensions and Tonal Structure. Sibelius Academy, Studia Musica No. 8. Helsinki: Hakapaino Oy. ISBN 952-9658-567.

1997 Suurpää, Lauri. ”On Brahms’s Der Tod das ist die kühle Nacht Op. 96/1: A Schenkerian View.” In Composition as a Problem: Proceedings of a Conference on Music Theory, ed. Mark Humal (Tallinn: Eesti Muusikaakadeemia): 27-35.

2000 Teboul, Jean-Claude. ”Les trois etudes ecrites pour la Methode des methods de Moscheles et Fétis: Approche Schenkerienne.” Ostinato Rigore 15: 249-63.

1999 Schneider, Mathieu. ”Les Métamorphoses de Richard Strauss. In Memoriam.” M.M. thesis, Université Marc-Bloch, Strasbourg.

1999 Lewin, David. ”Auf dem Flüße: Image Poetique et structure musicale profonde dans un lied de Schubert.” Cahiers F. Schubert: Bulletin de la Societe Franz Schubert et Revue des etudes schubertienes 12: 7-35.

1999 Cadwallader, Allen, trans. by Jean-Claude Teboul. ”Les analyses non publiees faites par Schenker des intermezzi op. 119 No. 1 et 2 de Brahms.” Ostinato Rigore 13: 97-112.

1999 Renwick, William. ”Chemins mystérieux de la fugue: Un point de vie schenkérien sur la fugue en fa majeur de la 2e suite de Händel.” Musurgia 4: 12-24.

1998 Schneider, Mathieu. ”Les Metamorphoses de Richard Strauss éraint-elles à l’origine de forme lied?” Cahires Franz Schubert: Revue de musique classique et romantique 13: 17-38.

1998 Mesnage, Marcel. ”Emplois compositionnels de la notion de register.” Revue Belge de Musicologie 52: 299-304.

1998 Meeùs, Nicolas. ”La direction de la ligne fondamentale schenkerienne.” Revue Belge de Musicologie 52: 311-20.

1998 Coeurdevey, Annie. Histoire du lanuage musical occidental. Paris: Presses Universitaires du France. ISBN 2-13-049344-0

1997 Legrand, Raphäelle. ”Quelques aspects de l’analyse de le musique baroque.” Musurgia 4/2: 7-11.

1996 Gut, Serge. ”Schenker et la ‘Schenkeromanie’: Essai d'appreciation d'une methode d'analyse musicale.” Revista di musicologia 82/2: 344-56.

1995 Teboul, Jean-Claude.   ”Comment analyser le neuvième interlude en si-flat du Ludus tonalis de Paul Hindemith? (Hindemith ou Schenker?).” Ostinato Rigore 6/7: 215-32.

1995 Sabourin, Carmen. ”Vers une approche critique de la theorie schenkerienne.” Revista de Musique des Universites Canadiennes 15/1: 1-43.

1995 Teboul, Jean-Claude. ”Le concept de la tonalite selon Heinrich Schenker (1868–1935) application aux 27 etudes de Chopin.” Ph.D. diss., University of Paris IV-Sorbonne.

1993 Meeùs, Nicolas. L’écriture Libre. Liège: Mardaga. ISBN 2-870-09559-7 (Vol. I) and 2-870-09508-2 (Vol. II).

1993 Meeùs, Nicolas. Heinrich Schenker: Une Introduction. Liège: Mardaga. ISBN 2-870-09506-6.

1993 Meeùs, Nicolas. ”Du bon usage de l’analyse schenkerienne.” Analyse Musicale 30: 21-24.

1993 Coeurdevey, Annie. ”L’analyse schenkerienne et ses frontières.” Revue de Musicologie 79/1: 5-30.

1993 Coeurdevey, Annie. ”La ‘Gigue en sol’ K. 574. Une approche schenkerienne.” Ostinato Rigore 1/2: 29-44. ISBN 2-858-93198-4.

1992 Nattiez, Jean-Jacques. ”Existe-t-il des relations entre les diverses methods d’analyse?” Trento, Italy: U. degli Studi Dipartimento di Storia della Civilta: 537-66.

1991 Coeurdevey, Annie. ”La formation du langage tonal en France dans la première Moitié du XVIe siècle: Etienne Moulinié.” Ph.D. diss., University of Tours.

1989 Barcaba, Peter.   ”L’analyse schenkérienne et interprétation musicale: Pour une lecture artistique de l’oeuvre de H. Schenker.” Analyse musicale 17: 91-104.

1988 Cook, Nicholas. ”De l’ambigüité de la notion de thème pour l’analyse musicale.” Analyse musicale 13: 30–6.

1986 Lamblin, André.   ”L'analyse tonale selon Schenker.” International Review of The Aesthetics and Sociology of Music 17/2: 187-202.

1986 Gut, Serge. ”Analyse musicale en musicology: Le choix des methods pour l’analyse d’un lied de Hugo Wolf.” Analyse Musicale 2: 52-8.

1986 Deliege, Célestin.   ”L'analyse post-Schenkerienne: Quand et pourquoi?” Analyse musicale 2: 12-20

1984 Deliège, Célestin. Les fondements de la musique tonale: Une perspective post- schenkérienne. Paris: J. C. Lattès. ISSN 0242-7834

2002 Drabkin, William. ”Heinrich Schenker.” In The Cambridge History of Western Music Theory, ed. by Thomas Christensen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 812–43.

2000 Drabkin, William. ”Chopin, Schenker, and ‘Musical Form.’”Ostinato Rigore 15: 173–86 ISBN 2-85893-604-8.

1999 Cook, Nicholas. ”Heinrich Schenker, Modernist: Detail, Difference, and Analysis.” Theory and Practice 24: 91–106.

1999 Cook, Nicholas. ”At the Borders of Musical Identity: Schenker, Corelli and the Graces.” Music Analysis 18/2: 179–233.

1996 Drabkin, William. ”Schenker, the Consonant Passing Note, and the First-Movement Theme of Beethoven’s Sonata Op. 26.” Music Analysis 15/2–3: 149–89.

1995 Cook, Nicholas. ”The Conductor and the Theorist: Furtwängler, Schenker, and Beethoven’s Ninth.” In Studies in Musical Interpretation, ed. by John Rink. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 105–25. ISBN 0-521-45274-7.

1995 Cook, Nicholas. ”Schenker, Polemicist: A Reading of the Symphony #9 Monograph” Music Analysis 14/1: 89–105.

1993 Cook, Nicholas. ”Heinrich Schenker: Anti-Historicist.” Rivista Italiana di musicologia: 24–36. Reprinted in Culturas musicales del Mediterraneo y sus ramificaciones, ed. by Alfonso de Vicente Delgado (Madrid: 1992).

1993 Cook, Nicholas John. Beethoven: Symphony No. 9, Cambridge Music Handbooks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-3903-9.

1992 Bent, Ian. ”History of Music Theory: Margin or Center?” Theoria 6: 1–21.

1991 Cook, Nicholas. ”The Editor and the Virtuoso; or, Schenker versus Bülow.” Journal of the Royal Music Association 116/1: 78–95.

1991 Cook, Nicholas. ”Heinrich Schenker and the Authority of the Urtext.” In Tradition and Its Future in Music, ed. by Yoshihiko Tokumaru, et al. Osaka: Mita: 27–33.

1991 Chew, Geoffrey. ”Ernst Kurth, Music as Psychic Motion and Tristan und Isolde: Towards a Model for Analysing Musical Instability.” Music Analysis 10/1–2: 171–93.

1990 Dunsby, Jonathan. ”Schenkerian Theory in Great Britain: Developments and Responses.” In Schenker Studies, ed. by Hedi Siegel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 182–90.

1989 Dunsby, Jonathan. ”Performance and Analysis of Music.” Music Analysis 8/1–2: 5–20.

1989 Cook, Nicholas. ”Music Theory and ‘Good Comparison’: AViennese Perspective.” Journal of Music Theory 33/1: 117–41.

1989 Cook, Nicholas John. ”Schenker’s Theory of Music as Ethics.” The Journal of Musicology 7/4: 415–39.

1989 Chew, Geoffrey. ”The Perfections of Modern Music: Consecutive Fifths and Tonal Coherence in Monteverdi.” Music Analysis 8/3: 247–73.

1989 Cavett-Dunsby, Esther C. Mozart’s Variations Reconsidered: Four Case Studies New York: Garland Press. ISBN 0-824-02340-4.

1988 Dunsby, Jonathan, and Arnold Whitall. Music Analysis in Theory and Practice. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 1-878-82279-9.

1988 Cavett-Dunsby, Esther. ”Mozart’s Codas.” Music Analysis 7/1: 31–51.

1988 Cavett-Dunsby, Esther. ”Mozart’s ‘Haydn’ Quartets: Composing Up and Down Without Rules.” Journal of the Royal Musical Association 113/1: 57–80.

1987 Dunsby, Jonathan. ”The Formal Repeat.” Journal of the Royal Musical Association 112/2: 196–207.

1987 Cook, Nicholas. A Guide to Musical Analysis. London: Dent. ISBN

1987 Cook, Nicholas. ”The Perception of Large-Scale Tonal Closure.” Music Perception 5/2: 197–205.

1987 Cook, Nicholas. ”Musical Form and the Listener.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Critisism 46/1: 23–9.

1987 Bent, Ian, and William Drabkin. Analysis. New York: Norton. ISBN 0-393-02447-4.

1986 Cavett-Dunsby, Esther. ”Schenker’s Analysis of the Eroica Finale.” Theory and Practice 11: 43–51.

1986 Bent, Ian. ”Heinrich Schenker, Chopin and Domenico Scarlatti.” Music Analysis 5/2–3: 131–50.

1986 Bent, Ian. ”Essays from Das Meisterwerk in der Musik, Vol. 1(1925).” Music Analysis 5/2–3: 151–91.

1985 Drabkin, William. ”A Lesson in Analysis from Heinrich Schenker: The C-Major Prelude from Bach’s Well-Tempered Clavier, Book 1.” Music Analysis 4/3: 241–58.

1985 Cavett-Dunsby, Esther. ”Mozart’s Variations Reconsidered: Four Case Studies (K. 613, K. 501, and the Finales of K. 421 [417b] and K. 491).” Ph.D. diss., King’s College.

1984 Dunsby, Jonathan. ”A Bagatelle on Beethoven WoO 60.” Music Analysis 3: 57–68.

1984 Drabkin, William. ”Felix-Eberhard von Cube and the North-German Tradition of Schenkerism.” Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association 111: 180–207.

1983 Dunsby, Jonathan. ”The Multi-Piece in Brahms: Fantasien Op. 116.” In Brahms: Biographical, Documentary, and Analytical Studies, ed. by R. Pascall. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 167–89.

1983 Chew, Geoffrey. ”The Spice of Music: Towards a Theory of the Leading Note.” Music Analysis 2/1: 35–53.

1982 Drabkin, William. ”Characters, Key Relations, and Tonal Structure in Il Trovatore.” Music Analysis 1/2: 143–53.

1982 Ayrey, Craig. ”Berg’s Scheideweg: Analytical Issues in Op. 2/2.” Music Analysis 1/2: 189–202.

1981 Dunsby, Johnathan, and John Stopford. ”The Case for a Schenkerian Semiotic.” Music Theory Spectrum 3: 49–53.

1980 Dunsby, Jonathan. ”Schoenberg on Cadence.” Journal of the Arnold Schoenberg Institute 4/1: 41–49.

1977 Dunsby, Jonathan Mark. ”Schoenberg and the Writings of Schenker.” Journal of the Arnold Schoenberg Institute 2/1: 26–33.

1972 Drabkin, William. ”Some Relationships between the Autographs of Beethoven’s Sonata in C Minor, Opus 111.” Current Musicology 13: 38–47.

1983 Somfai, László. ”Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart 4-hangos ornamense.” Zenetudományi dolgozatok: 17-33.

2001 Russakovsky, Luba. ”The Altered Recapitulation in the First Movement of Haydn’s String Quartets.” Ph.D. diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

2001 Goldenberg, Yosef. ”Prolongation of Seventh Chords in Tonal Music.” Ph.D. diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

1998 Pavlov, Sara. ”The Neapolitan Chord in the Works of Chopin.” M.A. Thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

1986 Wagner, Naphtali. ”The Apparent Tonic in Western Music of the 18^th-19^thCentury.” Ph.D. diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

1983 Kamien, Roger. ”Analysis and Performance: Some Preliminary Observations.” Israel Studies in Musicology 3: 156-70.

1983 Schoffman, Nachum.   ”Descriptive Theory and the Standard Table of Triads.” Israel Studies in Musicology 3: 144-55

1999 Sanguinetti, Giorgio. ”Reti versus Schenker: La funzione del motivo nel primo movimento della Sonata op. 57 Appassionata di Beethoven--In appendice: traduzione dell'analisi di Schenker.” In Intersezioni: Quattro studi di teoria e analisi musicale Cosenza: Universita della Calabria Facolta di Lettere e Filosofia: 37-108.

1999 Sanguinetti, Giorgio. ”La carta e il sentiero: Interpretazione e analisi in una prospettiva schenkeriana.” In Intersezioni: Quattro studi di teoria e analisi musicale Cosenza: Universita della Calabria Facolta di Lettere e Filosofia: 9-36.

1999 Burgnaro, Michele. ”Analisi e meta-analisi: Schenker e l’arte del comprendere.” Diastema 13/2.

1998 Drabkin, William. ”L’analisi come strumento pratico: un argomento da prendere in considerazione.”Analitica0. http://www3.muspe.unibo.it:8080/gatm/Ita/Vol/0/fr_drabkin-it.htm

1996 Carapezza, Paolo Emilio. ”La musica strumentale da Giovanni Gabrieli a Joseph Haydn: Dal colore delle immagini alla dialettica delle idée.” In Deutsch-italienische Musikbeziehungen: Deutsche und italienische Instrumentalmusik 1600-1750 (München: Katzbichler): 13-24.

1995 Sanguinetti, Giorgio. ”L'opera italiana nella critica musicale di Heinrich Schenker.” Nuova Rivista musicale italiana 29/3: 431-67.

1995 Renoldi, Marco. ”Eventi ingannevoli del livello esterno: Livelli strutturali ed elaborazione compositiva.” Rivista italiana di musicologia 30/2: 385-418.

1995 Goldwurm, Giuliano. ”L’analisi Schenkeriana a la forma sonata.” Rivista Italiana di musicologia 30/1: 135-69.

1995 Drabkin, William, with Susanna Pasticci and Egidio Pozzi. Analisi Schenkeriana: Per un' interpretazione organica della struttura musicale, Quaderni de Musica/Realta, Vol. 32. Lucca: Libreria musicale italiana. ISBN 8-870-96138-9.

1993 Damiani, Giovanni. ”La necessita della variazione nel pensiero Viennese progressista.” Studi musicali 22/2: 447-65.

1993 Cohn, Richard, trans. by Piero Marconi. ”Le theoria Schenker, la theoria schenkeriana: Unità pura o conflitto constructivo?” Analitica 4/12: 3-12.

1992 Scarpellini Pancrazi, Franco. ”Introduzione all’ Analisi schenkeriana: Principi teorico-practici.” Diastema 2: 25-31.

1992 Modena, Elena. ”Il concetto di coerenza organica secondo la teoria schenkeriana. Appunti per una verifica analitica.” Diastema 3: 17-21.

1992 Baroni, Mario, et al. Contrappunto e composizione. Torino: Edizioni di Torino. [Translation from the English of the Schachter/Salzer textbook]

1991 Modena, Elena. ”Analisi Schenkeriana e libertá compositiva: alcuneticolaritá strutturali dell’ Intermezzo op. 118/1 di J. Brahms.” Analisi 5: 23-31.

1991 Bent, Ian, and Claudio Annibaldi. ”Heinrich Schenker e la missione del genio germanico.” Rivista italiana di musicologia 26/1: 3-34.

1991 _________ ”Per una critica della theoria funzionale.” Azzaroni: 245-64 [orig. pp. 11- 31]. Translation of Chapter X from Federhofer’s Akkord und Stimmführung in den musiktheoretisch Systemen von Hugo Riemann, Ernst Kurth und Heinrich Schenker.

1991 _________ ”La theoria funzionale di Hugo Riemann a la theoria degi strati di Heinrich Schenker.” Azzaroni: 233-43. Translation of Hellmut Federhofer, ”Die Funktionstheorie Hugo Riemanns und die Schichtenlehre Heinrich Schenkers.” Bericht über des International Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongreß Wien, 1956: 183-9

1989 Drabkin, William trans. by Claudio Annibaldi.  ”‘Bisogna leggere Schenker’” Sull’analisi del preludio in do maggiore BWV 924 di Bach.”  Rivista italiana di musicologia 24/1: 48-66.

1982 Yokota, Erisa.  ”Heinrich Schenker no ongakukan kôsatsu - Harmonielehre (1906) o chûshin to shite.” M.A. diss., Ochanomizu Women's University, Tokyo.

1979 Noro, Aiko, and Akiko Tamamoto. Koten piano soshokuon soho. Japan: Ingaku nu tomo.

2001 Maas, Hans. ”Schenkeranalyse en onbegeleide melodie.” Tijdschrift voor muziektheorie 6/3:175-87.

2000 Scheepers, Paul.  ”Schenker in de praktijk.” Tijdschrift voor muziektheorie 5/2: 101-14.

2000 Plenckers, Leo. ”Drie Schenkeranalyses van Bachs Inventio 8.” Tijdschrift voor muziektheorie 5/1: 16-25.

1996 Scheepers, Paul.  ”Geistiges Leben oder Erstarrung in der Musik? De verwording van Schenkers methode tot dogma.”  Tijdschrift voor muziektheorie 1/1: 4-17.

1948 Daniskas, John. Grondslagen voor de Analytische Vormleer der musiek. Rotterdam: W. L. and J. Brusse.

2001 Meeùs, Nicolas. ”Teaching Schenker at the Sorbonne.” Tijdschrift voor muziektheorie 6/3:171-4.

2001 Schachter, Carl. ”Taking Care of the Sense: A Schenkerian Pedagogy for Performers.” Tijdschrift voor muziektheorie 6/3:159-170.

2001 Schwab-Felisch, Oliver. ”Functions of the unclear: Chromaticism in Beethoven's String Quartet in E Flat Major, op. 74.” Tijdschrift voor muziektheorie 6/3: 188-94.

2000 Plotnikov, Boris. ”On Blending Schenkerian Techniques with Traditional Foreground Analysis.” Tijdschrift voor muziektheorie 5/2: 124-9.

2000 Jarzebska, Alicja. ”Amerkanskie metody sformalizowanej analizy muzycznej.” Muzyka: 87-112.

1998 Mazur, Krzysztof. ”O praosnowie i jej formach.” Muzyka 43/1: 79-92

1997 Będkowski, Stanisław, Agnieszka Chwiłek, and Iwona Lindstedt. Analiza schenkerowska. Kraków: Musica Iagellonica. ISBN 8-370-99071-1.

1996 Tuchowski, Andrzej. Integracja strukturalna w świetle przemian stylu Chopina. Kraków: Musica Iagellonica. ISBN 83-7099-048-7.

1995 Rink, John. ”Ballady Chopina i dialektyka metod analitycznych.” Rocznik chopinowski 21: 45-66.

1992 Gołąb, Maciej. ”Pentezilea na sopran i orkiestre op. 18 Karola Szymanowskiego: Zagadnienia semantyki, skladni, formy i techniki dzwiekowej.” Muzyka 37/1: 21-38.

1986 Helman, Zofia.   ”Od metody analitycznej Heinricha Schenkera do generatywnej teorii muzyki tonalnej.”  Muzyka  31/4: 43-58.

1986 Gołąb, Maciej. ”Leksykon terminologii Schenkerowskiej.” Muzyka 31/4: 56-66.

1986 Gołąb, Maciej.   ”Analiza i dzieło: Na marginesie polemik wokół teorii Heinricha Schenkera.” Muzyka 31/4: 25-41.

1986 Federhofer, Hellmut, trans. by Zofia Helman and Maciej Gołąb  ”Heinrich Schenker.” Muzyka 31/4: 5-24.

2004 Плотников, Борис. Свободное сочинение. Красноярск: Красноярская Академия Музьіки и Театра [2004 Plotnikov, Boris. Free Composition. Krasnoyarsk: Krasnoyarsk Academy of Music and Theatre]

2003 Плотников, Борис. ” Шенкер и Асафьев (некоторые параллели) ” In Наука И Художественное Образование. Красноярск: Красноярская Академия Музьіки и Театра:.83-94 [2003 Plotnikov, Boris. ”Schenker and Asafiev (Some Parallels)” in Krasnoyarsk: Krasnoyarsk Academy of Music and Theatre: 83-94.

2003 Boris Plotnikov, ”Трезвучие как место и Действие.” in Очеки и Зтюдьі по Методологии Музьікального Анализа: 264-70. Translation of Carl Schachter. ”The Triad as Place and Action.” Music Theory Spectrum 17/2:149-69. Reprinted in Unfoldings: Essays in Schenkerian Theory and Analysis, ed. by Joseph N. Straus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999: 161-183.

2002 Плотников, Борис. Очеки и Зтюдьі по Методологии Музьікального Анализа. Краноярск: Краноярская академия музыки и театра. [2002 Plotnikov, Boris. Essays and Studies on the Methodology of Musical Analysis. Krasnoyarsk: Krasnoyarsk Academy of Music and Theatre.]

2000 Plotnikov, Boris. ”On Blending Schenkerian Techniques with Traditional Foreground Analysis.” Tijdschrift voor muziektheorie 5/2: 124-9. [In English]

1998 Плотников, Борис. ”Интерпретационньіе Возможности Аналитической Методики Г. Шенкера (на примере зтюда Шонена соч. 10 No 3)” In Культура, Искусство, Образование. Красноярск: Красноярская Академия Музьіки и Театра: 97-109 [1998 Plotnikov, Boris. ”Inperpretive Possibilities of the Analytical Method of H. Schenker (exemplified by Chopin’s Etude Op. 10/3.” in Culture, Art, Education. Krasnoyarsk: Krasnoyarsk Academy of Music and Theatre: 97-109.

1998 Плотников, Борис. К Вопросу О Расширении Аналитического Кругозора Педагогов-Музьікантов: Практический аспект идей и метода Генриха Шенкера. Краноярск: Краноярская академия музыки и театра. [1998 Plotnikov, Boris. On Expanding the Analytical Outlook of Teachers of Music: Practical Aspects of the Theory of Heinrich Schenker. Krasnoyarsk: Krasnoyarsk Academy of Music and Theatre.]

1997 Акопян, Левон. ”Теория Музьіки в Поисках Научности: Методология и Философия ‘Структурного Сльшания’ в Музьіковедении Последних Десятилетий.” Муыкалъная академця 1: 181-9, 2: 110-23. [1997 Akopian, Levon. ”Music Theory in search of a Scientific Basis: The Methodology and Philosophy of ‘Structural hearing’ in Musicology’s Last Decade.” Muzykal’naia Akademiia 1: 181-9, 2: 110-23]

1992 Неклюлов, Юрий. ”Заметки о Шенкеризме.” Муыкалъная академця 3: 213-6. [1992 Nekljudov, Yurii. ”Remarks on Schenkerism.” Muzykal'naja Akademija 3: 213-6.]

1992 Gołąb, Maciej. ”Анализ н Произвдение”. Муыкалъная академця 3: 221. [1992 Gołąb, Maciej. ”Analysis and Work.” Muzykali’naja Akademiia 3: 221.] – translation of an article originally in Polish.

1984 Баский, В. ”О теории Х. Шенкера и ‘музыке настоящего’.” Советская музіка 1: 121-2.[1984 Barskii, V(ictor). ”The Theory of H. Schenker and ‘genuine music.’” Sovetskaia Muzyka 1: 121-2.]

1979 Холопов, Ю. ”Музыкально-әстетические взгляды Х. Шенкера.” Әстетические очерки 5: 234-53. [1979 Kholopov, Y(urii). ”Musical-Aesthetic Views of H. Schenker.” Esteticheskie Ocherki 5: 234-53.]

1978 Холопов, Юрий. Музыкально-теоретическая система ha Х. Шенкера (болг. яз.). София, 1978. [Kholopov, Yurii. ”Musical-thoretical System of H. Schenker (published in Bulgarian). Sofia, 1978.

1998 Stefanija, Leon. ”Glasbeno-analiticni nastavki: Med idejo in strukturo.” Muzikoloski zbornik 34: 147-54.

2000 Medina, Cedilia and Juan Pablo Medina. ”Entrevista a Carl Schachter.” En Pauta 74: 18-24.

2000 Fessel, Pablo. ”La concepcion kantiana del tiempo y la anterioridad de lo tonal en la teoria de Heinrich Schenker.” Musica e investigacion 3/6: 127-34.

1998 Ulhoa, Mario. ”Gavotte I BWV 995: Reducao e performance musical.” Urucungo 1/1. http://www.svn.com.br/urucungo/ulloa/ulloa1.htm

1996 Schachter, Carl, trans. by David Aijon. ”La reconciliacion de opuestos: Elementos cromaticos en los dos primeros movimientos de las sonatas para piano op. 31 num. 1 y op. 53 de Beethoven.” Quodlibet 6: 47-59.

1995 Gago, Luis. ”Fondo y modelo” Quodlibet: Revista de especialización musical 1: 51-65. Translation of Roger Beeson, ”Background and Model – A Concept in Musical Analysis” Music Review 32/4 (1971): 349-59.

1990 Barce, Ramón. Tratado de armonía. Madrid: Real Musical. 

1986 Purroy Chicot, Pedro.   ”Heinrich Schenker a través de Felix Salzer, como una posible alternativa de comprensión y progreso, o la necesidad de un nuevo planteamiento.”  Nassarre: Revista aragonesa de musicología 2/1: 71-94.

1983 Ramón Stilles. ”La obra multiple en Brahms: Las fantasías op. 116.” Quodlibet: Revista de especialización musical 9 (1997): 97-119. Translation of Jonathan Dunsby, ”The Multi-Piece in Brahms: Fantasien Op. 116.” In Brahms: Biographical, Documentary, and Analytical Studies, ed. by R. Pascall. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983: 167-89.

VITA

Benjamin McKay Ayotte completed a bachelor of arts cum laude from Eastern Michigan University (Ypsilanti, Michigan) in 1995, where he studied Schenkerian analysis with Sylvan Kalib. In 1997 he entered into the master’s degree program at Bowling Green State University (Bowling Green, Ohio), where he completed coursework in musicology and music theory. He is currently a Ph.D. candidate in music theory at Michigan State University, where his dissertation will be an analytical study of Schenker’s Lieder for solo voice and piano. Ayotte is a member of the Society for Music Theory, The College Music Society, and the American Musicological Society. He is the author of Heinrich Schenker: A Guide to Research (New York: Routledge, 2003).