Gauss Disq. Arithm. Translation Errata? Note: I apologize if this is the wrong website/section to be posting such questions, but at the same time I hope someone can help me.
Hi, this year I finished high school and decided to start reading Disquisitiones Airithmeticae. (I plan to follow up with Dirichlet's Lectures in Number Theory.) I regret getting the paperback copy [the original English translation by Arthur A. Clarke, published by Yale uni. press] of the book, but I don't have £100+ at the moment (need to get a job :p) so I couldn't get the corrected Springer hardback version any way. I have noticed many errors in the paperback book, and was wondering if someone has already compiled an errata for it so that people can buy it without having to spend a fortune getting the springer hardback edition. If not, then please if you have read the book try your best to remember the most glaring errors (ones in relation with equations and formulae) and post them here, because I don't mind a typo every now and again in the text itself, but typos in equations might lead me astray (for example, I heard that in one typo the author assumes that $t_i\cdot t_i=(t_i)^2$ means $t_{2i}$, which is plain wrong because the latter has index $2i$ instead of $i$.)
Thanks!
EDIT: The edition I currently possess:

The corrected springer hardback edition that is too expensive for me:

 A: Due to the relatively low interest in this question, I have decided to answer it on my own. So far I have corrected the first 40 articles of the Yale Uni. paperback version of Disquisitiones Arithmaticae. The articles ("article" will abbreviated as "Art" in what follows) that included errors of any sort, are included below, followed by their corrections in the form:
Art n : correction applied to Art n.
Note: All corrections were taken from the Springer hardback edition of Disquisitiones  Arithmaticae. I corrected them by hand, by comparing each proposition in the defective copy to the Springer edition and making the necessary adjustments. Since this took me a long time, I hope that the collection of errors below will make it much easier for people to correct them own copies by hand, should they need to.
CORRECTIONS:
Art 6 : Most of it was wrong, so I will include the whole corrected version:
"Given the numbers A,B,C,etc. and other numbers a,b,c,etc. that are congruent to them relative to some modulus, i.e. $A\equiv a$, $B\equiv b$, etc., then $A+B+C+etc.\equiv a+b+c+etc.$"
Art 9 : Change "with undetermined" to "of the indeterminate"
Art 13 : In the margin to the right of this article, add the following:
"Preliminary theorems regarding primes, factors, etc."
Art 14 : Change "vague computations" to "feeble arguments"
Art 17 : Change "no other factor than A and provided it contains" to "no other prime factors than A does and contains"
Art 22 : Change "If, however, other things being equal, m and k" to "If, keeping the other assumptions, we let m and k"
Art 23 : Change "It is clear that if a is" to "Clearly, then, if a is"
Art 26 : In the margin to the right of this article, add:
"Solution of congruences of the first degree"
Also (still on Art 26), change the first two lines immediately after the line "of the congruence $ax+b\equiv c$." to:
"Since solutions of the congruences by values of x congruent" (first line)
"to one another always go together, and since in this respect" (second)
Art 27 : Change "concerning the manner of solving congruences." to "concerning the manner of solving such congruences."
Also, change the first four lines immediately after the line "relative to $a$, depends on $ax\equiv \pm 1$; for if $x\equiv r$ satisfies the latter," to:
"$x\equiv \pm(u-t)r$ will satisfy the former. But the congruence $ax\equiv \pm 1$" (first line)
"with modulus $b$ is equivalent to the undetermined equation $ax=$" (second)
"$by\pm 1$, and it is well known nowadays how to solve this, so we need" (third)
"only to write out the algorithm for it." (fourth)
Further, at the very bottom of page 10, change "This relation can be considered more generally, as we do on another occasion" to "This relation can be considered more generally, as we may do on another occasion"; Change "We add more propositions useful for our investigations" to "Here we add just two propositions useful for the present investigation"
Art 28 : Change "For the rest, the algorithm is" to "Moreover, the algorithm is"
Art 29 : Change "Let the modulus be $m$ and $\delta$ of the greatest common" to "Let the modulus be $m$, with $\delta$ the greatest common"; Change "Then $ex+k\equiv 0\pmod {\delta f}$" to "Then $ex+k\equiv 0\pmod f$"
Art 30 : Change "the solution of any congruence of the first degree relative to a modulus $mn$" to "the solution of any congruence of the first degree relative to the modulus $mn$"
Art 31 : Change the two lines immediately after "to $c/\delta$ when $\delta$ is the greatest common divisor of $c,a$" to:
"One can work with these expressions very much as with common" (first line)
"fractions. We point out some properties which can be easily" (second)
Art 32 : In the margin to the left of the top of page 14, add:
"The method of finding a number congruence to given residues relative to given moduli"
Also, change "according to which $z\equiv c$, obviously we proceed in the same way" to "according to which $z\equiv c$, we can proceed in the same way"; Change "since the two previous conditions combine into one." to "since the two previous conditions have been combined into one."; Change "But when none of the auxiliary congruences is solvable, we conclude" to "But when not all of the auxiliary congruences are solvable, we conclude"
Art 33 : Change "exhaust the proposition" to "exhaust the original one"; Change "This observation opens to us not only a method" to "This observation yields not only a method"
Art 34 : Change "multiple or submultiple" to "multiple or proper divisor"
Art 37 : Add to the margin to the right of this article the following:
"Linear congruences with several unknowns"
Also, at the very bottom of page 18, change "It is even possible that there is no solution at all. A similar paralogism occurs in treating linear equations." to "For there might be no solution at all. A similar fallacy occurs in treatments of linear equations."
Also, on page 19, change "satisfying the congruences" to "satisfying these congruences" and "whose connection can be shown by one or more of the conditional" to "whose connection can be given by one or more conditional"
Art 38 : To the left margin, add:
"Various theorems"
Also, on page 21, change "modulus $M$ among the numbers" to "modulus $M$ to one of the numbers"; Change "modulus $N$ among the numbers" to "modulus $N$ to one of the numbers"; Change "where $a,b,c, etc.$ are separate prime numbers" to "where $a,b,c, etc.$ are different prime numbers"
Art 39 : Change the first line to "If we define $\phi$ in such"
On page 22 change "multiplying by $A/a'$, and we will have $\phi a+\phi a'+\phi a'' etc.$ of them, none greater" to "multiplying by $A/a'$ etc. We will have $\phi a+\phi a'+\phi a'' etc.$ numbers, none greater"; Change "will be the divisor of $A$ which is prime relative to $t/\delta$" to "will be a divisor of $A$ which is prime relative to $t/\delta$"
Art 40 : On page 23, change the line immediately after the line "And if the numbers $A,B,C,D,etc.$ have no common divisor," to:
"clearly we can get"
