Slurs
|
b. 67
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In the main text we give the slurs of PE. In the remaining sources, the notation is less accurate in this regard. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
|
b. 67
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
Compatible versions of EF and PE suggest an oversight of the slur in JC. However, it is possible that the slur appeared in [AI] later or it was Fontana who added it in his edition, knowing or guessing Chopin's intentions in relation to this detail. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of JC |
||||||||||
|
b. 68-69
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In the main text we give the slurs of PE. When read literally, they seem to embrace four notes in bar 68 and five in bar 69, which in a situation of an accurate repetition of the text, as far as the pitch and rhythm are concerned, seems to be unjustified. The range of the slur in bar 69, due to placing the crotchet on the upper stave, is rather doubtless, which cannot be said of the slur in bar 68 (in PE on the lower stave), whose intended range could be misinterpreted. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in PE |
||||||||||
|
b. 70
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In the main text we give the slur of PE, which starts from the quaver. In EF, the beginning of the slur falls on the first of demisemiquavers. In similar contexts, Chopin used both types of notation; it also happens that it is hard to determine from each note the carelessly put slur was meant to start in the autograph. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
|
b. 71
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In the main text we give the undoubtedly correct slurs of PE. In JC there are no slurs here, whereas the divided slurs of EF is probably an inaccuracy related to the end of the octave sign. category imprint: Differences between sources |
