T218. The nominal openings, both And terms and all parentheses remain. Evolutions here preserves maneuvers or movements in the wing image, not biological development. Both without-any clauses and the three beneficial actions remain. The mid-sentence capital Of follows the collated capital De after ou . The complete parenthetic drafts pointer and its internal final period are retained; the historical vuide/scavoir/vuë spellings remain in French. The drafts pointer stays unlocated in the body, not an instruction to create missing text.
T578. The complete 20, literal vuide and scavoir spellings, repeated Et , capital De after ou , two parenthetic qualifications and final manuscript pointer remain. No target manuscript is identified. Vuë has two distinct raised e components in the original-size color image. The nominal/dependent formulations, both sans/aucun constructions, three active predicates and final period inside the parenthesis are retained. All text is roman.
T219. The emphatic cleft, can-say and seem relation remain. The café/player/theater sequence is preserved as an imagined manner of composition, not a verified biography. Theater contextually renders comédie without selecting a named play or performance.
T579. Lesage remains one word, caffé retains double f , domino is singular. The cleft emphasis, modal claim and passive perfect plus participial circumstance remain. All text is roman.
T220. The superlative competence, five-term sequence and full reversal remain, with mots/paroles both rendered words. Spin, silk and tangle preserve the textile image instead of reducing it to smooth style. Sometimes and too qualify Pradon, while the final past did remains distinct from present has. The restrictive did-nothing-but is retained without adding a named object. The English joins the reversed list to its predicate with are all silk; the French retains a qualified semicolon before […]out est de soye . The source’s separate upper block supports that reading, although an artifact beside a comma remains possible. This punctuation and syntax change is not a repair of the French. The paragraph continues through the opening of 831 without a new unit. [All] and [but] contextually complete the two 831 losses […]out and […]ais . The English predicate arrangement is not used as evidence to resolve the uncertain source punctuation.
T580. One paragraph continues from 830 onto the first two lines of 831. The first five-item list and the reversed second list retain their distinct final mots/paroles terms, semicolon and a qualified terminal semicolon before the page turn. Historical sentimens/événemens , soye twice and fesoit remain. At 831 only out and ais are complete at the two clipped beginnings. Original-size color/native 363 do not certify t or the incomplete first arch of m ; no initials are reconstructed. The surviving o/a contours are abraded but identifiable. Quelquefois/aussi , present a versus imperfect fesoit and final restrictive ne...que remain. The bounded independent comparison agrees with the qualified connoit , triaires , vuë , terminal semicolon and two 831 continuation losses; it covers new 830 and the incoming 831 lines, not the new 831 units. After paroles , original-size color/native 362 show a lower comma-shaped body and a separate higher block, supporting a qualified semicolon; the upper block’s rightward displacement leaves an artifact beside a comma possible. The reproduced mark is retained without certifying typographic intent.
T221. Both human/animal alternatives, the inanimate negative and perfectly limitation remain. Counterfeit preserves contrefaire ’s imitation sense without implying fraud; no modern sound-technology claim is added. The bracketed [counterfeit] contextually completes the reproduction loss in […]ontrefaire ; the French initial remains unresolved.
T581. Only ontrefaire is complete at the clipped second-line opening; the two separated remnants before o do not certify a whole c . The human/animal alternative, negative rien...ne peut and perfectly qualification remain.
T222. The nominal opening, singular mind, many and both negative reasoning formulations remain. The complete electronic Académie entry of 1798 defines évidence through truth immediately presented to the mind; certainties is a contextual count-noun rendering of Joubert’s plural in that sense, not documentary evidence. No dictionary facsimile was inspected. The actual-past and conditional-impossibility distinction remains. The opening day remains […]2 April, without an inferred first digit; both source paragraphs share this partial date.
T582. The second 2 is complete, but the first digit retains only a broken curved/diagonal remnant without its full left contour; no preceding numeral is certified. Two separate indented paragraphs remain one unit. The raisonnées line-wrap opening and nature have faint but identifiable foreground n contours in the color witness, retained with explicit abrasion qualification; native 363 loses portions of the thin strokes. Il and qu’ils also retain identifiable openings. No added lexical gap is inferred there. The first singular esprit/il and second plural esprits/ils , alternatives, perfect negatives and conditional negatives remain distinct.
T223. The repeated certainty/reasoning formulation remains in a second paragraph. Naturally/by-their-nature and the alternative enlightened/penetrating remain. The source’s plural minds are not replaced by named people, and the previous paragraph is not deleted as redundant.
T224. The past-perfect negative question, fullness and unawareness remain. It refers to the monad rather than to Leibnitz. The printed name is retained, and no particular philosophical text is authenticated.
T583. The literal name Leibnitz , negative past-perfect question, singular monad and feminine subject pronoun remain. The narrow initial i of ignore is abraded but identifiable by its stem and upper mark in the color/native comparison.
T225. The nominal construction, parenthetic quality, some/all distinction and repeated charlatanism family remain. One is ordinary English support for the relative clause, not a recovered French word. No particular statesman is identified.
T584. The nominal parenthetic construction, quelques , coordinated relative, tous and singular/plural charlatanisme terms remain. The initial q of quelques is abraded but identifiable, without an added gap.
S1. Source editor’s annotation Theory of Pestalozzi, an educator of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
T226. The complete quotation, internal these/the alternative, only condition, reflexive remaking and qualified possession remain. The following machine comparison and question stay in this same paragraph; Pestalogism preserves the visible local term rather than silently regularizing the name. Its source-editor call belongs after that word and before the comma. Only the alternative the and the later mentioned exercises, including its following comma, correspond to source italics; the earlier exercises in the question stays roman. The three more degrees, repeated exercise, knowing/learning distinction, future conditions and hands image remain. The literal source reads S’il y est propre . Its qualified but identifiable contours do not support an added negative or im- prefix, so suited to it retains the apparent paradox rather than repairing it. The abbreviated Cuvier reference remains unexpanded and unverified. English colon after take care is an openly supplied punctuation aid.
T246. The name and both century numbers translate the complete one-paragraph source annotation. The centuries describe the educator rather than date the notebook entry. This remains Beaunier’s apparatus, with its call after Pestalogisme and before the comma; it is not added to Joubert’s argument. The Roman century numerals have raised e endings in French; ordinary English ordinal words convey them without invented source typography.
T585. One continuous indented paragraph contains the quotation, source pointer and commentary. In the French source, the quotation closes after pas. with its period inside; the bibliographical period after 60 is inside its parenthesis. Projet... remains a printed ellipsis, not a reproduction loss. No external source is substituted for the printed quotation. Only les in the parenthetic correction is italic there; the later exerce, is italic through its following comma. Its first occurrence in the question remains roman. The raised source call 1 follows Pestalogisme and precedes its comma. The Pesta-/logisme wrap is complete, without silently adding lozzi to the main spelling. The left openings idées/nous/où/ce/pas/ordinaire/logisme/exerce/la/ici/quelles/apprenne/tout/propre remain identifiable in original-size color/native 363 despite thin or abraded strokes. The text literally reads S’il y est propre , with no im or ne supplied from expected logic and no positive additional word slot. All repeated first-person/plural/reflexive forms, negative restrictions, conditional and future predicates, future-perfect aura mis , comparative adverbs and knowledge/exercise distinction remain. Guères , nous mêmes , c’est à dire , prenez y garde , scache and scavoir retain their printed forms and spacing.
T586. The separate one-paragraph roman annotation retains Pestalozzi, the comma and two small-cap Roman century numerals with raised e . The main-text Pestalogisme spelling remains distinct. No new main paragraph or expanded identification is inserted.