At 3:50:29 PM on Sunday, August 4, 2013, Brian M. Scott wrote:

> At 2:10:37 PM on Sunday, August 4, 2013, rob13567 wrote:

>> --- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com,
>> "elliot.holland@..." <elliot.holland@...> wrote:

>>> •I am finding many different definitions of "Mund"
>>> "Mundr" and "Munda", so I'm not sure about the part of
>>> speech, given the position after the object.

>> "Mundu" is "would." See Zoega "munu," but note the entry
>> for the past tense as "would." This is a very common
>> auxiliary verb, so it's worth making a note of.

> <Munu> is an irregular verb, specifically, a so-called
> preterite-present verb; its conjugation is given in the
> table of irregular verbs in the section of tables at the
> back of Zoëga. <Mundu> is 3rd plur. past indic., '[they]
> would'.

It is not 3rd plur. past indic.: I forgot to check the
actual sentence when I wrote this.

> Snorri kvaðst heim mundu ríða um kveldið ….

This is an accusative and infinitive construction (§3.9.4 in
Barnes); the subject of the subordinate clause is the same
as the subject of the main clause, so it’s omitted, and the
omission is indicated by using the sk-form <kvaðst> of the
main verb. Here <mundu> is the past infinitive of <munu>.
There are only three of these past infinitives that occur
with any frequency: <mundu> (from <munu>), <skyldu> (from
<skulu>, and <vildu> (from <vilja>).

Brian