That's a straw man, Owain. Of course English isn't "natural" (read: innate), but the common fundamental grammar (Chomsky's "universal grammar") that makes human language possible in the first place is clearly innate, and, like the man says, universal.

No one is arguing that the Western system of functional harmony is "natural" or innate. Only that there might well be some innateness to more general concepts of "consonance" and "dissonance."

- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY


On 05 Feb 2005, at 7:20 PM, Owain Sutton wrote:



David W. Fenton wrote:

And when you eliminate the concept of dissonance in the musical text (i.e., the dissonances are never resolved), then you no longer have a distinction between the two types of intervals beyond the culturally defined meanings the listeners bring to the table.

This is a good explanation of the situation - unfortunately it's beyond the distance that even musicians are prepared to go to question whether their understanding of music is inate or acquired. I do find is scary, that people can react so vociferously against any suggestion that the major/minor tonality that *feels* natural to them is actually not something inherent or natural. They wouldn't react the same way if I told them that English wasn't the 'natural' language, or that base-10 wasn't 'natural' maths (assuming we got that far in the maths class :p ) But I find the defensiveness that surrounds western tonality quite scary, and very puzzling.
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale



_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to