Issues : Long accents
b. 12
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In the main text we give a long accent on the basis of Ap and a handwritten Chopin's entry in FEcor. The engraver of FE (→GE,EE) totally misunderstood Chopin's sign, reproducing it as for the entire 2nd beat of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||
b. 12
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
Same as in analogous bars 3-4, we propose an alternative interpretation of the short sign, resembling an accent, visible in Ap at the end of bar 12. A similar problem appears also in bars 11, 38 and 39. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
|||||||||||
b. 17
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The undeniable long accent, written by Chopin in FEcor, was reproduced in FE (→GE,EE) as hairpins. The sign in Ap, as many others in this manuscript, may be interpreted as a long accent or hairpins. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE |
|||||||||||
b. 17
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
Our proposal (long accent) constitutes a resultant of undeniable elements of two sources including independently written indications in this place – Ap and FE (→GE,EE). We do not consider , as in the version for printing Chopin significantly reduced the number of these signs, while the type of the accent was determined by us on the basis of an entry made by Chopin himself in Ap. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||
b. 19
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In the main text we do not consider the accent underlining the beginning of the new section in Ap. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents |