![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : GE revisions
b. 264
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The notation of the last two quavers is inaccurate in the sources, since Chopin most probably considered the manner in which he wrote the chord on the 4th quaver of the bar – c category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Errors in FE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE |
|||||||||
b. 267
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
|||||||||
b. 268
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The second half of the bar is written in the sources even more carelessly than in b. 264. In FE (→GE1), there is no category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE |
|||||||||
b. 273-274
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The difference in the length of the accents, visible in FE between the accent in b. 273 & the 2nd accent in b. 274 and the remaining accents in b. 274-276, does not necessarily mean that they should be diversified. It may be a result of a different origin of these two accents, which were probably added only just in the last stage of proofreading of FE (it is supported by their absence in EE). The latter was inaccurately reproduced in GE1, which was then corrected in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |