Blair Collection > Celtic studies

Contents. \
mcnt of s- stems, p. l'_*o. As to the ablative, p. 125. As to the 6 in
the dative plural, p. 125. Want of pronominal declension, p. 125.
Agreement of gen. sing, and nom. plur. of masc. a- stems in the Old
Gaedliclic and the Latin, p. 1 25. Other agreements less exclusive, pp.
125-120.
§ 12. Affinkies of gradation {or comparison). Pecuhar forms of griidation
in the Greek, the Latin, the Celtic. Analogy of some Gaedhelic
forms, p. 126.
§ 13. Affinities of the pronouns. Celtic peculiarity in giving up the nom.
sing, of the 1. and 2. person, p. 126. Analogy vrith the Teutonic in the
3. person, p. 126. Analogy with forms in the Sanskrit, p. 127. The
ta; the ana; p. 127.
§ 14. Affinities of conjugation. Peculiar combinations and new formations
in conjugation. Examj)les, p. 127. Remarkable analogy with Teutonic
and Slavonian, p. 127. Paradigm of Old Gaedhelic and Lithuanian —
ending of the present and preterite, p. 128. The Kymric -st, (2, pers.
sing, prset.) p. 128. Pictet's view of this -t, p. 128. Distinction of
the imperfect and perfect in tlie Slavonian by separate verbs, p. 128.
Use of the present as a future, p. 129. Peculiar force, in the Teutonic
and Slavonian, of the particle in composition, p. 129. Analogy in the
Celtic ; (1) the perfect denoted by a special particle ; (ju-; ro- ; ra-),
pp. 129-130. Peculiarity of Celtic in use of this particle, p. 130. (2)
The pres. and fut. changed into the perfect future exactum by this
particle (ro-), p. 130. "(3) The present forms (especially the con-
junctive pres.) turned into future by it, p. 129. All three uses in the
Gothic, p. 131. Gaedhelic particle to tenses of incomplete action,
{nu-, no-), p. 131. Middle position of the Celtic, between the Italic
and Greek, and the Teutonic and Lito-Slavonian, p. 131. Other points
of contact to be sought in a comparative syntax of these languages,
p. 131.
Chapter III. — On Phonology in Irish.
§ 2. Necessiti/ of establishing an organic orthography; and great importance
of a comparison of the modern Irish forms for the purpose. Schleicher's
opinion, p. 135. Want of linguistic materials on the continent, p.
135. Inaccuracy of those published: (examples in Zeuss, O'Dono-
van, etc.) p. 135. How to attain what is required, p. 135. Com-
parison wanted between Middle and Modern Irish forms, p. 136.
• Disfigurement and irregularity of Modern Irish forms ; (errors of
Pictet and Bopp), p. 136. Examples, pp. 130-138. Necessity of com-
parison with newer forms nevertheless ; (error of Zeuss), p. 138.
§ 2. Vocalismus. The chief difficulty of the Irish phonetic system, p. 138.
Three kinds of e and o, p. 138. Suggestion of a mode of distinguishing
them in print, p. 138. Examples, p. 139. Of the a corrupted from
the in Old Irish. Examples, pp. 139-141. Correction of mistake in
preceding chapter, (p. 88 ; § II. On the article, etc.) as to the modern
form of the article an, note, p. 140.
§ 3. Consonantismus. — Aspiration of mediae after vowels. Important results
of comparison of the newer forms. Examples, p. 141. Influence of
the s, p. 141 . Comparison of the modern forms especially necessary to
determine whether the tenuis or media is to be aspirated or not. Ex-
amples, pp. 141-142. Aspiration of the simple m in Modern Irish. M.
for bh. 2lm (or mh) in Old Irish, deduced from m (in inlaut) in Mo-
dern Irish. (Note : mm in several examples, compared with the nn
of the article), p. 142. Mediae after vowels always aspirated in Modern
Irish ; after consonants not so, except where a vowel dropped out, pp.
142-143. Mediffi assimilated after iquids, p. 143 Observation on the
so-called Eclipse, p. 143.
2*