Salzer & Schachter Counterpoint in Composition – some paraphrases & notes

In the Introduction, the authors state some of their views. This is interesting: [my emphasis] "Whatever
Fux's aims may have been, species counterpoint or indeed any approach to counterpoint cannot serve
as a method of composition in any style whatever."

So what is the point of learning Counterpoint? They say: "1. The study of counterpoint is above all the
study of voice-leading." Therefore, no matter what text or resource you are using to learn counterpoint,
don't confuse it with learning to compose; it is musical knowledge and skills that will help with
composition in the long run, and in the understanding of existing music.

Point #2: Salzer & Schachter believe that once a student acquires a solid foundation in the counterpoint
most relevant to the Common Practice period – which they call 'the period of triadic tonality (circa
1450-1900)' – it is an excellent foundation for understanding earlier AND later music.

Point #3: "The present book draws a distinction between the contrapuntal and the harmonic concepts;
it presents them as contrasting, but by no means as mutually exclusive. In distinguishing between
contrapuntal and harmonic progressions, we include among the former much that is usually considered
harmonic. Of the two great organizing forces, counterpoint is the older and the more inclusive.
Medieval polyphony is dominated by contrapuntal thinking. Progressions of a definitely harmonic
nature make their appearance in the fourteenth century, but attain real importance only in the second
half of the fifteenth century. The growth of harmonic organization influences but does not diminish the
role of counterpoint; most works show the cooperation and mutual influence of the two organizing
forces."

Here is something which might help in understanding point 3. On p. 26 the authors state [my
emphasis]:

"The combination of two voices gives rise to vertical intervals; when three voices sound together,
chords result. In a purely contrapuntal setting the succession of chords arises from the motion of voices
regulated by the laws concerning consonance and dissonance, forbidden parallels, etc. Counterpoint
organizes chord successions but not on the basis of harmonic function; such organization, of
course, belongs to the discipline of harmony. The presence or absence of functional relationships
among the chords is irrelevant to the purpose of the species exercise. Consequently, statements
like 'the II chord often proceeds to the V' do not belong to the sphere of counterpoint."

Point #4: "Species counterpoint -- far beyond its narrow application to any limited period in the history
of music -- can be so formulated as to present an ideal introduction to the basic voice-leading principles
underlying the works of many stylistic periods and composers."

Can be so formulated. What about Seth Monahan's 'Harmonic Counterpoint'? Here is how Monahan
himself characterizes it [my emphasis]:

What makes this "harmonic" species counterpoint?

Although harmony and counterpoint are closely linked in most music, species
counterpoint has traditionally been taught separately from the study of chords and
their relationships. In regular species counterpoint, the combination of lines is regulated
only by the (consonant or dissonant) intervals that result from their alignment. In other
 words, the chords that appear in traditional species counterpoint are byproducts rather
than the main event.
Harmonic species counterpoint is a new method for learning counterpoint, one that is
organized around chords rather than intervals. Every exercise has a specific harmonic
"skeleton" that provides the basic framework for combining lines. The harmonic
language used here is the "functional" or "common-practice" syntax of the Baroque and
classical periods of music (i.e. 1700s and early 1800s).
Another difference is that in traditional species counterpoint, the student may add lines
above or below the cantus firmus. In harmonic species work, the student will always be
given the bottom part (the bass line) and always composes the top part (the melody)
his-/herself [sic].
[http://sethmonahan.com/TH101HarmonicCounterpoint.html]

I think, but I'm not 100% sure yet, that chord progressions which are unorthodox from the 'common-
practice' point of view will appear in traditional counterpoint exercises. How frequently I don't know.