In these bars, in spite of the strict analogy to b. 13-16 (except for the first two and the last semiquavers), Chopin wrote a different pedalling. Due to a dense notation and the use of an abbreviation in b. 32, it posed, however, similar challenges in its interpretation. The copyist considered – and rightly so – that leaving the last 
mark written by Chopin (in b. 31) without a 
mark is an inaccuracy, which he tried to fix by adding a at the end of b. 31. However, that does not remove the inaccuracy if the markings in b. 32 are to be repeated – if such was the case, a mark would be missing at the beginning of b. 32. The above is probably the reason why the pedalling in b. 32 was completely omitted in GE. According to us, Chopin's intention was interpreted correctly in FE, which repeated the markings from b. 31 in b. 32 and added a mark at the end of it. Moreover, in FC (→GE) the mark at the end of b. 29 was placed – contrary to A – under the last semiquaver. In FE it is also the marks at the end of b. 30 and 31 that were reproduced like that. EE stand out due to an erroneous omission of pedalling starting from the 3rd beat of b. 30.
See also b. 1-4.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources
issues: Inaccuracies in FE, Fontana's revisions
notation: Pedalling