Issues : Long accents

b. 431

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Short accent in EE & GC (→GE)

No mark in FE

Our suggestion—a long accent

..

Similarly to the corresponding b. 89, we believe a long accent to be musically justified and, taking into account possible inaccuracies in reading the autograph, possibly accepted as a source.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents

b. 433-446

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Short accents in EE & GC (→GE)

Long accents in FE

..

We may assume that although the accent marks in GC (→GE) are quite large, when compared with the previous section - short accents in bars 416-431, and with the corresponding bars 91-96 and 99-104 - mostly long accents, they should be interpreted as short ones. Short accents can undoubtedly be found in EE (with the exception of a mark in  b. 439 that must have been omitted). For the main text we adopt long accent found in FE as we see no reason to notate the bars in question differently from the corresponding bars 91-104.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents

b. 448

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Short accent in EE & GC (→GE)

Long accent in FE

..

Similarly to the previous bars (compare bars 433-446) we retain the FE notation with a long accent that seems more appropriate here. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents

b. 495

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Short accent in EE & GC (→GE)

Long accent in FE

..

Long accent in FE seems to harmonize better with the phrase's character. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents

b. 575-579

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Short accent in EE

Long accents in FE, probable reading of GC

Possible short accents in GC (→GE)

..

In bars 575 and 579 of FE there are long accents, in EE - short (in b. 575 no accent). Accents in GC may be taken as long since they extend over two quavers, or short, as marks of this length most of the time in his manuscript represent short accents (shorter marks actually do not appear there, and long accent marks are undoubtedly and visibly longer). In GE they were interpreted as short ones.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents