|
b. 198-199
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
The tie sustaining b category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 198-199
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
Deleting the slur over the three-note motif, totally unjustified, as far as the music is concerned, is a possible result of misunderstanding at the proofreading of FE4, whose aim was addition of the tie of b category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 200-202
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
In the majority of the sources the arpeggios of the tenth chords in the L.H. are not marked. In spite of this, on the basis of a few signs appearing in analogous bars, we suggest an alternative notation with marked arpeggios. In the case of bar 201 in FE it is almost certainly an oversight, as the bar was only marked in the base text to FE1 – [A] – as a repetition of bar 13, in which there is an arpeggio sign. In EE2 the arpeggio in bars 201-202 was most probably added on this ground. category imprint: Interpretations within context |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 200
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
The absence of category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 200-202
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
The pedalling of GE1 and EE is most probably an inaccurate reproduction of their base texts – GC and FE respectively. The discussion on the versions of the latter – see bars 13-14. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies |
2 was added – most probably by Chopin – in the proofreading of 
in 
