Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
|
b. 113-124
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
The absence of accents in b. 113-118 and 122-124 in GE is most probably an inadvertence of the engraver or of Chopin himself. If it were the latter, the accents of FE could have been added by Chopin, e.g. at the stage of proofreading of FE1. The majority of the marks of FE are long accents, although their size is not homogeneous – the marks in b. 116 and 122-124 could have been considered short in a different context. A comparison with b. 87-101 (including short accents) leads to the conclusion that moving certain fragments of the R.H. part an octave higher does not influence the character of the music in the discussed bars enough to use accents of a different length. Therefore, we assume that the longer accents resulted from an inaccurate reproduction of the manuscript basis or Chopinesque proofreading; in the main text we suggest short accents (like the first time). Short accents were also introduced by EE. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 113-124
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
In comparison with b. 83-102, the staccato dots are less carefully marked here (there are many omissions). Unlike there, it concerns GE to a greater extent; however, it does not seem that the differences between the sources and analogous places were something more than mere inaccuracies of notation. Taking into account the above, in the main text we provide all R.H. quavers and semiquavers with dots (except the octaves beginning the bars). category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 114-124
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
The staccato dots under the L.H. quavers are an arbitrary addition of the engraver of GE2. This time – unlike in b. 87-100 – the procedure was limited to the groups of three quavers at the end of the bars with even numbers (apart from that a dot was added only on the 2nd beat of b. 117). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 119-121
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
In the main text we suggest accents as written down in EE. This solution combines the most certain elements of the versions of GE1 and FE:
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Placement of markings |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 125
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
According to us, the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE |
in 
), most probably target, a common prolongation of the diminuendo by a fraction of a bar seems to be insignificant, hence it is highly unlikely that Chopin could have written it down in such a form. Due to the above reason, we suggest two possible interpretations of this mark, which are, according to us, more likely in this context.