Page: 
Source: 
p. 13, b. 529-565
p. 1, b. 1-47
p. 2, b. 48-98
p. 3, b. 99-158
p. 4, b. 159-198
p. 5, b. 199-238
p. 6, b. 239-270
p. 7, b. 271-306
p. 8, b. 307-347
p. 9, b. 348-398
p. 10, b. 399-446
p. 11, b. 447-484
p. 12, b. 485-528
p. 13, b. 529-565
p. 14, b. 566-604
p. 15, b. 605-649
EE1 - First English edition
Main text
GC - Gutmann's copy
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected impression of FE1
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Second German edition
Select notes: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Differences
No differences
GC - Gutmann's copy
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected impression of FE1
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Second German edition
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF EE1 - First English edition


  b. 548-549

Slur in EE and FE

Slurs in GC

Slurs in GE

One can doubt whether the break between the slurs visible in GC and copied even more vividly into GE actually reflects the true sense of [A1] notation, as neither EE nor FE displays this divided slur. The break in the slur at this point is related to the basic rhythmic structure (in b. 549 anouther four-bar section begins) but it is not compatible with the motif-based or phrase structure. Therefore, for the main text we adopt the EE and FE version.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE, Inaccuracies in GC

notation: Slurs