![](/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. 1
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
In spite of the title, which clearly indicates that the piece is a polonaise, there is no indication that it is here that the actual polonaise begins, which we consider an oversight and correct it in the main text. It was already GE that introduced a relevant addition; it is also in EE2, most probably on the basis of GE. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
In FE (→GE) the category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
b. 6
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE |
|||||||||||
b. 7-8
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The missing category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
b. 19
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The vast majority of similar accompaniment figures in FE is provided with slurs, hence the missing slur here must be considered an inaccuracy. A slur – such as the one we suggest in the main text – was added both in GE and EE. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |