A, an come from the same root as "one" ... anfald = onefold (means simple). The "of a, an" construction has been here since at least Middle English ... heck, 1123 is almost Old English:

1123 Peterb.Chron.(LdMisc 636) an.1123: Þa tidde hit on an Wodnes dei [etc.]..he was canonie ***of an*** mynstre, Cicc hatte. (Here it means of one which is the root of a, an ... in OE and early ME it means "one".

a1225(?a1200) Trin.Hom.(Trin-C B.14.52) 39: Ure drihten drof fele deules..ut ***of a*** man þe was of his wit.

It's been here a long time: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nother

Oops, that's "lose the net".

In OE, focus was fustra ... btw, it's "home in" not "hone in", one can hone his skills but he homes in on a target. (Hone in was a mistake made about 50 years ago and it's still here).

For suggestion, the word is foreset: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/foreset

Yes, I kno about onefold, I just like anfald: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/anfald better.

Loose the net for a two weeks and I miss a lot! lol

I noted Qapla' as a byspel for that it is from a constructed yet is alreddy in the English wordstock: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Qapla'

change (v.)
early 13c., from O.Fr. changier "to change, alter", from L.L. cambiare "to barter, exchange", from L. cambire "to exchange, barter", ***of Celtic origin***, from PIE root *kamb- "to bend, crook".

Þ and ð were noted interchangeably in OE. The ð was brought in by Irish monks but the thought that they were noted for different th sounds never laught (old strong form of latch) on.

Etymology 2
From Middle English noten, notien, from Old English notian (“to make use of, use, employ, enjoy”), from Proto-Germanic *nutōnan (“to make use of”), from Proto-Indo-European *neud- (“to acquire, make use of”).

Verb http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/note
note (third-person singular simple present notes, present participle noting, simple past and past participle noted)

(transitive, UK dialectal, Northern England, Scotland) To use; make use of; employ.
1553, Gawin Douglas (translator), Eneados (original by Virgil), reprinted in 1710 as Virgil’s Æneis, Tranſated into Scottish Verſe, by the Famous Gawin Douglas Biſhop of Dunkeld:
He would note it.
(transitive, UK dialectal, Northern England, Scotland) To use, for food; eat.
1808, Jameson:
He notes very little.
Derived terms
benote

Verb http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/benote
benote (third-person singular simple present benotes, present participle benoting, simple past and past participle benoted)

(transitive) To use.
(transitive) To consume.

My guess is that it is a blending of different versions of the Bible ... http://bible.cc/james/4-14.htm ... Hinging on which version that is being read, it is "on the morrow" or "tomorrow". I can see how it may hav started, but I can't say why it is more common among American blacks.

@Matthew ... editirixrex is right. Go back upthread and read my earlier post. Plead is a Latinate and the wont is for outlander verbs to be weak. The same happened with prove ... it now has a proven as a past participle. Truly folks, it's not something to get worked up about. Pleaded or pled, both are ok.

The yogh was a ME staf. Don't assume that the LWS dialect was standard. It wasn't ... otherwise we wouldn't hav some words that gainsay this "rule" about "g" = "y" before "e" or "i" or "c" = "ch" before or after "e" or "i". Nonetheless, there is no reasum to be beholden to a pronunciation that has died out. Many times one can be truthful to the spelling or the LWS dialect, but not both (sometimes neither) ... in those times which is better? I go with the spelling when I can do so ... anfaldly (simply) owing to the word is in the wordbook and I can give the link.

AFAIK, seyer doesn't stand aside from a book like Cowley's or maybe on the Anglish Moot (AM). As I said, if yu link to the AM, folks will say that yu'r making it up. If yu link to Wiktionary or to an OE (or ME) wordbook, then all they can say is that it is archaic or obsolete. Seyer looks nothing like its root ... it looks like someone pulled it out of thin air ... might as well note qapla'! (More folks kno that word!)

@ jayles ... 1.) Yes, sieg is far better known, but, as yu said, it has a dark side and it has the befuddling orthography ... does "ie" = "ee" or a 'ī' as in tie? That is why I would spell it as seeg. However, the word "sig" stands. I think "sigor" would be a good fit for "victor".

2.) True. But then folks understand victory and not sig. In that line of thinking, wh bother at all since folks understand the Latinates. The forefast "ed-" was unneededily besteaded by the Latin forefast "re-" in many words, to inhold edquicken:

edcwic (adjectiv) - revived, restored to life (edquick)
edcwician (verb) - to re-quicken, revive (edquicken)

3.) I yeasay. It's much better when one can link to a wordbook.

@Gallitrot ... That's why I note the spelling thane. The sometimes g=y of OE orthography is mostly unknown to most English speakers today so they see "thegn" and are befuddled. They're not sure if the g is serving to mark the vowel long as in sigh or if the g should be said in a consonant cluster or both ... which is why yur friend tried theegn. BTW, thein/þein is found in ME would be better than thegn to help folks say the word (or theyn) if not for thane. However, writers like thegn and it keeps popping up every now and then.

In other cases, the edquickened word is said with a hard g ... like gemoot.

@Goofy ... How much do students learn from teachers? Quite a lot! Think about it. A student spend 6-8 hours a day in school ... And if the school is any good, the student will spend an hour or two ... or more ... at home doing homework. Those teachers can have a very profound effect on their grammar.

Truly ... Do you think it's fine for an English teacher to say "you is" to a student? I can tell you that if I heard an English teach speaking ebonics to her class, I'd be in the principal's office in a heartbeat giving him hell for the low quality of teachers he had working for him.

Yo! Speak proper cracker ass english sho 'nuff!

@Flory ... By that inwit, the word exaggerate shouldn't exist at all! So let's ban the word "exaggerate" ... after all, if isn't ever "appropriate" to exaggerate, then one shouldn't need the word. But whether is it is "appropriate" or not not, folks do exaggerate and their exaggerations can be small or big