|
b. 6
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
By the end of b. 6 both sources based on [A2] – CJ and CK – convey an abbreviation of an indication, which, taking into account the context, we decipher as legato. (IJ features agit., which must be a mistake, yet it confirms that the Chopinesque entry in [A2] was probably indistinct.) In EL the generally uncommon abbreviation leg. was replaced by legg., which must be a mistake. In the main text we move this indication, referring to the accompaniment figures that are not encompassed with slurs, to the beginning of the bar, where first such figures appear. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Revisions in EL |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 6-19
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
In CB the half-bar L.H. quaver figures are provided with slurs in the whole piece except for b. 16, 20 and 63, in which the slurs encompass entire bars. It is one of a few serious revisions performed by Balakirev, in this case musically justified but not necessary and contrary to the Chopinesque practices – cf., e.g. the authentic L.H. slurring in the Nocturne in D category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 6-17
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
Wherever possible, A1, CJ and CK used abridged notation to mark repeated accompaniment figures – the / signs were used in the second halves of b. 6-9, 12, 14-15 and 17. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Abbreviated notation of A |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 6-7
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
A1 is devoid of dynamic hairpins and accents in b. 5-18, which is a result of the working nature of this autograph. To the main text we adopt a mark that was an attempt to reconstruct [A2] on the basis of its two representations in CJ and CK. However, the interpretation of both is subject to some uncertainty due to the use of abridged notation of the L.H. part and in CJ also due to the lack of synchronisation in the notation of the parts of both hands. Consequently, the versions of both copies, and even the interpretation of CK given in CB, may be considered a potentially accurate interpretation of Chopin's intention. The absence of the mark in EL is probably a mistake. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 7
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
The significant difference between the slurs of CJ and CK suggests that one of them is probably inaccurate (or both). In the main text we adopt the slur of CJ, which is a natural continuation of the slur in b. 5-6. In our interpretation, the slur of CK encompasses the entire 2nd half of the bar. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A |
Major, Op. 27 No. 2. Due to the fact that the slurs are also present in other sources, we discuss b. 7, 17 and 20 separately. 
in 
