June 21, 2006, 11:27 p.m. (Message 45627, in reply to message 45614)
> We do have a minor problem in English, in that the opposite > of "within" obviously should be "without", but that's taken > for a rather different meaning. That's typical for such a > poorly designed language, I guess. But 'without' can be used with the same meaning as 'outwith'. Quite possibly the latter was invented to avoid the confusion caused by the two meanings of the former ... if you see what I mean?