



b. 36-52
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
The absence of the slurs combining the semiquaver with the chord in bars 36 and 38 in FE (→EE) is most probably an oversight by the engraver of FE (in EE the slur in bar 52 was overlooked too). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in EE |
||||||||
b. 39
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
The long accent was written into FC by Chopin. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
||||||||
b. 39
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
In the main text we add a cautionary category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
b. 39
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
Here and in bar 55 we give in the main text a non-slashed grace note after FE, which seem more reliable in this case. It is true that French editions included inaccuracies in grace notes, but Fontana would very often change non-slashed grace notes to slashed ones (cf. the description of FC in the Preludes, Op. 28). This situation occurs twice in the Mazurka, and in both places FE feature a category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Notation of grace notes , Non-slashed grace notes , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||
b. 41
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
The in tempo indication was most probably added as part of the Chopinesque proofreading of FE. There is a similar situation in bar 57. The change of the preposition from in to a was an arbitrary decision of the engraver/reviser of EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |