Slurs
|
b. 36
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The slur in FE (→GE1→GE2) was written carelessly – the beginning of the slur is placed at the pitch of the top voice, but it falls over the 2nd quaver in the bar. We assume the most straightforward interpretation, from the b1 quaver, to be the text of those editions. The version was revised both in EE and GE3; in the latter, in accordance with Atut. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 39-40
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The slur of Atut, originally encompassing only 4 quavers (like in the following bars), was probably prolonged. According to us, it is, however, uncertain whether the short, zig-zag line was added on purpose – a trace after an unintended touch of the quill could have looked like that. It is also possible that Chopin wanted to prolong this slur, yet he hesitated at the time of writing it and eventually renounced longer slurs – none of the following slurs over similar motifs was prolonged. We are convinced that all motifs in bars 39-44 should be performed in a similar manner; therefore, in the main text, we suggest a non-prolonged slur. Such a solution was adopted also in GE3, probably on the basis of comparison with the following bars. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 45
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In Atut, the fact of beginning the slur from the 2nd semiquaver, although it was then repeated in bar 47, seems to be an inaccuracy of notation. Such a notation would suggest that the 1st semiquaver of the tremolando should be separated, as far as the articulation is concerned, which is inconvenient from the pianistic point of view. Due to this reason, in the main text we give the interpretation adopted in FE (→GE,EE). In turn, the literal interpretation of Atut has its perks if we consider the slur to be a phrase mark – it graphically underlines the motif of the top voice, b2-a category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A |
||||||||
|
b. 46-47
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The interpretation of the slurs of Atut by the engraver of FE (→EE,GE1→GE2) may be considered justified, since the notation of the manuscript is most probably inaccurate. In the main text, we give a different interpretation of Atut, based on the assumption that the similarly looking beginnings of the slurs in bars 45 and 47 convey the same message – slurs from the beginning of the semiquaver tremolando (however, cf. the note in bar 45). This solution was adopted in GE3. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 48-49
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
EE added a slur combining the F category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
2. 
