In FE (→EE), the moment of the division of the slur in the L.H. in this and analogous bars raises doubts. At first sight, it seems that in bars 412-413 and 436-437, the slur over barline runs from the last semiquaver of the bar, whereas in bars 413-414 and 437-438 – from the penultimate one, which, due to its consistent use, seems to be an intentional difference. According to us, diversification of these musically and pianistically twin pairs of bars is, however, highly unlikely; therefore, in the main text we are seeking to unify them. The division of the slur before the last semiquaver is supported by the bottom slur in the R.H. in bars 412-413. However, it is uncertain whether this slur, which was not repeated in subsequent bars, actually corresponds to Chopin's intention. In turn, a closer look at the discussed slurs in FE reveals that in bars 436-437 the most probably inaccurate slurs coincide on the penultimate note, which may also be interpreted in favour of the version with the division of the slur before the penultimate note. It tips the statistical balance in favour of this particular version, and due to this reason, we suggest it in the main text in all four places.
In GE1 (→GE2), the slurs of FE were reproduced inaccurately in three out of four places. In GE3, the notation was partially unified – the version of GE1 with one slur was generalised in bars 412-414; this version is almost certainly erroneous, since it is not featured in any of the remaining places, whereas the division adopted in bars 436-438 is compliant with the one we suggest.
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
issues: Inaccuracies in GE, GE revisions
notation: Slurs
Back to note