Issues : Errors in GE
b. 35
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The missing dots in GE1 (→FE) is certainly an oversight. The signs were added in EE, probably by analogy (see also the adjacent note). The absence of the 2nd dot in GE2 is also a patent mistake. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 35
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
Omission of the accent in GE1 (→FE→EE) is certainly a mistake. The reviser of GE2 restored the sign (in the form of a short accent). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 36
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
GE misreproduced the indication as radoscendo. The correct spelling appears in a proofreading of FE (→EE), perhaps as a result of Chopin's intervention. (The contemporary Italian orthography requires it to be spelled with a double "d": raddolcendo). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 38
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
We consider the omission of the accent in the editions to be an oversight of the engraver of GE1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||
b. 39
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The version with the a2 grace note present in GE1 (→FE→EE) is almost certainly a mistake, which is confirmed by the correction of this note written in FES. The version of A was restored also in GE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Annotations in FES |