|
b. 155
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The demisemiquaver passage in FE (→GE1) is devoid of the accidentals present before the 1st chord (not counting the octave sign) – the naturals of a1 and a2 and the category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||
|
b. 155
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
In the main text we add a cautionary category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 155
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The missing staccato mark must be an inaccuracy. In the main text we suggest a wedge, like in the analogous bars. Staccato was also marked in EE, yet with a dot, like in the L.H. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 155-156
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The curved line of FE (→GE) placed on the side of the noteheads could be considered a tie of c1. This is how it was most probably understood in EE, where a slur was added over the chords. A comparison with the analogous situations in b. 152-153 and 153-154, in which the bottom-most, common note of the chords is not tied, shows that c1 is most probably to be repeated here. In order to avoid doubts, in the main text we place the slur over the chords. After all, it cannot be ruled out that the notation of [A] was unequivocal – the slur could have been placed over the chords (engravers would often move marks – slurs, accents, dots – to the side of the noteheads, not taking into account a possible change of significance of a given mark) or the second chord could have been provided with a staccato dot, like at the beginning of b. 155. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Placement of markings |
||||||||
|
b. 155
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The missing accent in FE (→GE) is probably an inaccuracy related to the transition to a new line. The mark was added in EE (as a short accent). In the main text we suggest a long accent, like in analogous motifs. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions |
of f
2. A comparison with the notation of the two previous bars, in which the 
of e2 is present in the passage, shows that possible rules of validity of accidentals were approached in a very flexible manner in such situations. In the remaining editions the notation was partially completed – 
before e
1.
