Issues : Uncertain slur continuation
|
b. 115-119
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major
..
In FE the slur in the middle voice breaks at the end of line (in bar 115). GE overlooked the entire slur, despite an unambiguous and clear notation of GC. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE , Uncertain slur continuation |
||||||||
|
b. 119-121
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The fact that the slur is not continued on a new line (b. 120) is a patent mistake of FE, revised in EE. The continuous slur of GE is also erroneous, although, while looking at the slurs of AF, one can easily imagine that if the slur of [AG] in b. 120 were even slightly longer, the engraver of GE1 could have interpreted such overlapping slurs in this manner. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Uncertain slur continuation |
||||||||
|
b. 125-126
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
The slurring was most probably changed by Chopin in the basis for FE together with the matching system of beams. However, the new, longer phrase mark was reproduced inaccurately in FE – the ending of the phrase mark in b. 126, at the end of the page (like in our transcription), suggests that it should be continued in the next bar, in which, however, there is no ending of that phrase mark. We consider the a crotchet in b. 127, which ends the phrase, having been left outside the phrase mark to be a mistake; therefore, in the main text we lead the phrase mark to that note. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 127
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
In the main text we add the ending of the slur, since in the previous bar its shape in FE suggested that it should be continued. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 128-131
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In AF b. 129 opens a new line, and the slur that starts at the beginning of this bar does not match the slur at the end of b. 128, which suggests continuation. The continuous slur in FE is one of possible interpretations, yet a comparison with analogous b. 37 shows that Chopin probably meant the slurs to coincide, which we give as the main text. The fact that the slur beginning in b. 129 is absent in GE is either an earlier version written in [AG] or a mistake of the engraver. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
