Page: 
Source: 
p. 3, b. 40-50
p. 1, b. 1-24
p. 2, b. 25-39
p. 3, b. 40-50
p. 4, b. 51-62
p. 5, b. 63-77
p. 6, b. 78-91
p. 7, b. 92-103
p. 8, b. 104-113
p. 9, b. 114-126
Main text
Main text
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FED - First French edition
FEFo - Forest copy
FEH - Hartmann copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected impression of GE1
GE2a - Altered impression of GE2
GE3 - Second German edition
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Corrected impression of EE1
EE3 - Revised impression of EE2
Select notes: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Differences
No differences
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FED - First French edition
FEFo - Forest copy
FEH - Hartmann copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected impression of GE1
GE2a - Altered impression of GE2
GE3 - Second German edition
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Corrected impression of EE1
EE3 - Revised impression of EE2
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 50

Slur from b2 in FE (probable reading→EE)

Slur from d2 in FE (possible reading→GE)

In FE, the beginning of the slur is written in such a way that it remains unclear whether it runs from the first or the second demisemiquaver. According to us, the first possibility is more likely, hence we adopt it in the main text. Cf. a similar problem in the next bar.

Compare the passage in the sources»

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues:

notation: Slurs

Missing markers on sources: FE1, FES, FED, FEJ, FEH, GE1, GE2, GE3, EE3, EE1, EE2, FEFo, GE2a