|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slurs in FED, possible interpretation |
|
|
Slur suggested by the editors |
The slurring of A in b. 26-27 is ambiguous – the slur in b. 26 (ending the line), led over the notes, certainly suggests that it should be continued, which is, however, not confirmed by the beginning of b. 27, in which only the initial slur is finished (it was crossed out in b. 26), under the notes. The fact that the ending of the bottom slur was not crossed out and that the top one was not continued proves that Chopin did not control the slurs in b. 27 after having introduced the corrections into b. 26. According to us, the aim of those changes was to combine the new slur in b. 26 with a slur running further, until the end of the phrase in b. 31, in accordance with the unequivocal slurring of an analogous phrase in b. 8-13. Therefore, in the main text we suggest one slur over b. 26-31. It seems that such an interpretation is confirmed by the entry in FED – the mark over the 2nd half of b. 27 may indicate that the slur should be prolonged, i.e. it should start earlier, from the tied dotted b1 quaver (consequently, we obtain a notation equivalent to a continuous slur).
In FE (→EE) the slurs of A were interpreted in the simplest manner possible (yet making sense), which can be considered an acceptable variant. In turn, the slurring of FC (→GE), clearly contrary to A, cannot be authentic.
Compare the passage in the sources»
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources
issues: Annotations in teaching copies, Annotations in FED, Inaccurate slurs in A, Errors of FC, Uncertain slur continuation
notation: Slurs