![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : Inaccuracies in FE
b. 49-50
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
As was the case with b. 23-24 and analogous, we base the main text on FE, which was proofread by Chopin; we only omit the d note, which was certainly added by mistake to the A-a demisemiquaver in b. 50. That note was also abandoned by EE2 (→EE3), probably on the basis of a comparison with analogous b. 283. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in EE |
||||||||||
b. 55-56
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
In the main text we give the slur from GE, in accordance with slurs in analogous bars 29-30 and 288-289. In the latter passage such slur also occurs in FE (→EE) what proves the shorter FE's slur in bars in question inaccurate. The missing slur in EE is certainly an oversight. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in EE |
||||||||||
b. 58-59
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
In FE1 there is not a single category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , Omission of current key accidentals , FE revisions , Errors repeated in FE |
||||||||||
b. 61
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
As is the case with the remaining similar bars, in FE (→EE) it is only the top note of the 1st R.H. octave that is separated as a crotchet. It is almost certainly an inaccuracy; in the main text we give the notation of GE. The suggestion of an additional, alternative version of this place results from the failure to provide a justification for the differentiation between the rhythmic values of the bottom and top (tied) notes of that octave. According to us, it may be a remaining element of the corrections performed in [A] or in a still earlier draft autograph – Chopin could have e.g. started from an analogous version to b. 35, in which f category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||||
b. 62-64
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
As is the case with the remaining similar bars, in FE (→EE) it is only the top note of the 1st R.H. octave that is separated as a crotchet. It must be a mistake, which is proven by the dots prolonging both notes of the octaves in analogous b. 36-40. To the main text we adopt the undoubtedly correct notation of GE. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |