![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : Errors in PE
b. 22
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
At the beginning of the bar, both JC and EF have a b category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Errors in PE |
|||||||||||
b. 22
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In PE there is no category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors in PE |
|||||||||||
b. 23
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In PE there is no arpeggio before this chord, which in this context is certainly an oversight. In JC, both signs of arpeggio in this bar are placed after chords. It seems to be one of the numerous graphic slips committed by the copyist (it also concerns bar 50, which is not written out in JC). category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information issues: Errors in PE , Inaccuracies in JC |
|||||||||||
b. 25-26
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In the main text we consider the slur over four quavers in the L.H., despite the fact that, probably, it was recreated inaccurately. It is revealed by its range, which is not a natural consequence of the accompaniment's line. What is more, it cannot be excluded that the slur is a misread tie sustaining the f minim on the 2nd beat of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in PE |
|||||||||||
b. 27-29
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
To the main text we adopt two category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Sign reversal , Errors in PE |