Issues : Uncertain slur continuation
|
b. 36-37
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
In FC the slur at the end of bar 36 (which ends the line) may suggest that it should be continued, which, however, is not confirmed by the slur in bar 37. We consider the unequivocal beginning of the slur in bar 37 to be reliable. Due to this ambiguity, and also due to the earlier decision concerning the slurring in bars 32-33, in the main text we continue the FE slur. In analogous bars 44-45 all sources feature a continuous slur. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
|||||
|
b. 43-44
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
The separated slurs of GE are a missed interpretation of the incoherent notation of FC, in which the slur at the end of the line (bar 43) does not point to continuation, while the slur in bar 44 does. We consider a continuous slur (as in FE) to be the text of FC. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
|||||
|
b. 134-135
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
In FC the slur in bar 134, the last in the line, suggests that it should be continued, which is not confirmed by the slur beginning in bar 135 from the 1st note. We assume that they are separated slurs, as in FE (→EE), whereas in GE they were interpreted as a continuous slur. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
