Chapter 5 – Siebenhaar 1927
It is not hard to see this version is longer: 38 sentences against just 30 in Nahuijs. The difference is not primarily due to Siebenhaar splitting up long sentences.
Another marked difference between the two translations is that Siebenhaar’s version also comes with a footnote.
Also, Frits is mentioned. I said in Chapter 2 that both Frits and Stern were mentioned in the passage, but you may have noticed when looking at Nahuijs 1868 in the previous chapter that Frits was absent there.
Now attempt the Questions. They are comparative and concern differences between the Siebenhaar 1927 and Nahuijs 1868 versions. I am assuming – and this is a significant methodological point – that Siebenhaar had seen Nahuijs’s version when he produced his own.