CC BY
23
European Journal of Arts 4 (2021) - PRE_M|ER Section 2. Musical arts - issn 2310-5666 -
UDK 781.24:81'22 DOI: 10.29013/EJA-21-4-112-117
D. STARTSEV 1
1 Kharkiv I. P. Kotlyarevskiy National University of Arts
MUSICAL NOTATION AS A SEMIOTIC OBJECT
Abstract
Aim: of the research - to reveal theoretical standpoints allowing to analyse musical text as a semiotic object in a context of musical work.
Results: analysis of theories explaining phenomenon of graphical form of music allowed to define characteristics and functions of musical text as well as its role in creation, interpretation and perception of musical work. The research revealed justifications to regard musical text as a sign system constituted from complexes of graphical signs. The results of the research to some degree characterize sign functioning, processes of signification of musical ideas, their transformation into sign-vehicle and further interpretation.
Scientific novelty: the article presents generalization of several theoretical standpoints regarding phenomenon of musical notation.
Practical significance: main theses of the article demonstrate semiotic approach to examination of musical text and might be used in various types of analysis of graphical signs. Information received from research might contribute to creation of methods in which musical text is examined, methods relevant foremost for interpreters and for composers aimed at the most accurate fixation of their ideas in musical notation.
Keywords: semiotics of musical text; sign functioning; graphical signs; interpretation of musical text; musical text; musical work; interpretant.
For citation: Startsev D. Musical Notation As A Semiotic Object // European Journal of Arts, 2021, №4. - C. 112-117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29013/EJA-21-4-112-117
Introduction
Comprehension of written form of music bears a status of a relevant task of modern research. Being a representation of acoustic images through a system of graphical signs, notation becomes an object of examination for semiotics. Peculiarity of sign-related processes in music causes a necessity for exact definition of sign units and their functioning in the framework of this system. We suppose that the most effective approach to study of sign nature of music is a creation of an apparatus founded on general postulates of semiotics and their adaptation to specifics of musical phenomena and processes. Approach to musical text as a semiotic object contributes to new methods of its interpretation and opens the way to the meaning enshrined in it. In order so solve this problem musicology can apply results of research revealing fundamental basics of general semiotics (Ch. Pierce [3], Ch. Morris [5], A. Solomonik [6]), semiology (F. de Saussure [4]) and carry on develop-
ment of promising ideas contained in special works of the scholars (K. Agawu [16], E. Tarasti [13], R. Monelle [12]). This article favours two theories which the author regards as emblematical: one of them belongs to a French-Canadian scholar J.- J. Nattiez and the other one - to a Russian scholar M. Aranovskiy; both these theories are devoted to fundamental problems of graphical form of music.
Results
In order to analyse musical text as a semiotic object it is necessary to determine its position in context of a musical work. J. - J. Nattiez comes from a hypothesis that a musical piece is not restricted by its textual form or a system of structures. It is an artistic process, constituted from three kinds of musical activity: process of composition, process of interpretation (performance) and its consequent perception. Thus, a musical work becomes a term embracing all the links of communicative chain. But in order to clarify understanding of the subject of
Section 2. Musical arts
I PREMIER
issn 2310-5666
European Journal of Arts 4 (2021)
musical semiotics (or semiology, as it is defined by the scholar), J.- J. Nattiez proposes the following thesis: "Semiology - once again - is not the science of communication" (H. c. 16). This paradoxical statement is called to attract attention to main objectives of semiology in musical context, that is examination of specifics of functioning of symbolical forms and phenomenon of reference [1,15]. Symbolical form in this theory is defined by the author as a sign or complex of signs united with limitless field of interpretants1 [1, 8].
Like J.-J. Nattiez demarcates musical text and musical work, M. Aranovskiy differentiates musical notation and musical text. It goes without saying that musical text is much broader than musical notation, but M. Aranovskiy notes that musical notation is an important component of musical text, its point of departure [2, 5]. Obvious discrepancies between these approaches are caused by these scholars' choices of subject of research. Treatise of J.-J. Nattiez regards functioning of symbolical form of musical work; M. Aranovskiy explores a structure of musical text. But regardless of the subject chosen, they both concentrate their attention on notation as it is an inherent and fixed component of musical piece.
M. Aranovskiy states that musical text, on the one hand, is "merely a scripture", which performers realize in sonic form after its reading, but on the other hand, text is "not only a scripture", "but music" [2, 8]. A reason for this ambiguous function of musical text lies in a specific trait of its representation. M. Aranovskiy compares musical text to a verbal one basing on two main criteria: perception of their meaning and perception of their structure. The scholar says that in musical art structures are present in text, while meaning can be understood by reflection; in verbal text, vice versa, meaning is perceived directly, while structures are ensconced [2, 9]. The scholar regards notation as graphical structurally-processual variant of musical work and notes that it defines "interpretation of content" only partially. Conversely, content of verbal text is perceived without analysis of a form in which it is given [2, 9]. These observations made by M. Aranovskiy allow to conclude that authentic cognizance of musical
text in its integral form (as much as it is possible), cannot be reached without reading of its structure. As a result of this, the scholar distinguishes three components of musical text: scripture, structure and meaning. This unity of scripture and structure causes not only a fixation of the structure by the scripture, but also its "execution". Meaning, a third constituent, according to M. Aranovskiy, can be freely interpreted by the subject, but it is dependent from the structure. Thus, the author refers to F. de Saussure's statement about "randomness of sign"2 and proves its incongruity with the essence of musical signs, since signified meaning is "entirely dependent from structure" [2, 10-11]. As a result, a path of cognizance of meaning lies through adequate reading of a structure with reception of a sign representing certain significance. The author notes, that semantics is caused by a "system of filters", with them being types of musical idiom, style, genre, forms and "stereotypes ofmusical speech" [2, 10].
J.-J. Nattiez in his theory connects concept of meaning with a process of functioning of interpretants [1,11]. Meaning is not restricted by a form of sender's message and its following decoding by a recipient in a process of communication. Contrary to that, the author argues that meaning is a result of assignment of set of interpretants and their placement in a special form. As it can be seen from the context of author's thought, he means a symbolical form. In other words, meaning is constructed by this assignment. The process of communication supposes that both sender and recipient ascribe certain meaning to a message. But the scholar stresses that there are absolutely no guarantees whatsoever that all the subjects involved in this process will use the same field of interpretants [1, 11]. Thus, as can be seen from this thesis, a degree to which a subject knows the rules of functioning of signs directly influences level of fidelity of its reading. We also must consider that processes of appearance of interpretants, provoked by the signs, are not strictly predefined as a quantity of interpretants as well as conditions of their creation are not limited. And sign system and rules by which signs function it its context define borders of respective field of interpretants.
1 Term «interpretant» was suggested by Ch. Pierce in his triadic model of the sign. James Hoopes said: «The "sign", as Ch. Peirce employed the term, is also a thought, but it differs from an "idea" in that its meaning is not self-evident. A sign receives its meaning by being interpreted by a subsequent thought or action. The sign attains meaning «in relation to a subsequent thought - what Ch. Peirce called an interpretaunt» [3, 7].
2 We remind that it was F. de Saussure's way of characterising an independence of physical form («signifier») of a and its «signified». Scholar employed: "The bond between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary. Since I mean by sign the whole that results from the associating of the signifier with the signified, I can simply say: the linguistic sign is arbitrary" [4, 67].
D. STARTSEV MUSICAL NOTATION AS A SEMIOTIC OBJECT
European Journal of Arts 4 (2021)
I PREMIER
Section 2. Musical arts
issn 2310-5666
J.-J. Nattiez discerns three aspects of symbolical form:
1. Poetical dimension, that is a dimension including various artistic processes, especially in context of musical activity, everything involved in creation and ascribing of certain meaning to any symbolical form;
2. Aesthetical dimension, in which "recipients" (listeners) create their own interpretation of symbolical form while experiencing a work of art, and this interpretation is also a form of musical activity. But the author notes that in this context usage of term "recipient" is not quite correct. The listener does not "receive" the work literally, but rather creates his own interpretants in the process of perception, certain subjective reactions to a sign. Thus, interpretants are represented by the ideas, creation of which is provoked by signs;
3. Trace, in author's terminology, or symbolical image, as we can name it as an analogy to acoustic image, incarnates in a physical, material form, capable of being perceived. J.-J. Nattiez suggests usage of the word "trace" since poetical process in its essence is an inner process and requires expression in material form, which would be accessible to perception of other subjects. Perception of material processes' products, partially expresses in material image, is influenced by such factors as interpreter's own personal experience [1,11-12].
Thus, in spite of the fact that material form itself does not guarantee that interpretation of meaning will be equal to author's vision and is not conducive to immediate reveal of significance, an existence of this meaning without material form is utterly impossible [1,15].
Thus, semiological "programme" of J.-J. Nattiez includes three objects: 1) poetical (artistic) processes, 2) aesthetical processes, 3) material incarnation of a work (its appearance in real world, such as act of performance, scores, written text etc.), in other words, physical (material) images ofpoetical process. Each class of objects, according to the scholar, supposes certain type of analysis contributing to understanding of their specific features. Respectively, J.-J. Nattiez discerns three analytical approaches. The first of them relates to poetical dimension, the second - to aesthetical one. The third analytical approach is aimed at examination of immanent configuration of musical work constituting neutral level [1, 5]. Musical text, being one of fixated forms ofsymbolical levels, can be seen as a semiotic object, studying ofwhich allows to reveal methods ofits understanding and opens the way to a meaning enshrined in it.
Musical text as a symbolical form serves as an invariant of musical work, and this distinguishes it from other
symbolical forms. J.-J. Nattiez reveals significant difference between sheet music and acoustic image left by any performer. He stresses that sheet music is a stable material object, while there will be as many acoustic realisations as performances ofany piece. But regardless ofthe placement ofimaginary border between poetical and aesthetical processes we must take into account interpretants emerging on the way from sheet music to its acoustic realisation. This is the reason why J.-J. Nattiez applies analysis of neutral level only to graphical form, as this form precedes any interpretation. In other words, no performer creates a work because he only gives it a way to physical existence.
M. Aranovskiy interprets musical text as a unity of mental sphere, musical structure and iconic scripture. In his words, "musical thought is done in musical structures, while musical structures are given (performed) in notation" [2, 11]. This allows the author to formulate vertical scheme: thought-structure-scripture, a scheme capable of being read in both directions, representing in one case a creative aspect, in other case a perceptive one [2, 11]. The way of scholar's rumination reminds of components of J.-J. Nattiez's semiological programme, particularly, poetical and aesthetical processes with their neutral level, expressed in notation.
M. Aranovskiy regards understanding of musical text as a material signifier and understanding of meaning as a spiritual signified, which is essentially a projection of linguistic model of a word being double-sided (signifier-signified) as insufficient. He motivates this statement by the fact that musical text is a multi-level system created from multiple signifier-signified relations. According to M. Aranovskiy, in a certain link of this system "original psychic intentions" might become "signified" while a system of musical idiom and consequently emerging musical structures become "signifier". In other link "signifier" is a notation, and "signified" is constructed by the structures on another level, "psychic intention" [2, 12]. Since the researcher ascribes "certain iconic traits" to scripture, it can be regarded as a signifier. If acoustic realisation is "signified", notation will be signifier related to it, a "reduced, schematic reflection in other words, a sign of true existence of music" [2, 12]. Drawing conclusions, the author describes musical text as "system of multiple representative relations" [2, 12]. M. Aranovskiy's idea about multi-level relations between signs and their objects proves complexity of semiosis in musical work. It is worth nothing that field of signs and their denotants on each level spawns potentially infinite
Section 2. Musical arts - European Journal of Arts 4 (2021) - issn 2310-5666 -
numbers of interpretants, causing this system to be more large-scale. Besides that, sign-like functioning occurs in three dimensions: syntactics, semantics and pragmatics1.
Regarding a term "text of work", M. Aranovskiy notes that this very term indicates text and work not being identical. The author views work and text as ontologically different objects situated in different spatial and temporal dimensions. A work has been already completed, while a text is still happening, it flows in time. "A work unfolds into a text, a text folds into a work" [2, 24-25). Temporal status of text allows M. Aranovskiy to draw a conclusion about its integrity not being obligatory, as a fragment of musical texts will still be understood as text [2, 26]. This allows the author to conclude that text must be characterized not by completeness, but by "successive realization of system if relations between elements" [2, 29]. M. Aranovskiy's interpretation oftext as unfolding network ofelements "being in certain relations with each other and all others" unfolding in time is congruent to the concept of system [2, 28].
We must note that graphical form of musical text is founded on sign system2, which is equal in complexity to a network of textual elements represented by it. Thus, there is a justification to regard text as a semiotic object.
Semiotic approach is capable of distinguishing text and musical work. According to M. Aranovskiy, semiotic nature of text conditions its comprehension through a pair of terms: syntactics - semantics; while a work is understood through concepts of form and content [2, 29]. The scholar faces a following task: to define general laws, aimed at rationalization and formalization of sonic environment in a certain structure. This cases the scholar to formulate an important thought: "If a work draws attention to form as a resulting integrity, text draws attention to temporal creation ofinterconnections between its elements, to their hierarchy" [2, 30].
Based on these thoughts, M. Aranovskiy gives a definition of musical text: it is a succession of sounds that "is interpreted by a subject as relating to music, has a structure built in accordance with norms of a certain historical musical idiom and bears certain meaning comprehensible with intuition" [2, 35]. A structure is a 'nucleus' of musical text" [2, 38]. Its ability to unite multitude of elements and create various types of rela-
tions between them is regarded by the author as accordant to essence of music. The scholar underlines importance of relations between elements for music as there is no other way to unite them into "something whole". He thinks that integrity in music is created from "mute" elements, who "cannot reach the world of denotants" [2, 38].
We must note that M. Aranovskiy does not think it is practical to apply methods of examination of musical text, derived directly from linguistic approaches. This can be proven by differences revealed by the author in his comparison between musical and verbal texts. As he thinks that a problem of musical sign's nature preserves its relevancy, M. Aranovskiy suggests a change of term "succession of sign units" to "sound succession". This context allows to understand his thesis, in which he argues that elements of musical text are "mute" as they acquire significance only after being joined with others.
Conclusions
Summarized approaches to solution of problems of musical work, its written and acoustic form, are aimed at development of theoretical postulates revealing specifics of such phenomenon as text in music.
In his concept J.-J. Nattiez understands musical work as a process of creation of meaning. Dividing it into poetical, neutral and aesthetical levels, he defines musical text as one of symbolical forms of musical work. Being a result of poetical process, musical text serves as a "point of departure" for multitude of interpretations. In his turn, M. Aranovskiy does not equate musical text to notation, defining notation as an "important constituent of musical text" under certain conditions, although without giving much information about it. The scholar reveals iconic traits in notation and ascribes to it such function as fixation of musically-textual structures.
Phenomena represented, thoughts, "psychical intentions", acoustic images appearing in mind, acquire their material form as a result ofbeing replaced with graphical signs. Regardless of the terms which both scholar use to describe notation, "symbolical form of neutral level" or "iconic scripture of musical structure", it is represented as a tool to fixate composer's invariant and is an obligatory condition for its reception and interpretation.
1 Morris Ch. regards these semiotic dimensions and differentiates them according to types of relations between signs, between signs and objects, between signs and their interpretants [5, 6-7].
2 Solomonik A. classifies sign systems according to their principal signs. System of musical notation might be attributed to systems of scripture upon first sight but considering level of its complexity it should be characterized as a formalized system constituted by symbols with variable meanings [6, 76].
D. STARTSEV MUSICAL NOTATION AS A SEMIOTIC OBJECT
European Journal of Arts 4 (2021) - PREMJER Section 2. Musical arts
- issn 2310-5666 -
References
1. Nattiez J-J. Music and Discourse. Toward a Semiology of Music, Princeton (N.J.): Princeton University Press, 1990.- 272 p.
2. Aranovskiy M. G. Muzikal'nyi tekst. Struktura i svoystva (Musical text. Structure and properties),- Moscow: Kompozitor, 1998.- 343 p. (in Russ.).
3. Peirce Ch., Peirce on signs. Writings on Semiotic by Charles Sanders Peirce; Edited by James Hoopes. The University of North Carolina Press, 1991.- 284 p.
4. Saussure F. Course in General Linguistic, Philosophical Library, 1959. - 232 p.
5. Morris Ch. Foundations of the Theory of Signs / International Encyclopedia of Unified Science,- Vol. I. -No. 2. The University of Chicago Press, 1938.- P. 1-59.
6. Solomonik A. Ocherk obshei semiotiki (Essay on semiotics).- Minsk, 2009. - 189 p.
7. Afisi O. T. The Concept of Semiotics in Charles Sanders Peirce's Pragmatism, Trends in semantics and pragmatics, 2020.- P. 270-274. Available at: URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343167191_THE_CON-CEPT_OF_SEMIOTICS_IN_CHARLES_SANDERS_PEIRCE'S_PRAGMATISM
8. Sebeok Th. A. Signs: An Introduction to Semiotics, Second Edition, University of Toronto Press Incorporated, 2001.- 186 p.
9. Culler J. Saussure, Fontana, 1976.- 127 p.
10. Araki N. Saussure's Theory of Sign, Bull. Hiroshima Inst. Tech. Research,- Vol. 50. 2016.- P. 1-7.
11. Reybrouck M., Maeder C. Making sense ofmusic, Studies in musical semiotics. UCL Presses Universitaires, 2017.-P. 7-12. Available at: URL: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mark-Reybrouck/publication/323404142_ Making_sense_of_music_Studies_in_musical_semiotics/links/5a94a477aca27214056750c8/Making-sense-of-music-Studies-in-musical-semiotics.pdf?origin=publication_detail
12. Monelle R. Linguistics and Semiotics in Music, Harwood Academic Publishers, 1992.- 349 p.
13. Tarasti E. A Theory of Musical Semiotics, Indiana University Press, 1994.- 329 p.
14. The Music of Meaning (by Brandlt P., Brandlt L., Hanenberg P., Bennett A.), Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2019.- 324 p.
15. Music Analysis Experience. New Perspectives in Musical Semiotics (Edited by Maeder C., Reybrouck M.), Leuven University Press, 2015.- 356 p.
16. Agawu K. Music as Discourse, Oxford University Press, 2009.- 336 p.
17. Tarasti E. Semiotics of Classical Music, - Berlin/Bouston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, 2012.- 493 p.
18. Tarasti E. Signs of Music,- Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2002.- 224 p.
Information about the author
Dmytro Startsev, postgraduate at the Department of Interpretation and Analysis ofMusic, Kharkiv I. P. Kotlyarevskiy
National University of Art, Kharkiv, Ukraine
Address: 61003, Kharkiv, Ukraine, Maidan Konstitutsii 11/13
E-mail: dmitriy8startsev@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-1727-481X
Section 2. Musical arts - PREMJER European Journal of Arts 4 (2021) - issn 2310-5666 -
СТАРЦЕВ Д. 1
1 Хартвський шцюнальний утверситет мистецтв iMeHi I. П. Котляревського
МУЗИЧНА НОТАЦ1Я ЯК СЕМ1ОТИЧНИЙ ОБ'СКТ
Анотацт
Мета: виявлення теоретичных пiдстав анал1зу нотного текста як семiотичного об'екта у контексти музич-ного твору.
Методи: анал1з дослiджень семiотичного наукового напряму та спещальних музикознавчих теорш; порiв-няльний анал1з; методи аналоги та синтезу.
Результаты: аналiз теорш, як розкривають феномен графiчноi форми музики, дае змогу виявити вла-стивостi та функцп нотного тексту, а також його роль в процесах створення, штерпретування та сприйняття музичного твору. Пiд час досмдження визначенi пiдстави бачити у нотному текст знакову систему, яка сформована з комплекав графiчних знаюв. Отриманi результати певною мiрою характеризують знакове функцю-нування - процеси трансформування музичних iдей в знаконосп та ].х iнтерпретацiя.
Наукова новизна: у статп запропоновано узагальнення деяких теоретичних положень, як1 вiдносяться до феномену нотного запису.
Практичне значення: отримаш результати стати демонструють семютичний пiдхiд у вивченнi властивос-тей нотного текста та можуть бути використаш в рiзних типах аналiзу графiчних знак1в. Надана iнформацiя сприятиме формуванню методiв роботи з нотним текстом, як1 актуальнi, у першу чергу, для 1'х iнтерпретаторiв та для композиторiв, як1 нацiленi на максимально точне фжсування власних ^ей у партитурi.
Ключов1 слова: семютика нотного тексту; знакове функцiонування,• графiчнi знаки; iнтерпретацiя нотного тексту; музичний текст; музичний твiр,• iнтерпретанта.
1нформац1я про автора:
Старцев Дмитро, аспирант кафедри iнтерпретацГi та анал1зу музики, Харк1вський Нацiональний Унiверситет
Мистецтв iм. I. П. Котляревського, Харк1в, Украша
Адреса: 61003, Харк1в, Укра'ша, Майдан Конституцп, 11/13
E-mail: dmitriy8startsev@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-1727-481X
СТАРЦЕВ Д. МУЗИЧНА НОТАЦ1Я ЯК СЕМ1ОТИЧНИЙ ОБ'СКТ
