Slurs
|
b. 1
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
It is difficult to assume that Chopin would have wanted to mark the L.H. motifs in bar 1 and 3 differently, hence we consider the absence of the slur in bar 1 to be Chopin's inadvertence. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 2-4
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
The shorter R.H. slurs in bar 2 and 4 resulted from arbitrary decisions by the GE engraver (→FE,EE,IE), who standardised the slurs concerning the left- and right-hand motifs, which seems justified. However, the A notation is exceptionally precise and consistent, hence we keep it in the main text, although in this context both versions indicate the same performance, according to us. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 3
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE |
||||||||
|
b. 8-10
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
In bars 9-10 EE1 printed the text of bars 8-9 for the L.H. part, devoid of the majority of performance markings (except the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE |
||||||||
|
b. 11
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
In the main text we provide the A slur, in this case clearly led to the 3rd beat of the bar. GE (→FE,EE,IE) shortening and doubling the slur, although most probably compliant with the performance intended by Chopin, cannot be authentic. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
in 
in bar 10). The mistake is serious enough to hamper the reconstruction of the correct text, hence we do not provide the content transcription here. 
