Page: 
Source: 
p. 4, b. 53-72
p. 1, b. 1-16
p. 2, b. 17-32
p. 3, b. 33-52
p. 4, b. 53-72
Main text
Main text
GC - Gutmann's Copy
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected reprint of FE1
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE1a - Corrected reprint of GE1
GE1b - Flawed impression of GE1
GE2 - Second German edition
GE3 - Revised impression of GE2
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Corrected reprint of EE1
EE3 - Revised impression of EE2
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
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected reprint of FE1
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE1a - Corrected reprint of GE1
GE1b - Flawed impression of GE1
GE2 - Second German edition
GE3 - Revised impression of GE2
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Corrected reprint of EE1
EE3 - Revised impression of EE2
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 69-70

Slurs in GC, literal reading (→GE1)

Slurs in GC (contextual interpretation) & GE2 (→GE3)

Slur in FE & EE

The ending of the slur in bar 70 cannot be considered as reliable in GC. As far as bars 68-69 are concerned, it is hard to state in which sources the slurring of [A] was interpreted correctly – in GC or in FE and EE. The arguments for a continuous slur are not only the number of sources, yet also the fact that possible corrections of the slurring could have had place only in the lost manuscripts, as they are not to be seen in GC. Due to these facts, in the main text we give the version of FE and EE, being conscious of the fact that the interpretation of slurs of GC adopted in GE3 (→#GE4) may also correspond to Chopin's intention.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions, Inaccuracies in GC

notation: Slurs

Missing markers on sources: GC, FES, EE1, EE2, EE3, FE1, FE2, GE3, FED, FEJ, GE1, GE1a, GE2, GE1b