If the scale is imitation of the tone on the horizontal plane, that is, note after note, then chords are imitation on the vertical, notes sounded together. If the scale is analysis, then the chord is synthesis of the tone.And he further says[41, page 26]:
The triad is without a doubt similar to the tone, but it is no more similar to its model than, say, Assyrian reliefs are to their human models.By recognizing that all the simple elements of scale (i.e. the scale tones) as well as the compound elements (i.e., the chord and melodies) are all derived from the same principle, and realizing the relationship between analysis (i.e., breaking down an object to its parts) and perception of impression (i.e., the holistic view), he establishes a continuum between the consonances and dissonances[41, page 20]:
That is to say, here the musical ear does indeed abandon the attempt at exact analysis, but it still takes note of the impression. The more remote overtones are recorded by the subconscious, and when they ascend into the conscious they are analyzed and their relation to the total sound is determined. But this relation is, to repeat, as follows: the more immediate overtones contribute more, the more remote contribute less. Hence, the distinction between them is only a matter of degree, not of kind.
There is a very subtle and important point in this analogy. What this relationship is implying is a relationship between content and form. Before we can grasp this point we need to fully understand the function of tonality and its implications.