Issues : Errors in FE
|
b. 35-36
|
composition: Op. 26 No 2, Polonaise in E♭ minor
..
The slur under the F notes at the transition between the bars, added by Chopin in the proofreading of FE (→GE1,EE), seems to indicate sustention of this note. Comparison with the notation of this motif two bars earlier indicates, however, that Chopin most probably thought about a phrasing slur, which the engraver arbitrarily moved to the side of note heads (it was a frequent, routine procedure ordering the notation; in the case of dyads or chords, it could, however, change the sense of the sign, same as in this case). In the subsequent GE the slur was moved higher, most probably as a result of comparison with analogous situation in bars 33-34. Similarly in bars 139-140. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Placement of markings , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 45
|
composition: Op. 26 No 2, Polonaise in E♭ minor
..
It is hard to state whether the absence of category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 53
|
composition: Op. 26 No 2, Polonaise in E♭ minor
..
The absence of category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 57
|
composition: Op. 26 No 2, Polonaise in E♭ minor
..
The absence of accent in FE (→GE1,EE1) is almost certainly a mistake. The remaining editions added the mark on the basis of analogous bars 9, 113 and 161. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 57
|
composition: Op. 26 No 2, Polonaise in E♭ minor
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
in 
in 
