Page: 
Source: 
p. 8, b. 132-144
p. 1, b. 1-17
p. 2, b. 18-32
p. 3, b. 33-62
p. 4, b. 63-78
p. 5, b. 79-98
p. 6, b. 99-116
p. 7, b. 117-131
p. 8, b. 132-144
p. 9, b. 145-165
p. 10, b. 166-182
p. 11, b. 183-202
p. 12, b. 203-223
Main text
Main text
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FEO - Orda copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Revised impression of GE1
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
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
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FEO - Orda copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Revised impression of GE1
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 142-143

 &  in FE (→GE,EE)

 &  suggested by editors

The position of the  mark in bar 142 in the middle of the 2nd demisemiquaver sextuplet is almost certainly inaccurate – see the note in bar 141. The same applies to the  mark in bar 143. In the main text we provide a contextual interpretation of both marks, which coincide with the structural division of the figuration – marked by, e.g. harmonic changes – into whole-bar sections, starting from the 2nd quaver of the bar. 

Compare the passage in the sources»

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

issues:

notation: Verbal indications

Missing markers on sources: FE1, FEO, GE1, GE2, EE1