Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Shorthand & other

b. 1

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

Wedge in Afrag & A1

Staccato dot in FE (→EE) & GE


In the main text we give a wedge as the staccato mark over the 1st quaver in the R.H. Wedge is present in both preserved autographs, i.e. Afrag and A1. We do so because the engraver of GE1 reproducing the notation of [A2] inaccurately seems to be more likely than a change of this detail while writing [A2] (an example of such an inaccuracy is FE1, in which dots are present wherever A1 clearly features wedges).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Wedges

b. 2

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

No rest in Afrag, A1 & GE

Rest in FE (→EE)


It is difficult to say whether the L.H. top voice rest was added in FE by Chopin or by the engraver/reviser. As it does not appear in any of the eight further repetitions of this bar and is absent in the remaining sources, we do not include it in the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , FE revisions

b. 2-3

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

Slur to minim in Afrag & FE (→EE)

Slur to end of bar in A1, contextual interpretation

Slur to bar 3 in GE


When interpreted literally, the slur of A1 does not reach the beginning of b. 3. A comparison with analogous bars in A1 points to an inaccuracy of Chopin's notation in this place (as well as in b. 6-7). It is also confirmed by the slurring of GE. It seems that the division of the slur of A1 into two parts was caused by temporary ink stoppage in the pen's tip.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Tenuto slurs

b. 2-16

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major


In A1 these bars are provided with consecutive numbers from 1 to 15, which identify a fragment repeated then as b. 58-72.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

b. 3-5

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

Slur in Afrag

Slur in A1

2 slurs, our alternative suggestion

Slur in FE1 (→EE)

Slur in FE2

Slur in GE


The comparison of all analogous places (b. 3-5, 27-29 and 59-61) as well as of the similar motifs in b. 7, 11 and analog. leads to the following conclusions:

  • the beginning of the slur of Afrag is most probably inaccurate – the slur is also supposed to encompass the semiquaver, just like in b. 11. Presumably, the slur of GE is also similarly inaccurate;
  • the absence of a slur in b. 3-4 must be an oversight of A1. Chopin probably meant 2 slurs here, just like in b. 27-29;
  • the slur of FE1 (→EE) is a distorted slur of A1, which was corrected by Chopin in FE2.

We provide the main text with the version of FE2, which can also be considered a contextual interpretation of GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccuracies in A