|
b. 198-199
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
Deleting the slur over the three-note motif, totally unjustified, as far as the music is concerned, is a possible result of misunderstanding at the proofreading of FE4, whose aim was addition of the tie of b category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
|||||
|
b. 198-200
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
The slurs in GC were corrected, almost certainly by Chopin, who added a clear ending of the slur in b. 198 and a beginning in b. 199; however, he did not delete the fragment of the original, continuous slur (which became superfluous). It is difficult to say whether this was the reason why this correction was not included in GE – according to us, the intention to separate the slurs is unquestionable here. The notation of FE (→EE) is ambiguous – the slur in b. 198 (at the end of the line) suggests continuation; however, there is no doubt that a new slur starts in b. 199. We interpret it literally as separated slurs, yet it is likely that the engraver meant a continuous slur, which, judging from the original version of GC, was probably in [A]. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
|||||
|
b. 198
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
In A there is no accidental before the 10th semiquaver. Chopin's patent oversight was corrected already in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2), by adding a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A |
|||||
|
b. 198
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
In the sources the only cautionary sign in this bar is a category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Cautionary accidentals |
|||||
|
b. 198
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In EE, a cautionary category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
2. See the adjacent 
restoring b
was added before f
2, poorly justified in this context.