



Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
b. 2-3
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
According to us, out of two sources based directly on [A] – GC and FE – it is the copy that may convey a more accurate representation of this place in the autograph, since the text in FE is too tightly packed. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
b. 7-8
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
The fact of beginning the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
|||||||||||
b. 11
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
The category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
|||||||||||
b. 14-15
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
The differences in the length of the category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins |
|||||||||||
b. 16
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
The differences between GC, FE (→EE1) and GE seem to be accidental inaccuracies. The solution we suggest in the main text is an attempt to reconstruct [A] on the basis of the discrepancies between GC and FE. The same range of the category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in GC |