data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/73ecd/73ecd80c88ad44c39f3711b6bcc33ca9e1021267" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/75013/75013441a15e45e6f391d55c49aaf803f3dff8a4" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/57140/571405c7057401412640722d57e0f4262876af22" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3075f/3075f31e8b155e01785c3a53896ad205598099cf" alt=""
In A the slur over b. 23, which ends the line, was extended and reaches clearly beyond the stave, which, in turn, suggests a continuation. However, the slur in b. 24 rather does not confirm that, hence the slurs in FC (→GE) are divided. The slurs in FE reproduce the ambiguous notation of A – the slur in b. 23 suggests a continuation, yet in b. 24 a new slur begins. It is also that inaccuracy that was interpreted as separate slurs, which we see in EE. In the main text we suggest a continuous slur, considering the Chopinesque correction of the slur at the end of b. 23 to be decisive.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information
issues: Inaccurate slurs in A, Corrections in A, Uncertain slur continuation
notation: Slurs