Page: 
Source: 
p. 12, b. 188-205
p. 1, b. 1-21
p. 2, b. 22-40
p. 3, b. 41-55
p. 4, b. 56-73
p. 5, b. 74-90
p. 6, b. 91-109
p. 7, b. 110-125
p. 8, b. 126-140
p. 9, b. 141-155
p. 10, b. 156-172
p. 11, b. 173-187
p. 12, b. 188-205
p. 13, b. 206-223
p. 14, b. 224-244
p. 15, b. 245-264
Main text
Main text
A - Autograph
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected impression of FE1
FED - Dubois copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Revised impression of GE1
GE3 - Revised impression of GE2
GE4 - Corrected impression of GE3
GE1a - Album German edition
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Amended impression of EE1
EE3 - Revised impression of EE2
Select notes: 
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
Differences
No differences
A - Autograph
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected impression of FE1
FED - Dubois copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Revised impression of GE1
GE3 - Revised impression of GE2
GE4 - Corrected impression of GE3
GE1a - Album German edition
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Amended impression of EE1
EE3 - Revised impression of EE2
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 194-195

Slur to a1 in A & EE

No slur in FE

Slur to g1 in GE

The analysis of the corrections of slurs in similar motifs that are visible in A – in b. 8-19, 100-101 and perhaps 198-199, one can see that the slurs were being prolonged so that they reached the minim ending the motif – leads to the conclusion that the slur in the discussed bars is the initial version of slurring of this figure, left by inadvertence. Therefore, in the main text we give a longer slur, compliant with the final slurring concept.
The absence of the slur in FE must be an oversight by the engraver, which was amended – most probably on the basis of a comparison with analogous figures – both by GE and EE. The reviser of GE probably took into account previous similar places too, whereas his English colleague looked only at the nearest figure, in b. 196.

Compare the passage in the sources»

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions, Errors in FE, GE revisions, Omitted correction of an analogous place

notation: Slurs

Missing markers on sources: A, FE1, FE2, FED, GE1, GE2, GE3, GE4, GE1a, EE1, EE2, EE3