What is the reason for a classical composer’s insertion of a repeat sign?
It is not simply for the listener to be able to hear a phrase or motive
a second time, but perhaps more so, for the player to get a second chance at
expressing the motive as the composer had seen it.
Of course, there is always room for the interpreter’s variation, unless he
(referring to both sexes) the performer feels he got it right the first time.
After all, if a sound speaker expresses himself clearly the first time round,
is there a need to repeat oneself. And if he does, he most certainly won’t
use the exact same words, or intonation, or phrasing, or timing.
Does the sound performer, then, really need to play repeat signs??
In doing so, this allows the performer to get his own personal meaning across:
(different from the composer’s) But he cannot play something the same way twice.
Or should he play it "the same way", then the idea of diversity be installed in the mind’s ear
of the listener, anyway, especially if the audience is familiar with the melody.
When a speaker rephrases something he has said to avoid being misunderstood
‘the first time round’, it is merely poetic license (freedom of speech).
By repeating a motive, you open, ever so slightly, the possibility of variety, of improvisation.