On Di, 17.03.2009, 21:33, Liz Gabay wrote:
>>I haven't been following very closely, but so far I did not have the
>>impression that g and d are regularly confused in this text.
> I'm not sure this is relevant, but I noticed that both texts sometimes
> write 'luig' for 'luid'.
Yes, this is relevant and indeed an instance of the confusion I was
talking about. Thanks for pointing it out.