Page: 
Source: 
p. 5, b. 130-160
p. 1, b. 1-30
p. 2, b. 31-58
p. 3, b. 59-94
p. 4, b. 95-129
p. 5, b. 130-160
p. 6, b. 161-193
p. 7, b. 194-224
p. 8, b. 225-252
p. 9, b. 253-287
Main text
Main text
GC - Gutmann's Copy
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Second impression of FE
FE3 - Third impression of FE
FE4 - Fourth impression of FE
FESch - Scherbatoff Copy
FES - Stirling copy
FED - Dubois copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected impression of GE
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Revised impression of EE
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 - Second impression of FE
FE3 - Third impression of FE
FE4 - Fourth impression of FE
FESch - Scherbatoff Copy
FES - Stirling copy
FED - Dubois copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected impression of GE
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Revised impression of EE
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 140-141

Slurs in GC (literal reading) & EE

Slurs in GC, contextual interpretation

Slur in GE

The range of the slurs in GC is unclear due to the nonchalant way of their notation, as well as due to the transition into the new line of the text (from bar 141). We consider the division of the slurs at the bar line to be the literal interpretation, as at the beginning bar 141 does not include the ending of the previous slur. Such divided slur is also in EE, based on the base text, in which the slurs were most probably added by Chopin (in this fragment). Therefore, we give the version in the main text. According to us, however, the interpretation of the slurs of GC with division after the 1st crotchet in bar 141 is more justified. The slur of GE is rather an emergency option, not determining the phrasing, than an attempt to reproduce the notation of GC.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE, Inaccuracies in GC, Authentic corrections of EE

notation: Slurs

Missing markers on sources: FE1, FE2, FES, FED, FESch, FE3, FE4, GE1, GE2, EE1, EE2