Our most fundamental concepts of musical motion and space, used by laypeople an d music theorists alike, are defined by conceptual metaphors that are based on our experience of physical motion. We analyze the 3 most important metaphors of musical motion : the "MOVING MUSIC. " metaphor, the "MUSICAL LANDSCAPE" metaphor, and the "MOVING FORCE" metaphor. We show how each metaphor is grounded in a particular basic experience of physical motion and physical forces and how the logic of physical motion shapes the logic of musical motion. We suggest that our conceptualization of, discourse about, and even our experience of musical motion depend on the logic of these 3 metaphors.Music moves . And something in the way it moves moves us. The relative ease with which we talk about musical motion might fool us into thinking that we know quite well what musical motion is . But do we? This article suggests how the "theory of conceptual metaphor" that has developed over the past two decades can explain important aspects of our experience and understanding of musical motion. As we will see, the logic of certain metaphors shapes our understanding of musical motion and constrains the inferences we make in reasoning about such motion . These metaphors define what moves, the way it can move, and where it moves to.Using the tools and analytic resources of the theory of conceptual metaphor, we argue for two major claims : (a) our understanding of musical motion is entirel yRequests for reprints should be sent to Mark L. Johnson, Department of Philosophy, 1295 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-1295 .

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

RECENT STUDIES CONCERNING "musical forces" suggest that listeners of tonal music may understand, experience, and create that music (in part) through a metaphorical process that maps physical motion onto musical motion. These studies argue that musical motion is shaped by a "musical gravity," a "musical magnetism," and a "musical inertia" that are analogous to their physical counterparts. The studies also found a variety of types of evidence (the distribution of patterns within compositions, improvisations, and analyses; the behavior of computer models of melodic expectation; and the responses of participants in psychological experiments). However, none of this evidence quantifies how the interaction of musical forces might account for listeners' judgments of the dynamic tendencies of notes within heard melodic patterns. This article complements and extends these studies in three ways. First, we show how a reexamination of the metaphorical bases of the forces leads to a number of hypotheses to be tested. Second, we report an experiment that tested those hypotheses by asking listeners specifically to make judgments about the experienced "strength" of presented pattern completions. Third, we report a content analysis of the distribution of the same patterns within in Schenker's Five Graphic Music Analyses.