Soru

The following passage is adapted from an essay on historical musicology.

Musicological consensus regarding the performance of *notes inégales*—the practice of playing equally written notes with unequal duration, typically adopting a long-short rhythmic profile, in French Baroque repertoire—has undergone substantial revision since the early twentieth century. Eugène Borrel's seminal 1934 treatise established the orthodox framework, positing that the practice was strictly circumscribed chronologically (1650 to 1793) and geographically (exclusively French), and was rigidly governed by metric parameters. According to Borrel, inequality was mechanically applied to the specific rhythmic subdivision immediately below the tactus, or beat, and was invariably realized as a precise 3:1 ratio, effectively converting pairs of even notes into sharp dotted rhythms regardless of musical context.

Subsequent scholarship, however, has systematically dismantled Borrel's deterministic taxonomy. Frederick Neumann, while generally acquiescing to the geographical circumscription of the practice, argued vehemently in the 1960s that the degree of temporal alteration was fluid and highly context-dependent. Neumann contended that inequality ranged from a gentle, almost imperceptible lengthening of the initial note—a ratio perhaps closer to 3:2 or 7:5—to a sharp, over-dotted rhythm. This variability, Neumann asserted, was dictated not by mathematical stricture but by the *affect* or emotional character of the composition. Furthermore, he demonstrated that inequality occasionally permeated rhythmic levels beyond the immediate subdivision of the beat, particularly in *adagio* tempos where smaller note values carried melodic weight.

More recently, David Fuller and Stephen Hefling have challenged the geographical and stylistic boundaries maintained by both Borrel and Neumann. Fuller’s meticulous analysis of pinned barrels from mechanical musical instruments of late eighteenth-century England and Germany provides empirical evidence of widespread inequality in performances of purportedly non-French repertoire. Corroborating this, Hefling’s re-examination of didactic treatises by Johann Joachim Quantz and Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach revealed that German proponents of the *galant* style explicitly instructed performers to assimilate French inequality in specific stylistic contexts, often contrasting it with the inverted 'Lombardic rhythm' (short-long).

Building upon this decentering of French exclusivity, John Byrt has further expanded the scope of inquiry by tracing the phonetic origins of rhythmic inequality. Byrt theorizes that the long-short *notes inégales* rhythm originated not as an abstract instrumental convention, but as a practical reflection of prosody in the French language, specifically the natural lingering on the penultimate syllables of words. He argues that as vocal music traditions heavily influenced instrumental phrasing during the seventeenth century, this text-driven rhythmic elasticity was codified into instrumental performance practice before eventually disseminating across the European continent. Consequently, contemporary historiography conceptualizes *notes inégales* not as a monolithic, mathematically precise, and exclusively French institution, but as a malleable, pan-European expressive device whose realization relied heavily on the interpreter’s stylistic fluency, rhetorical intent, and underlying linguistic foundations.

Based on the passage, match each of the following musicological scholars with the specific claim, evidence, or theoretical framework explicitly attributed to them in the text.