Issues : Inaccuracies in A

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

b. 12-13

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

No sign in Afrag

 in A1 (literal reading→FE1)

 in A1, contextual interpretation

in GE & EE

..

According to us, the  hairpin written in A1 is to be interpreted as ending before the  indication in b. 13. It is most likely that Chopin first wrote the top arm (perhaps before entering ) and then indicated the end of the mark with the ending of the bottom arm. Such an interpretation is confirmed by the mark of A1 in b. 36 and the notation of GE based on [A2] (in GE2 the mark was shortened with respect to GE1, which does not influence its meaning). In FE the mark was interpreted according to the length of the top arm; moreover, FE2 reproduced it inaccurately. It remains unclear how come that the mark was shortened in EE – perhaps by analogy with b. 36. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Corrections in A , EE inaccuracies , Hairpins denoting continuation , Inaccuracies in A