An Interrogative combined with a Personal p.r.o.noun, asks a question without the intervention of the Substantive verb; as, co mise? _who [am] I?_ co iad na daoine sin? _who [are] those men?_ cia i a" cheud aithne? _which [is]
the first commandment?_ In interrogations of this form, the noun is sometimes preceded by the Personal p.r.o.noun, and sometimes not; as, co e am fear? _who [is] the man?_ co am fear? _what man?_ Co am fear? is evidently an incomplete sentence, like _what man?_ in English. The ellipsis may be supplied thus; co e am fear a ta thu ciallachadh? _who is the man whom you mean?_ This example may be abridged into another common interrogation, in which the Interrogative is immediately followed by the Relative; as, co a ta thu ciallachadh? _who [is he] whom you mean?_ ciod a ta thu faicinn?
_what [is it] that you see?_
In an interrogative sentence including a Personal p.r.o.noun and a Noun, as, co e am fear sin? if the Noun be restricted in {148} its signification by some other words connected with it, such as the Article, an Adjective, another Noun in the Genitive, or a relative clause, then the p.r.o.noun usually follows the Gender of the Noun, or the s.e.x of the object signified by the Noun, if the Gender does not correspond to it; as, co _e_ am fear a theid a suas? _who is the man that shall ascend?_ co _i_ am boirionnach sin? _who is that woman?_ cia _i_ a" cheud aithne? _which is the first commandment?_ If the Noun be not _so restricted_, the p.r.o.noun is of the masculine gender; as, ciod e uchdmhacachd? _what is adoption?_ ciod e urnuigh? _what is prayer?_[101]
{149}
SECTION IV.
OF THE AGREEMENT OF A VERB WITH ITS NOMINATIVE.
As the Verb has no variation of _form_ corresponding to the Person or Number of its Nominative, the connection between a Verb and its Nominative can be marked only by its _collocation_. Little variety therefore is allowed in this respect. The Nominative, whether Noun or p.r.o.noun, is ordinarily placed after the Verb; as, ta mi _I am_, rugadh duine-cloinne _a man-child is born_[102]. The Article or an Adjective, is frequently {150} placed between the Verb and its Nominative; as, thainig an uair, _the hour is come_; aithrisear iomadh droch sgeul, _many an evil tale will be told_.
Sometimes, but more rarely, circ.u.mstances are expressed beween the Verb and its Nominative; as, rugadh dhuinne, an diugh, ann am baile Dhaibhi, an Slanuighear, _there is born to us, this day, in David"s town, the Saviour_.
The word denoting the object of the verbal action, can never, even in poetry, be placed between the Verb and its Nominative, without altering the sense. Hence the arrangement in the following pa.s.sages is incorrect:--Ghabh domblas agus fiongeur iad, _they took gall and vinegar_. "Buch. Gael.
Poems," Edin. 1767. p. 14. The collocation should have been ghabh iad domblas, &c. Do chual e "n cruinne-ce, _the world heard it_, id. p. 15, ought to have been, do chual an cruinne-ce e. So also, do ghabh truaighe, Iosa dhoibh, _Jesus took pity {151} on them_. Matt. xx. 34, Irish vers. It ought to have been, do ghabh Iosa truaighe, &c.[103].
The Relatives a _who_, nach _who not_, are always put before the verb; as, am fear a thuit, _the man who fell_; am fear nach dean beud, _the man who will not commit a fault_.
In poetry, or poetical style, where inversion is allowed, the Nominative is sometimes placed before the Verb; as doimhneachd na talmhain ta "n a laimh, _in his hand is the depth of the earth_. Psal. xcv. 4.
Oigh cha tig le clar "n an comhdhail, _No virgin with harp will come to meet them._ Smith"s "Ant. Gal. Poems," p. 285.
Gach doire, gach coire, "s gach eas, Bheir a" m" chuimhne cneas mo Ghraidh.
_Each grove, each dell, and each water-fall, will bring to my remembrance the form of my love._ Id. p. 30.
An la sin cha tigh gu brath, A bheir dearrsa mo ghraidh gu tuath.
_That day shall never come, which shall bring the sun-beam of my love to the North._ Fingal II. 192.
Am focail geilleam do Mhorlamh; Mo lann do neach beo cha gheill.
_In words I yield to Morla; my sword to no living man shall yield._ Fing.
II. 203. This inversion is never admitted into plain discourse or unimpa.s.sioned narrative.
In those Persons of the Verb in which the terminations supply the place of the Personal p.r.o.nouns, no Nominative is expressed along with the Verb. In all the other Persons of the Verb, a Noun or a p.r.o.noun is commonly expressed as its Nominative. In sentences of a poetical structure, the Nominative is sometimes, though rarely, omitted; as, am fear nach {152} gabh "nuair gheibh, cha "n fhaigh "nuair "s aill, _the man who will not take when [he] can get, will not get when [he] wishes_.
A Gharna, cuim a sheas? a Ghuill, cuim a thuit?
_Garno, why stoodst? Gaul, why didst fall?_ Smith"s "Ant. Gal. Poems," p. 153.
The Infinitive often takes before it the Nominative of the Agent; in which case the Preposition _do_ is either expressed or understood before the Infinitive; as, feuch, cia meud a mhaith, braithre do bhi "n an comhnuidh ann sith! _behold how great a good it is, that brethren dwell in peace!_ Psal. cx.x.xiii, 1. Is e mi dh" fhantuinn "s an fheoil, a "s feumaile dhuibhse, _my abiding in the flesh is more needful for you_, Phil. i. 24, Cha n"eil e iomchuidh sinne dh" fhagail focail De, agus a fhrithealadh do bhordaibh, _it is not meet that we should leave the word of G.o.d, and serve tables_, Acts vi. 2. The Preposition _do_, being softened as usual into _a_, readily disappears after a Vowel; as, air son mi bhi a rs a lathair maille ribh, _by my being again present with you_, Phil. i. 26[104].
SECTION V.
OF THE AGREEMENT OF ONE NOUN WITH ANOTHER.
When in the same sentence two or more Nouns, applied as names to the same object, stand in the same grammatical relation to other words, it should naturally be expected that their Form, in so far as it depends on that relation, should be the same; in other words, that Nouns denoting the same object, and related alike to the governing word, should agree in Case. This accordingly happens in Greek and Latin. In Gaelic, where a variety of form gives room for the application of the same rule, it has been followed in some instances; as, Doncha mac Chailain mhic Dhonuil, _Duncan the son of {153} Colin the son of Donald_; where the words Chailain and mhic denoting the same person, and being alike related to the preceding Noun mac are on that account both in the same Case. It must be acknowledged, however, that this rule, obvious and natural as it is, has not been uniformly observed by the speakers of Gaelic. For example; instead of mac Ioseiph an t-saoir, _the son of Joseph the carpenter_, many would more readily say, mac Ioseiph an saor; instead of thuit e le laimh Oscair an laoich chruadalaich, _he fell by the hand of Oscar the bold hero_, it would rather be said, thuit e le laimh Oscair an laoch cruadalach. The latter of these two modes of expression may perhaps be defended on the ground of its being elliptical; and the ellipsis may be supplied thus: mac Ioseiph [is e sin] an saor; laimh Oscair [neach is e] an laoch cruadalach. Still it must be allowed, in favour of the rule in question, that the observance of it serves to mark the relation of the Nouns to each other, which would otherwise remain, in many instances, doubtful. Thus in one of the foregoing examples, if we should reject the rule, and write mac Ioseiph an saor; it would be impossible to know, from the form of the words, whether Joseph or his son were the carpenter.
The translators of the Scriptures into Gaelic, induced probably by the reasonableness and utility of the rule under consideration, by the example of the most polished Tongues, and by the usage of the Gaelic itself in some phrases, have uniformly adhered to this rule when the leading Noun was in the Genitive; as, do mhacaibh Bharsillai a" Ghileadaich, 1 Kings ii. 7; righ-chathair Dhaibhi athar, 1 Kings ii. 12; do thaobh Bheniamin am brathar, Judg. xxi. 6; ag gabhail nan clar chloiche, eadhon chlar a"
cho-cheangail, Deut. ix. 9. The rule seems to have been disregarded when the leading Noun was in the Dative. See 1 Kings i. 25, Ruth iv. 5, Acts xiii. 33. {154}
CHAPTER II.
OF GOVERNMENT.
Under this head is to be explained the Government of Nouns, of Adjectives, of Verbs, of Prepositions, and of Conjunctions.
SECTION I.
OF THE GOVERNMENT OF NOUNS.
One Noun governs another in the Genitive. The Noun governed is always placed after that which governs it; as, ceann tighe, _the head of a house or family_; solus na greine, _light of the sun_; bainne ghabhar _milk of goats_.
The Infinitives of Transitive Verbs, being themselves Nouns, (See Part II.
Chap. V. p. 86.) govern in like manner the Genitive of their object; as, ag cur sl, _sowing seed_; a dh" fhaicinn an t-sluaigh, _to see the people_; iar leughadh an t-soisgeil, _after reading the gospel_[105].
Although no good reason appears why this rule, which is common to the Gaelic with many other languages, should ever be set aside, yet it has been set aside in speaking, and sometimes in writing Gaelic.
1. When the Noun governed does in its turn govern another Noun in the Genitive, the former is often put in the Nominative instead of the Genitive case. The following instances of this anomaly occur in the Gaelic Scriptures:--Guth briathran an t-sluaigh, instead of, bhriathran, _the voice of the words of the people_, Deut. v. 28; do mheas craobhan a"
gharaidh, instead of, chraobhan, _of the fruit of the trees of the garden_, {155} Gen. iii. 2; ag itheadh tighean bhantrach, for thighean, _devouring widows" houses_, Matt. xxiii. 14; ag nochdadh obair an lagha, for oibre, _showing the work of the law_, Rom. ii. 15; ag cuimhneachadh gun sgur obair bhur creidimh, agus saothair bhur graidh, for oibre, saoithreach, _remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love_, 1 Thess. i. 3; trid fuil is fearta Chriost, _through the blood and merits of Christ_, Gael. Paraph. 1787, p. 381, for trid fola Chriost, as in Eph. ii.
13; ag aiteach sliabh Shioin, for sleibh, _inhabiting the hill of Zion_, Psal. ix. 11. metr; air son obair Chriosd, Phil. ii. 30, 1767, according to the usage of the language, but changed to oibre, in Edit. 1796, to suit the Grammatical Rule[106]. For the most part, however, the general rule, even in these circ.u.mstances, is followed; as, guth fola do bhrathar, _the voice of thy brother"s blood_, Gen. iv. 10; amhainn duthcha cloinne a shluaigh _the river of the land of the children of his people_, Numb. xxii. 5; a"
nigheadh chos sheirbhiseach mo thighearna, _to wash the feet of the servants of my lord_, 1 Sam. xxv. 41.
2. Such expressions as the following seem to be exceptions to the rule:--Dithis mac, 2 Sam. xv. 27, 36; ceathrar mac, 1 Chron. xxi. 20; leanabaibh mac, Matt. ii. 16. In the following similar instances, the rule is observed:--Dithis mhac, Gen. xli. 50; dithis fhear, 2 Sam. xii. 1; ceathrar fhear, Acts xxi. 23; ceathrar mhaighdiona, Acts xxi. 9.
The same anomaly takes place in the regimen of the infinitive, as in that of other Nouns. Though an Infinitive be in that grammatical relation to a preceding Noun which would require its being put in the Genitive, yet when itself also governs another noun in the Genitive, it often retains the form of the Nominative. The Infinitives naomhachadh, gnathachadh, briseadh, admit of a regular Genitive, naomhachaidh, gnathachaidh, brisidh. In the following examples, {156} these Infinitives, because they govern a subsequent Noun in the Genitive, are themselves in the Nominative, though their relation to the preceding word naturally requires their being put in the Genitive Case. Tha an treas aithne a" toirmeasg mi-naomhach_adh_ no mi-ghnathach_adh_ ni sam bith, &c., _the third commandment forbids the profaning or the abusing of any thing_, &c. a.s.sem. Cat. Gael. Edin. 1792, Answer to Q. 55. Ged fheud luchdbris_eadh_ na h-aithne so dol as, &c., id.
Q. 56., _though the transgressors of this commandment may escape_, &c. Cuis crath_adh_ cinn is cas_adh_ beil, Psal. xxii. 7, as it is in the older edition of the Gaelic Psalms. An deigh leugh_adh_ an lagha, _after the reading of the Law_, Acts. xiii. 15; luchd c.u.m_adh_ uilc, Rom. i. 30[107].
The Infinitive is not put in the Genitive, when preceded {157} by a Possessive p.r.o.noun, because it is in the same limited state as if it governed a Noun in the Genitive Case; as, a chum am marbh_a_dh "s na beanntaibh, _to kill them in the mountains_, Exod. x.x.xii., not marbh_ai_dh, which is the Case regularly governed by chum. Co tha "g iarraidh do mharbh_a_dh? John vii. 20, not do mharbh_ai_dh. Thug iad leo e chum a cheus_adh_. Matt. xxvii. 31. Chum an cruinneach_adh_ gu cath. Rev. xx.
8[108].
This coincidence in the Regimen of the Infinitive in two similar situations, viz., when limited by a Possessive p.r.o.noun, and when limited by a subsequent Noun, furnishes no slight argument in support of the construction defended above, of putting the Infin. in the Nom. case when itself governs a Noun in the Genitive; for we find the Infin. is invariably put in the Nom. when limited in its signification by a Possess. p.r.o.noun.
When one Noun governs another in the Genitive, the Article is never joined to both, even though each be limited in its signification, as, mac an righ, _the son of the king_, not am mac an righ; taobh deas a" bhaile, _the south side of the town_, not an taobh deas a" bhaile[109]. For the most part, the Article is thus joined to the latter Noun. Sometimes it is joined to the former Noun; as, an ceann tighe, _the head of the family_; an ceann iuil, _the pilot_; but in such instances the two Nouns figure as one complex term, like _paterfamilias_, rather than as two terms. The following examples, in which the Article is joined to both Nouns, seem to be totally repugnant to the Gaelic idiom: cuimhneachadh _nan_ cuig aran _nan_ cuig mle, Matt. xvi. 9; _nan_ seachd aran _nan_ ceithir mle, Matt. xvi.
10[110].
{158}
A Possessive p.r.o.noun joined to the Noun governed excludes, in like manner, the Article from the Noun governing; as, barr-iall a bhrige, _the latchet of his shoe_, not am barr-iall a bhrige; obair bhur lamh, _the work of your hands_, not an obair bhur lamh.