|
b. 10-11
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In the main text we give the undoubtedly later version of the accompaniment written – with minor inaccuracies – in PE. The new shape of the accompaniment in this version was provided with slurs and the indication legato, probably by Chopin. The text of EF is a more precise notation of the earlier version, written in a partially draft form also in JC. In that last manuscript, it is three additional notes that draw attention; their meaning and relation to the remaining part of the notation is ambiguous. It could be, e.g., a draft of a new version of the bass line in this bar developed by Chopin. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information issues: Accompaniment changes , Inaccuracies in PE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 10-11
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The sources based on the earlier autograph have the ornaments written at the beginning of those bars as category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
|
b. 10
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
JC has a category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
|
b. 11
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The pedalling of EF, probably added by Fontana, is valid only in relation to the earlier version of the accompaniment written in JC and EF. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
|
b. 11
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The slur in EF – despite the fact that it corresponds to the natural phrasing – is probably an addition by Fontana. A similar reservation concerns the slur in bar 12. category imprint: Differences between sources |
in 
in 
before a in the chord on the 3rd beat of the bar. In this harmonic context, the sign is unjustified. 
in 
