|
b. 139
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The correctness of the version of FE (→EE) is confirmed by the sources of the orchestral part – MFrorch and FEorch, whereby the latter contains a cautionary category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 139
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
Both GE and EE interpreted the mark of FE as an accent and gave it the form of a common short accent. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 139
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The missing slur is probably an inaccuracy of notation – cf. bars 115, 123, 267 and 275. On the other hand, the long accent over the crotchet suggests that the slur is not necessary; it is also absent in strictly analogous bar 291. Due to this reason, in the main text we give the slur in brackets. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
|||||
|
b. 139
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
In the main text we add a cautionary category imprint: Editorial revisions |
|||||
|
b. 139
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
It seems that both published versions of the beginning of this bar were already present in AI, in which one can see a crossing-out of the crotchet, probably G category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Chopin's hesitations , Accompaniment changes , Corrections of AI |
in 
before this note in cellos, after the g featured four bars earlier. The pupil's copies also do not indicate a possible oversight of a 
before the discussed note – Chopin did not introduce changes in any of them. Therefore, the natural added in 
