Slurs
|
b. 318-319
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In the main text we reproduce the unquestionable A slurs (→GE). The shorter FE slurs resulted from the inaccuracy of the copyist in [FC] or of the engraver (or both). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 321-322
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In FE (→EE) the missing slur over the separated R.H. voice resulted either from a mistake or from a misunderstanding of the overlapping A slurs (see the next note). The earlier beginning of the slur is probably a revision, while the earlier ending in GE1 – an inaccuracy, corrected in GE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 322
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In A the starting point of the slur encompassing the final passage is not clearly defined. The tip of the slur is between the 1st and the 2nd triplet quavers and is quite high above the notes (above the shorter slur of the separated voice), hence it cannot be said which quaver it concerns. These factors could have made the engraver of GE (who considered this version of notation inaccurate on a larger scale) lead this slur from the 1st note in the bar. The origin of the longer FE slur could be similar, yet other scenarios are likely as well – in this edition the second slur in this bar is missing, hence the copyist (or the engraver) could have assumed that the overlapping A slurs are an inaccurately written down extension to the slur. According to us, the A slur is supposed to run from the 1st triplet quaver assigned to both hands (e category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A |
), from which the characteristic 6-note motif being the basis for the entire passage begins (cf. bars 188-195). We provide this interpretation of the