|
2 slurs in FE, contextual interpretation |
|
|
3 slurs in FE, possible interpretation |
|
|
Slur in b. 24 in GE |
|
|
2 slurs in b. 22-23 in EEW |
None of the sources conveys the correct version of slurring in these bars. In FE it is bars 23-24 that are ambiguous – the slur in bar 23, at the end of the page, does not point to continuation, while its shape could even suggest that it was shortened in print. This, in turn, is contrary to the slur in bar 24, which clearly suggests that the slur from the previous bar should be continued. The unquestionable slurs over analogous motifs in bars 31-32, 63-64 and 75-76 are also an argument for a continuous slur, hence this is the slur we give in the main text. In GE the missing slurs in bars 22-23 are probably an oversight, since in bar 24 (on a new page) the notation of FE was repeated, with a slur pointing to continuation from the previous bar. By contrast, in EEW it was the continuation of the slur on a new page that was omitted (overlooked? considered erroneous?).
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources
issues: Inaccuracies in FE, Errors in EE, Errors in GE, Uncertain slur continuation
notation: Slurs