Re: Latin æ and more

Heill Óskar!

>
>> I was (partly) joking. The point was that the sentence (above
>labelled "A")
>> had several errors in it.
>
>No... only in spelling "við" instead of "vit", but I think Eysteinn
>made reference to that being on purpose. Otherwise the sentence was
>perfectly grammatical, and I think you should be careful in doubting
>Eystein's ON.

Okay, that sounds more like it!
I interpreted "við" as "með".
I then found out that there were far more references to "vega at e-m"
than to "vega með e-m". (or should it be e-n?)

Please regard my doubts as cartesian in nature.
(doubt as "method")

>
>> >"Við Haukur ætlum að drepa hann Eystein. Eysteinn verður drepinn.
>Við
>> >ætlum að drepa hann."
>>
>> Actually, I find that much better!
>> Now the meaning is also immediately plain to me.
>> (no leafing after obscure references)
>> Wouldn't the above also be excellent ON?
>
>Absolutely not! :)

I guess that is a good negation of the equality of ON with MI, then.

Ver heill!
Ketill