This question started for me with an analysis using
It was analysis in Kostka/Payne for Mozart's K545, mv II, mm. 69-71...
G: I | IV6/IV V6/IV | IV
G: I |C: IV6 V6 | IV ... G:...
First that made me wonder how to show a tonicization rather than a modulation. I thought the
C: change was easier to read, but is that reserved for the specific meaning of "modulation?" If tonicization is meant, the secondary slash notation should be used?
Next, should the secondary role be fulfilled? In the Mozart example it is. It eventually gets to
By comparison, if I label a
V/ii shouldn't it fulfill its dominant function in some way? Like
V/ii-VI/ii. Hypothetically, if I had
C A7 Am and labeled it
I V/ii vi or
I V/ii v/ii isn't that kind of silly? In what way is that
A7 in context acting as a dominant?
If I had
C f#o B7, wouldn't
I iio/iii V7/iii at least make some sense? Because the subdominant function of
iio at least fulfilled its role and moved to the dominant of
iii - in other words
f#o B7 is
iio V7 in