Talk:mésailler


 * Sorry for not answering sooner. It's most likely a mistake for . PUC – 21:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * A scanno, see . PUC – 21:28, 13 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Thanks for identifying the intended word. I did check many of the inflected forms for attestation before creating it, and saw cites, but as you say several turn out to be scannos. This spelling does occur in at [//books.google.com/books?id=y28WAQAAMAAJ&q=%22m%C3%A9saillent%22&dq=%22m%C3%A9saillent%22&hl=&cd=2&source=gbs_api least] [//books.google.com/books?id=-VNUAAAAcAAJ&pg=RA3-PA30&dq=%22m%C3%A9saill%C3%A9%22&hl=&cd=3&source=gbs_api#v=onepage&q=%22m%C3%A9saill%C3%A9%22&f=false some] [//books.google.com/books?id=v_hWAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA444&dq=%22m%C3%A9saill%C3%A9%22&hl=&cd=2&source=gbs_api#v=onepage&q=%22m%C3%A9saill%C3%A9%22&f=false works], including some [//books.google.com/books?id=nNIOAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA229&dq=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&hl=&cd=2&source=gbs_api#v=onepage&q=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&f=false old] [//books.google.com/books?id=hsNRAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA634&dq=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&hl=&cd=1&source=gbs_api#v=onepage&q=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&f=false dictionaries], but could be a typo. (In [//books.google.com/books?id=c7lDAAAAcAAJ&pg=RA1-PA1513&dq=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&hl=&cd=6&source=gbs_api#v=onepage&q=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&f=false this dictionary], it's clearly a typo as it occurs after mésalliance, and although [//books.google.com/books?id=mJ5Xan3L714C&pg=PA634&dq=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&hl=&cd=5&source=gbs_api#v=onepage&q=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&f=false this]/[//books.google.com/books?id=cnpUAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA664&dq=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&hl=&cd=4&source=gbs_api#v=onepage&q=%22m%C3%A9sailler%22&f=false this] also has the noun as mésaillance, both come after mésaise, so I guess it's a typo there, too, rather than e.g. an obsolete spelling.) - -sche (discuss) 04:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * This quote is curious, though: here it must be, to rhyme with . PUC – 08:38, 14 April 2020 (UTC)