|
b. 208
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
The FE1 version is erroneous. This can be inferred from the concordance of GC and FE2, corrected after [A]. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 208-209
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The fingerings of FEH and EE differ essentially. What is more, in bar 208, FEH initially contained the same fingering as in EE; however, it was then changed to a regular scheme, conveniently synchronised with the accents. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||
|
b. 208
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
There is no accidental to the bottom note of the 2nd grace note (d category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Errors repeated in EE |
||||||||
|
b. 208-209
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
As the division of the slur in FE (→EE) falls during a tied note, practically, both versions of slurring bear the same meaning. To the main text we adopt the slur of GE as compliant with the slurs in analogous b. 129 and 148-149, running from the beginning of the phrase. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 208
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
The lack of a dot is almost certainly an oversight of the engraver of FE (→GE,EE). The mark is near the end of the slur and can be considered part of it. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
2) in the sources. This patent inaccuracy was removed only in 
to the bottom note, was moved to the beginning of b. 208. It could have been the inaccuracies concerning the accidentals of the grace notes that influenced the decision to correct the rhythm too.
