This question already has an answer here:

According to Is this generic cadence chart from Kostka/Payne generally accepted?,

enter image description here

However, the authentic cadence in natural minor, which is v-i, does not meet the definition by Kostka/Payne here. The first chord, v, doesn't really contain the leading tone (as the subtonic and the leading tone are two completely different concepts), while the second chord, i, is the tonic. In this view, it seems to be more plagal, but it isn't.

So, why is v-i in natural minor viewed as an authentic cadence while it doesn't fit the definition by Kostka/Payne?

marked as duplicate by David Bowling, Richard theory Jul 14 at 13:45

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 1
    Please note that the answer to "is this chart generally accepted" is "not really". – Your Uncle Bob Jul 14 at 3:57
  • 4
    Who says v–i is viewed as an authentic cadence? – Richard Jul 14 at 4:08
  • 3
    @MaikaSakuranomiya -- I've never heard that before. I have seen several people here at MusicSE suggest to you that Vm-Im is a perfectly workable minor key progression, but I haven't noticed anyone here claiming that it is an authentic cadence. – David Bowling Jul 14 at 4:19
  • 1
    I've always considered that in a minor key, the perfect cadence would be V-i, not v-i. So having that leading note is crucial. (In my world!) – Tim Jul 14 at 5:28
  • 2
    Dupe of - 'Can we have a perfect cadence in a minor key?' ? – Tim Jul 14 at 6:37