In the main text we adopt the notation of CK, actually equivalent to CJ, yet more natural to interpret. It is difficult to say whether the absence of the indication in CB is an oversight or – which seems to be more likely – a purposeful omission (the indication may be regarded as superfluous after 
in b. 33). The version of EL may be considered alternative in relation to our interpretation of CK – it was the beginning of sempre that was deemed reliable, whereas in our transcription we kept the placement of .
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources
issues: Balakirev's revisions
notation: Verbal indications