data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/73ecd/73ecd80c88ad44c39f3711b6bcc33ca9e1021267" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/75013/75013441a15e45e6f391d55c49aaf803f3dff8a4" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/57140/571405c7057401412640722d57e0f4262876af22" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3075f/3075f31e8b155e01785c3a53896ad205598099cf" alt=""
We consider the missing slurs in the L.H. top voice in bars 63-65 in FE (→GE,EE) to be Chopin's oversight (unless it is the engraver's one). Admittedly, the theme (bars 33-36 and analog.) is devoid of L.H. slurs, but in that case this voice moves in the same rhythm as the R.H. part, which naturally suggests the same phrasing. The impression that we are dealing with an oversight is enhanced by the presence of a slur in bar 66 and by numerous markings in the following bars, including slurs in analogous phrases in bars 81-86. Therefore, in the main text we suggest supplementing the missing slurs.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Editorial revisions
notation: Slurs