I forethink to put in all of the most weighty wordfastnings used in Anglish in time, but I firstly crafted this leaf for that I brought forefastning "ed-" back to use, which is a crossmatch to Anglonic "re-". Sjheiss 08:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
with-[]
Do you folk think we should brook this forefastening (also, is the headname here misspelled?) with the meaning of against in new words being made here? gain- seems to inhold a meaning more towards again than against in my mind, too. Are there any other ways that against could be said as a forefastening without being mistaken for again or today's meaning of with (I do find it odd that with aset "mid")? Wither- seems okay, but the keeping the -er- there seems very seldseen in New English. for- I think is okay, with very few or no meanings having to do with the lone word "for", but with- does not seem to share in that. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:10, April 27, 2018 (UTC)