



Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
b. 316
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In A the accent over a category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||
b. 316-318
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
When interpreted literally, the FE (→EE) marks could be interpreted as category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents |
||||||||
b. 318
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
According to the context, the missing second accent in this bar in A (→GE) is Chopin's mistake, which is additionally supported by the presence of a similar mark in FE (→EE). Due to the above, in the main text we add a short accent, complementing the sequence of such marks entered into A. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , Errors of A |
||||||||
b. 319
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In the case of a single mark, it is difficult to say whether its absence in FE resulted from an oversight or whether Chopin added this accent to A after [FC] had been finished. The length of this accent is also uncertain, particularly when compared with the mark at the beginning of bar 318. The interpretation we adopted is supported by (in addition to the musical context – long note) a combination of graphic factors – it is longer than the marks in bar 317 and narrower and tilted to a lesser extent than the accent in bar 318. The engraver of GE was also influenced by the mark's length to a certain extent – in this edition the respective mark is slightly longer than the previous ones. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||
b. 319
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
The category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions |