data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/73ecd/73ecd80c88ad44c39f3711b6bcc33ca9e1021267" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/75013/75013441a15e45e6f391d55c49aaf803f3dff8a4" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/57140/571405c7057401412640722d57e0f4262876af22" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3075f/3075f31e8b155e01785c3a53896ad205598099cf" alt=""
Lack of the grace note in EF is most probably a result of Fontana's error in preparation of the base text (copy of [AI]). The difference in the grace note's form – non-slashed in JC, slashed in PE – has no practical meaning in this context, as Chopin often did not pay attention to this detail. The sharp before the ornament is a patent error of the engraver of PE.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources
issues: Errors in PE, Errors in Fontana's editions
notation: Ornaments