The absence of the 
sign in A could be considered an inaccuracy related to the transition to the abbreviated notation from the next bar. In this kind of situations, the notation in the bar that initiates a non-written out section is often of a partially draft nature – cf., e.g., the Polonaise in E
minor, Op. 26 No. 2, bar 105. Paradoxically, the more exactly Chopin wrote such a bar, the higher a chance of a misunderstanding, since the engravers would consider the notation to be complete – cf., e.g., the Polonaise in E minor, Op. 26 No. 2, bar 49. However, in this case it is not certain, since the indications in this bar actually seem to be complete – tempo, slur, pedalling. What is more, in the next empty bar, Chopin wrote a hairpin, as if he wanted to emphasise that it is to be considered only from bar 98. In this situation, in the main text we leave the notation of A without any changes, whereas the sign added in later GE may be considered an acceptable addition.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources
issues: GE revisions
notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
