Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main


b. 75-76

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Without d in L.H. in GE

d in LH. in FE (→EE)

..

As was the case with b. 23-24 and analogous, in the main text we follow FE, proofread by Chopin, in which he added three d notes in the L.H. part: on the 1st and 3rd beats of b. 75 and on the first beat of b. 76.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 76-78

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

No markings in GE

Accent & slur in FE (→EE)

Our variant suggestion

..

In the main text we suggest the markings of FE (→EE) for the chordal section (beginning with the syncopated crotchet); it is possible to supplement them with the staccato dot drawn from GE (present in analogous b. 25).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 78

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

in GE

 in FE (→EE)

..

To the main text we adopt the notation of GE, based on [A]. Chopin would use both symbols interchangeably to mark a mordent; however, the version of FE may be regarded as a variant.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues:

b. 79

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

No indication in GE

in FE (→EE)

..

There are no reasons to doubt the authenticity of the  indication in FE; therefore, we give it in the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 79-84

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Shorter slur in GE

Longer slur in FE

No slur in EE

..

In the main text we give the unequivocal slur of FE. In GE the inaccurate, slightly too long ending of the slur in b. 82 is not a reliable indication of its intended range – it cannot be ruled out that it was also this slur that was supposed to reach b. 83, yet its ending in a new line was overlooked. The missing slur in EE is most probably an oversight of the engraver (one of a few in b. 79-84).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE