It is not entirely clear whether and with which mordent Chopin wanted to provide the 1st quaver of this bar and its repetition (bar 52). In Amar and in [A] (→GC) there was a 
sign, which is valid in both bars. However, in FE1 (→FE2) the sign is absent both here and in bar 52, which – unless it is a mistake – suggest a possibility of its later deletion in [A]. Eventually, however, Chopin returned to an ornament in this place, introducing double grace notes in the base text to EE (in both bars) and in the proofreading of FE3 (only in bar 52). In the case of EE, one has to include a possibility that one of the ornaments could have been added by the reviser, unifying the analogous places.
To sum up, we can consider the following solutions to be potentially authentic:
-
mordent ( or
) in both places. The version, most certain, as far as the sources are concerned – GC (→GE) and EE – is given by us in the main text (in the later authentic form of grace notes); -
only in bar 52, as it is in FE3 (→FE4,FE5). The authenticity of this version is not unquestionable – both the omission of the sign in FE1 and the absence of addition of grace notes in bar 36 in the proofreading of FE3 may be a result of inaccuracies. The version is also present, without amending annotations, in FES and FED;
- transitory, a version without ornaments can be considered, proved by FE1 (→FE2, including FESch).
category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations
issues: Errors in FE, Omitted correction of an analogous place, Authentic corrections of EE
notation: Ornaments
Back to note