Content deleted Content added
London Hall (talk | contribs) Nobody is claiming that syntax is fundamental in music |
→MMN and ERANKoelsch, S. (2009). "Music-syntactic Processing and Auditory Memory – Similarities and Differences between ERAN and MMN". Psychophysiology, 46(1): 179-190.: move ref out of heading |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
When analysing the regularities and structure of [[music]] as well as the processing of music in the [[brain]], certain findings lead to the question of whether music is based on a [[syntax]] that could be compared with [[linguistic syntax]]. To get closer to this question it is necessary to have a look at the basic aspects of syntax in [[language]], as language unquestionably presents a complex syntactical system. If music has a matchable syntax, noteworthy equivalents to basic aspects of linguistic syntax have to be found in musical structure. By implication the processing of music in comparison to language could also give information about the structure of music.
Line 5 ⟶ 4:
Syntax in general can be referred to as a study of the principles and rules needed for the construction of a language or as a term in particular describing these principles and rules for a special language.
===Linguistic syntax – three principles
Linguistic syntax is especially marked by its structural richness, which becomes apparent in its multi layered organization as well as in the strong relationship between syntax and meaning. That is that there are special linguistic syntactic principles that define how the language is formed out of different subunits, such as words out of [[morphemes]], phrases out of words and sentences out of phrases. Furthermore, linguistic syntax is featured by the fact that a word can take on abstract [[grammatical functions]] that are less defined through properties of the word itself and more through the context and structural relations. This is for example that every [[noun]] can be used as a [[subject (grammar)|subject]], [[object (grammar)|object]] or [[indirect object]], but without a sentence as the normal context of a word, no statement about its [[grammatical function]] can be made. At last, linguistic syntax is marked by abstractness. This means that only conventional structural relations and not psychoacoustic relationships are the basis for the linguistic syntax.<ref name=Patel2008>Patel, A.D. (2008). Music, Language, and the Brain. Oxford University Press, USA</ref>
===Musical syntax
Concerning musical syntax these three aspects of richness in linguistic syntax as well as the abstractness should be found in music too, if one wants to claim that music has a comparable syntax. An annotation that has to be made concerns the fact that most of the studies dealing with musical syntax are confined to the consideration of Western European tonal music. Thus this article can also only focus on [[tonality|Western tonal music]].<ref name=Patel2008/>
====Multilayered organization====
Line 33 ⟶ 32:
=====Tension and resolution=====
Searching for other aspects of hierarchical structure of music there is a controversial discussion, if the organization of [[Tension (music)|tension]] and [[Resolution (music)|resolution]] in music can be described as hierarchical structure or only as a purely sequential structure. According to
The question concerning the kind of structure that features tension and resolution in music is linked very close to the relationship between order and meaning in music. Considering tension and resolution as one possible kind of meaning in music a hierarchical structure would imply that a change of order of musical elements would have an influence on the meaning of the music.
Line 43 ⟶ 42:
==Neuronal processing of musical and linguistic syntax==
Investigating the neuronal processing of musical syntax can serve two proposed aspects.'''<ref>Patel, A.D. (2003). Language, music, syntax and the brain]. Nature Neuroscience. 6(7):674-681</ref>'''
===Processing of music and musical syntax===
Line 55 ⟶ 54:
(4)Concerning harmonic aspects of major-minor tonal music, Musical syntax can be characterized by statistical regularities in the succession of chord functions in time, that is probabilities of chord transitions. As these regularities are stored in a [[long-term memory]], predictions about following chords are made automatically, when listening to a musical phrase.
====MMN and ERAN====
Source:<ref>Koelsch, S. (2009). "[http://www.stefan-koelsch.de/papers/Koelsch_2009_Psychophys_ERAN_MMN_Review.pdf Music-syntactic Processing and Auditory Memory – Similarities and Differences between ERAN and MMN]". Psychophysiology, 46(1): 179-190.</ref> The violation of these automatically made predictions lead to the observation of so-called [[Event-related potential|ERPs]] (event related potential, a stereotyped electrophysiological response to an internal or external stimulus). Two forms of ERPs can be detected in the context of processing music. One is the [[Mismatch negativity|MMN]] (mismatch negativity), which has first been investigated only with physical deviants like [[frequency]], [[sound intensity]], [[timbre]] deviants (referred to as [[phMMN]]) and could now also be shown for changes of abstract auditory features like tone pitches (referred to as [[afMMN]]). The other one is the so-called [[Electroencephalography|ERAN]] (early right anterior negativity), which can be elicited by syntactic irregularities in music. Both the ERAN and the MMN are ERPs indicating a mismatch between predictions based on regularities and actually experienced acoustic information. As for a long time it seemed to be, that the ERAN is a special variant of the MMN, the question arises, why they are told apart today. There are several differences between the MMN and the ERAN found in the last years:
Line 63:
=====Differences – development=====
This is represented in the development of the ERAN and MMN. The ERAN cannot be verified in newborn babies, whereas the MMN can actually be demonstrated in [[fetus]]. In two-year-old children, the ERAN is very small, in five-year-old children a clear ERAN is found, but with a longer latency than in adults. With the age of 11 years children show an ERAN similar to ERANs in adults. Out of these observation the thesis can be built that the MMN is essential for the establishment and maintenance of representations of the acoustic environment and for processes of the [[auditory scene analysis]]. But only the ERAN is completely based on learning to build up a structural model, which is established with reference to representations of syntactic regularities already existing in a long-term memory format. Considering effects of [[training]] both the ERAN and the MMN can be modulated by training.
=====Differences – neural sources=====
Line 78:
(4)At least a comparison between the actually incoming sound and the predictions based on the model is made. This process is partly the same for the MMN and the ERAN as well.
=== Comparison of the processing of musical and linguistic syntax===
Source:<ref name=Patel2008/> As the ERAN is similar to an ERP called [[Early Left Anterior Negativity|ELAN]] which can be elicited by violation of linguistic syntax it seems to be obvious that the ERAN really represents syntactic processing. Deduced from this thought an interaction between music-syntactic and language-syntactic processing would be very likely.There are different possibilities in [[neuroscience]] to approach to an answer to the question of an overlap between the neuronal processing of linguistic and musical syntax.
| |||