H is never used as an independent radical letter. When prefixed to a word beginning with a vowel, it is pronounced like h inhow; as, na h-òigheanthe virgins, na h-oidhcheof the night.
The following scheme exhibits a succinct view of the letters, both singly and in their several combinations. The first column contains the letters whose sound is to be exhibited; the prefixed figures marking the number of different sounds denoted by the same letter. The second column explains the sounds by examples or by references. The third column contains Gaelic words, with their translation, in which the several sounds are exemplified.
Vowels.
Diphthongs.
Triphthongs.
Consonants
There is no doubt that the Gaelic has been for many ages a written language. It is equally certain that its orthography, since it was first committed to writing, has undergoneconsiderable changes. In this respect it has shared the common fate of all written languages.
In the first exhibition of the sounds of a living language, by alphabetical characters, it is probable that the principle which regulated the system of orthography was, that every elementary sound should be represented by a corresponding character, either simple or compounded, and that the same sound should be represented by the same character. If different sounds were represented by the same letter; if the same sound were represented by different letters; if more letters were employed then were necessary to exhibit the sound; or if any sound were not represented by a corresponding character; then thewrittenlanguage would not be an adequate representation of thespoken. It is hardly to be supposed that, in the first rude attempts at alphabetical writing, the principle above laid down could be strictly and uniformly followed. And though it had, yet, in the course of a few generations, many causes would occur to bring about considerable departures from it. A gradual refinement of ear, and increasing attention toeuphonia; contractions and elisions brought into vogue by the carelessness or the rapidity of colloquial speech, or by the practice of popular speakers; above all, the mixture of the speech of different nations would introduce numberless varieties into the pronunciation. Still, those who wrote the language might choose to adhere to the original orthography for the sake of retaining the radical parts, and preserving the etymon of vocables undisguised, and for maintaining an uniformity in the mechanism of the inflections. Hence the pronunciation and the orthography would disagree in many instances, till at length it would be found expedient to alter the orthography, and to adapt it to such changes in the speech or spoken language as long use had established, in order to maintain what was most necessary of all, a due correspondence between the mode of speaking and the mode of writing the same language.
It will probably be found on inquiry that in all languages when thespeechhas undergone material and striking changes,thewritten languagealso has varied in a considerable degree in conformity to these changes, but that it has not scrupulously kept pace with the spoken language in every smaller variation. The written language of the Greeks suffered many changes between the time that the old Pelasgic was spoken and the days of Demosthenes. The various modes of pronunciation used in the different districts of Greece are marked by a diversity in the orthography of the written language. The writing of the Latin underwent considerable alterations between the era of theDecemviriand the Augustan age, corresponding, no doubt, to the changes which had taken place during that interval in speaking the Latin. English and French books printed within the last century exhibit a mode of orthography very different from what is found in books printed two or three hundred years ago. These instances show the tendency which the written language has to follow the lead of the spoken language, and to maintain a certain degree of conformity to those modes of pronunciation which are from time to time adopted by those who speak it.
On the other hand, numberless examples might be adduced from any living language to prove that the written language does not adapt itself, on all occasions and with strict uniformity, to the sounds of speech. Words are written differently which are pronounced alike. The same combinations of letters, in different situations, represent different sounds. Letters are retained in writing, serving to point out the derivations of words, after they have been entirely dropped in speaking.
From such facts as these, it appears a just conclusion thatwritten languagegenerally follows thespoken languagethrough its various revolutions, but still at a certain distance,—not dropping so far behind as to lose sight of its precursor, nor following so close as to be led through all its fantastic deviations.
Here a question occurs of importance in settling the orthography of any particular tongue: How near ought thewritten languageto correspond to thespoken, and where may a disagreement between them be allowed withpropriety? The following observations may serve to throw some light on the subject of this question, though by no means sufficient to furnish a complete answer.
It is obvious that in speech thearticulations(which are represented by consonants in writing) are the least liable to variation.Vowel soundsare continually varying. In this variety chiefly consists that diversity of tone and dialect which is found in the speech of different districts of the same country, where the same words are spoken. The changes, too, which are introduced by time fall with greater effect on the vowel sounds than on the articulations. This circumstance will strike an observer who steps into any deliberative assembly, where the speakers are of different ages. St Jerome makes a remark on the reading of Hebrew, which is applicable, in some measure, to the pronunciation of all languages: "Nec refert utrumSalemautSalimnominetur; cum vocalibus in medio literis perraro utantur Hebraei; et pro voluntate lectorum, acvarietate regionum, eadem verbadiversis sonisatque accentibus proferantur." It may be observed that the superior stability of the articulations above the vowel sounds is the natural consequence of the position of the organs of speech in uttering them. The different modifications of the vowel sounds are effected by minute changes in the conformation of the organs; those of the articulations are made by more distinct and operose inflections of the organs.
It seems, then, a warrantable conclusion that, of the elementary constituents of speech, viz., articulations and vowel sounds, thearticulationsare, in their own nature, ESSENTIAL, PERMANENT, and PREDOMINANT; thevowel sounds, comparatively considered, are ADJUNCTIVE, FLUCTUATING, and SERVILE.
Further, all the vowel sounds that usually occur in speech seem to be uttered with equal ease, in whatever situation they occur, as the same organs are employed for all. In forming the common articulations of speech, as different organs are employed, a degree of difficulty is sometimes felt in making a transition from one articulation to another.Thus a difficulty will occasionally occur in pronouncing certain words, where the general analogy of inflection or of collocation has brought together articulations which do not easily coalesce. Hence a necessity arises of departing in such a case from the general analogy, and altering or displacing some of those discrepant articulations, for the sake of ease and convenience in pronunciation, and to relieve the ear from an offensive discordant sound. Departures are made from the general rules of speech in the case of the vowel sounds also, of which the Greek tongue abounds with examples. These departures, however, seem to have been made from a desire to indulge the ear in certain national predilections or aversions which it had conceived with regard to particular sounds. In examining the anomalies of speech, or those peculiarities which have been reckoned anomalous, it will be found that such of them as affect the articulations have, for the most part, been adopted for the purpose of ease and convenience in pronunciation; while those which affect the vowel sounds have proceeded from the peculiar taste of the speakers. Thus the former spring from a cause urgent and constant in its nature, and uniform in its operation; the latter, from a cause local and temporary in its nature, and variable in its operation.
If this theory be just, it ought to follow that, in all polished tongues, an agreement will be found among those irregularities which affect the articulations, that is not so observable in those which affect the vowel sounds. There is reason to believe that, if a full comparison were made between different languages, this would accordingly be found to be the case. Let it be observed, then, that in speech a deference has been usually paid to the articulations which has not been paid to the vowel sounds, inasmuch as the latter have been changed from the state in which the structure of each tongue had at first placed them, frequently and from peculiar taste or humour; the former more rarely, and for the most part from necessity. If this observation be found to be well supported, we shall have the sanction of general practice in favour of the conclusion that was formerlydrawn from the nature of articulate sounds, viz., that the articulations are ESSENTIAL, PERMANENT, and PREDOMINANT; the vowel sounds ADJUNCTIVE, FLUCTUATING, and SERVILE.
If it appear, then, that the vowel sounds in speech are perpetually varying in the mouths of different speakers, from causes which either elude our search, or, when discovered, are seen to be of small importance, may we not judge that it would be equally vain and improper to attempt to makeWritingfollow all these minute variations; and that, however it may happen that the same vowel sound may be represented in many instances by different letters, and different vowel sounds by the same letters, yet this disagreement betweenSpeechandWritingmust be connived at, for the sake of preserving some degree of uniformity, where alone it can be preserved, in thewritten language? If it appear, again, that the variations from the established analogy which are made on the articulations are less frequent, and proceed from causes obvious and cogent, ought not these variations to be exhibited in writing, for preserving that general correspondence between the written and the spoken language which ought to be preserved, as far as the limited powers of letters will permit, and without which the words I speak and those I write do not belong to the same language?
One exception from this principle seems allowable in the case of quiescent consonants. It may be inferred, from the practice of all living languages, that consonants whereof the corresponding articulations have been suppressed in speaking may yet be retained with propriety in writing, when they are requisite to point out the derivation of vocables, or the radical part of declinable words. But this exception ought to be allowed only to a moderate extent, for the reasons already assigned; to which it may be added, that the far greater part of the suppressed articulations can be easily discovered and retraced to their roots, without any index in thewrittenany more than in thespokenlanguage to point them out.
These observations being premised, I shall proceed to explain the present state of Gaelic Orthography, and shall endeavour to assist the reader in forming a judgment of its merit, and how far it may admit of improvement.
I. It may be laid down as one settled principle in orthography, that each letter or combination of letters in the written language ought always to denote one and the same sound. From the explanation that has been given of the powers of the letters, it may be seen how far this principle has been regarded in the Gaelic. Though almost every one of the letters represents more than one sound, yet there is an evident affinity between the several sounds of the same letter. And it may be readily allowed that less confusion and inconvenience follow from exhibiting a few kindred sounds by the same letter, than would have taken place had the characters been multiplied to such a degree as that a separate one could have been appropriated to each minute variety of sound.
It is obvious to remark, as a departure from this principle, that in the case of the consonantsl,n,r, the distinction between theirplainand theiraspiratedstate is not marked in writing, but that in both states the consonant is written in one way. In the middle and end of words, as has been shown, this distinction may be known from the relative situation of the letters. In the beginning of certain cases and tenses of declinable words, it may often be known from theirgrammaticalconnection, but is not marked by anygraphicalindex whatever. The proper reading is to be determined by the sense of the passage, instead of the sense being understood by the proper reading. It is not easy to discover how those who first committed the Gaelic to writing neglected to mark such a material distinction. Inconveniencies and ambiguities not unfrequently arise from this cause, which have been long felt and regretted. Is there room to hope that it is not yet too late to recommend a method of remedying this defect? The method I would suggest is the most simple and obvious of any. It is to annex to the initiall,n, andr, in their aspirated state, the letterh, just as has beendone to all the other consonants. The analogy of orthography would thus be maintained, the system of inflection would be more justly exhibited, and carried on by an uniform process inWritingas it is inSpeech, and errors in reading and ambiguities in syntax would be avoided[22].
II. Another principle of authority in regulating orthography is, that each sound ought always to be represented by one and the same letter, or combination of letters. The deviations from this rule in Gaelic are extremely few. The sound ofaois represented sometimes byaalone, sometimes byoalone. The sound ofghis represented also bydh; and finalcoften, though corruptly, represents the same sound withchd.
III. A third principle in orthography is, that no more letters ought to be employed than are necessary to represent the sound. There are probably few polished languages in which departures from this rule are not found in abundance. Reasons have been already mentioned which render it expedient to retain letters in writing many words, after the corresponding sounds have been dropped in pronouncing the same words. Quiescent letters, both vowels and consonants, are not unfrequent in Gaelic. Though these quiescent letters have no sound themselves, they are not always without effect in pronunciation, as they often determine the sound of other letters. Most, if not all, the quiescent vowels seem to have been introduced for this purpose. They ascertain thebroador thesmallsound of the adjoiningconsonants. This has been made sufficiently clear in treating of the vowels and diphthongs separately. A consonant, as has been shown, has itsbroadsound, both when preceded and when followed by a broad vowel; and in like manner has itssmallsound, both when preceded and when followed by a small vowel. If a consonant were preceded by a vowel of one quality, and followed by one of a different quality, the reader, it has been thought, might be doubtful whether that consonant ought to be pronounced with its broad or with its small sound. Hence this rule has long obtained in Gaelic orthography, that in polysyllables the last vowel of one syllable and the first vowel of the subsequent syllable must be both of the same quality[23]. To the extensive application and the rigid observance of this rule it is owing that so many diphthongs appear where one vowel is sufficient to express the vocal sound, and that the homogeneous vowels, when used in their quiescent capacity, are often exchanged for each other, or written indiscriminately[24]. From the former of these circumstances, most of the words in the language appear loaded with superfluous vowels; from the latter, the orthography of many words appears, in some respects, arbitrary and unsettled. Even a partial correction of these blemishes must be desirable. It may therefore be worth while to examine this long established canon of Gaelic orthography, with a view to discover whether it has not been extended farther than is necessary, and whether it ought not in many cases to be set aside.
We have seen that the Labialsb,m,f,p, whether aspirated or not, have no distinction of broad and small sound.
It cannot, then, be necessary to employ vowels, either prefixed or postfixed, to indicate the sound of these. Thus, abuichripe, gabhaidhwill take, chromainnI would bow, ciomaichcaptives, have been written with a broad vowel in the second syllable, corresponding to the broad vowel in the first syllable; yet the letters abich, gabhidh, chrominn, ciomich, fully exhibit the sound. The prepositive syllable im, when followed by a small vowel, is written im, as in imlichto lick, imcheistperplexity. But when the first vowel of the following syllable is broad, it has been the practice to insert anobefore them, as in iomlancomplete, iomghaotha whirlwind, iomluasgagitation. Yet the insertedoserves no purpose, either in respect of derivation, of inflection, or of pronunciation. The unnecessary application of the rule in question appears most unequivocally in words derived from other languages. From the Latin wordsimago,templum,liber, are formed in Gaelic iomhaigh, teampull, leabhar. Nothing but a servile regard to the rule under consideration could have suggested the insertion of a broad vowel in the first syllable of these words, where it serves neither to guide the pronunciation, nor to point out the derivation.
Another case, in which the observation of this rule seems to be wholly unnecessary, is when two syllables of a word are separated by a quiescent consonant. Thus in gleidheadhkeeping, itheadheating, buidheanna company,dligheachlawful, the aspirated consonants in the middle are altogether quiescent. The vocal sound of the second syllable is sufficiently expressed by the last vowel. No good reason, then, appears for writing a small vowel in the second syllable.
Thus far it is evident that the rule respecting the correspondence of vowels is wholly impertinent in the case of syllables divided by Labials, or by quiescent consonants. If we examine further into the application of this rule, we shall find more cases in which it may be safely set aside.
Many of the inflections of nouns and verbs are formed by adding one or more syllables to the root. The finalconsonant of the root must always be considered as belonging to the radical part, not to the adjected termination. The sound of that consonant, whether broad or small, falls to be determined by the quality of the vowel which precedes it in the same syllable, not by the quality of that which follows it in the next syllable. It seems, therefore, unnecessary to employ any more vowels in the adjected syllable than what are sufficient to represent its own vocal sound. The rule under consideration has, notwithstanding, been extended to the orthography of the oblique cases and tenses, and a supernumerary vowel has been thrown into the termination, whenever that was requisite to preserve the supposed necessary correspondence with the foregoing syllable. Thus, in forming the nominative and dative plural of many nouns, the syllablesanandibhare added to the singular, which letters fully express the true sound of these terminations. If the last vowel of the nominative singular is broad,analone is added for the nominative plural; as, lamh-anhands, cluas-anears. But if the last vowel be small, aneis thrown into the termination; as, sùil-eaneyes, sròin-eannoses. Now if it be observed that, in the two last examples, the small sound of thelandnin the root is determined by the preceding small voweli, with which they are necessarily connected in one syllable, and that the lettersanfully represent the sound of the termination, it must be evident that theein the final syllable is altogether superfluous. So in forming the dative plural: if the last vowel of the root be small,ibhis added; as, sùil-ibh, sroin-ibh. But if the last vowel of the root is broad, the termination is writtenaibh; as, lamh-aibh, cluas-aibh, where thea, for the reason already assigned, is totally useless.
These observations apply with equal justness to the tenses of verbs, as will be seen by comparing the following examples: creid-idhwill believe, stad-aidhwill stop; chreid-innI would believe, stad-ainnI would stop; creid-eamlet me believe, stad-amlet me stop; creid-ibhbelieve ye, stad-aibhstop ye.
The same observations may be further applied to derivative words, formed by adding to their primitives the syllablesach,achd,ag,an,ail,as; in all whichehas been unnecessarily introduced, when the last vowel of the preceding syllable was small; as, sannt-achcovetous, toil-eachwilling; naomh-achdholiness, doimhn-eachddepth; sruth-ana rivulet, cuil-eana whelp; cauch-aga little cup, cail-eaga girl; fear-ailmanly, caird-eilfriendly[25]; ceart-asjustice, caird-easfriendship.
The foregoing observations appear sufficient to establish this general conclusion, that in all cases in which a vowel serves neither to exhibit the vocal sound, nor to modify the articulations ofthe syllable to which it belongs, it may be reckoned nothing better than an useless incumbrance. There seems, therefore, much room for simplifying the present system of Gaelic Orthography, by the rejection of a considerable number of quiescent vowels[26].
Almost the only quiescent consonants which occur in Gaelic ared,f,g,s,t, in their aspirated state. When these occur in the inflections of declinable words, serving to indicate the Root, or in derivatives, serving to point out the primitive word, the omission of them might, on the whole, be unadvisable. Even when such letters appear in their absolute form, though they have been laid aside in pronunciation, yet it would be rash to discard them in writing, as they often serve to show the affinity of the words in which they are found to others in different languages, or in different dialects of the Celtic. The aspirated form of the consonant in writing sufficiently shows that, in speaking, its articulation is either attenuated or wholly suppressed.
The writers of Gaelic seem to have carefully avoided bringing into apposition two vowels which belong to different syllables. For this purpose they have sometimes introduced a quiescent consonant into the middle of compound or of inflected words; as, gneidheil, or rather gnethailkindly, made up of gnè and ail; beothaillively, made up of beoandail; diathangods, from the singular dia; lathaibhdays, from the singular là, &c. It may at least bear a question, whether it would not be better to allow the vowels to denote the sound of the word by their own powers, without the intervention of quiescent consonants, as has been done inmnaibhwomen, déibhgods, rather than insert consonants which have nothing to do with either the radical or the superadded articulations of the word.
From the want of an established standard in orthography, the writers of Gaelic, in spelling words wherein quiescent consonants occurred, must have been often doubtful which of two or three consonants was the proper one, and may therefore have differed in their manner of spelling the same word. Accordingly we find, in many instances, the same words written by different writers, and even at different times by the same writer, with different quiescent consonants. This variation affects not indeed the pronunciation, or does it in a very slight degree. Hence, however, some who judge of the language only from its appearance in writing, have taken occasion to vilify it, as unfixed and nonsensical[27]. A proper attention to the affinity which the Scottish Gaelic bears to some other languages, particularly to other dialects of the Celtic, might contribute to fix the orthography in some cases where it appears doubtful, or has become variable[28].
IV. The last principle to be mentioned, which ought to regulate orthography, is that every sound ought to be represented by a corresponding character. From this rule there is hardly a single deviation in Gaelic, as there is no sound in the spoken language which is not, in some measure,exhibited in the written language. The fault of the Gaelic orthography is sometimes a redundancy, but never a deficiency of letters.
A few observations on the mode of writing some particular words, or particular parts of speech, remain to be brought forward in the sequel of this work, which it would be premature to introduce here.
The Scottish writers of Gaelic in general followed the Irish orthography, till after the middle of the last century. However that system may suit the dialect of Ireland, it certainly is not adapted to the Gaelic of this country. In the Gaelic translation of the New Testament, printed in 1767, not only were most of the Irish idioms and inflections which had been admitted into the Scottish Gaelic writings rejected, and the language adapted to the dialect of the Scottish Highlands, but the orthography also was adapted to the language. In later publications, the manner of writing the language was gradually assimilated to that pattern. The Gaelic version of the sacred Scriptures lately published has exhibited a model, both of style and orthography, still more agreeable to the purest Scottish idiom, and has a just title to be acknowledged as the standard in both. Little seems to be now wanting to confer on the orthography of the Scottish Gaelic such a degree of uniformity as may redeem its credit and ensure its stability. This, it is to be hoped, may be attained by a judicious regard to the separate, and especially the relative powers of the letters, to the most common and approved modes of pronunciation, to the affinity of the Scottish Gaelic with other branches of the Celtic tongue, to the analogy of inflection and derivation, and, above all, to the authority of some generally received standard, to which pre-eminence the late Gaelic version of the Scriptures has the only indisputable claim.
OF THE PARTS OF SPEECH.
The parts of speech in Gaelic may be conveniently divided and arranged as follows:—Article, Noun, Adjective, Pronoun, Verb, Adverb, Preposition, Conjunction, Interjection. Of these, the first five are declinable; the other four are indeclinable.
OF THE ARTICLE.
The Gaelic article an corresponds to the English definite articlethe. There is in Gaelic no indefinite article corresponding to the Englishaoran. The inflections of the article are but few. They depend on the gender, the number, and the case, of the noun to which it is prefixed. Hence the article is declined by gender, number, and case, as follows:
In the singular, finalnof the article is sometimes cut off, and its absence marked by an apostrophe. The same happens to the initialaof the dative singular.
OF NOUNS.
A Noun is the Name of any person, object, or thing whatsoever, that we have occasion to mention. In treating ofthis Part of Speech, we have to consider theGenderand theDeclensionof Nouns.
Of Gender.
In imposing names on sensible objects, the great and obvious distinction of Sex in the animal world suggested the expediency of inventing names, not only for the particular species of animals, but also for distinguishing their Sex. Such arevir,femina;bull,cow;coileach,cearc, &c. To mark at once identity of species, and diversity of Sex, the same word, with a slight change on its form, was applied to both sexes: asequus,equa;lion,lioness;oglach,banoglach. In most languages, distinction of Sex has been marked, not only thus by the form of the noun, but further by the form of the adjective connected with the noun. Most adjectives were furnished with two forms, the one of which indicated its connection with the name of a male, the other its connection with the name of a female. The one was called by grammarians themasculine gender, the other thefeminine genderof the adjective. Adjectives possessing thus a two-fold form, must necessarily have appeared under one or other of these forms, with whatever noun they happened to be conjoined. Even nouns significant of inanimate objects came thus to possess one mark of nouns discriminative of Sex, as they happened to be accompanied by an adjective of the masculine or by one of the feminine gender. If any noun was observed to be usually coupled with an adjective of the masculine gender, it was termed by grammarians amasculine noun; if it was found usually coupled with an adjective of the feminine gender, it was termed afeminine noun. Thus a distinction of nouns into masculine and feminine came to be noted, and this also was called gender.
It is observable, then, that gender, in grammar, is taken in two different acceptations. When applied to an adjective,it signifies a certainform, by whichbonusis distinguished frombona. When applied to a noun, it signifies a certainrelationof the word to the attributives connected with it, by whichamoris distinguished fromcupido. As Sex is a natural characteristic pertaining to living objects, so gender is a grammatical characteristic pertaining to nouns, the names of objects whether animate or inanimate. The gender of nouns is not, properly speaking, indicated; it is constituted by that of the attributives conjoined with them. If there were no distinction of gender in adjectives, participles, &c. there could be none in nouns. When we say thatamoris a noun of the masculine gender, andcupidoa noun of the feminine gender, we do not mean to intimate any distinction between the things signified by these nouns; we mean nothing more than to state a grammatical fact, viz., that an adjective connected withamoris always of the same form as when joined to a noun denoting a male, and that an adjective connected withcupidois always of the same form as when joined to a noun denoting a female[29].
When an adjective was to be connected with a noun that denoted an object devoid of Sex, it is not always easy to guess what views might have determined the speaker to use the adjective in one gender rather than in the other. Perhaps Sex was attributed to the object signified by the noun. Perhaps its properties were conceived to bear some resemblance to the qualities characteristic of Sex in living creatures. In many instances, the form of the noun seems to have decided the point. It must be confessed that in this mental process, the judgment has been often swayed by trivial circumstances, and guided by fanciful analogies. At least it cannot be denied that in the Gaelic, where all nouns whatever are ranked under the class of masculines or of feminines, the gender of each has been fixed by a procedure whereof the grounds cannot now be fully investigated or ascertained. Neither the natural nor artificial qualities or uses of the things named, nor the form of the names given them, furnish any invariable rule by which the gender of nouns may be known. It ought to be remembered, however, that the Gaelic is far from being singular in this respect. The oldest language with which we are acquainted, as well as some of the most polished modern tongues, stand in the same predicament.
The following observations may serve to give some idea of the analogy of gender in Gaelic nouns; though they do not furnish a complete set of rules sufficient to ascertain the gender of every noun:—
Masculines.Nouns signifying males are masculines; as, feara man, righa king, sagarta priest, tarbha bull, cua dog.
Many nouns, signifying the young of animals of either Sex, are masculine, even when the individual objects they denote are mentioned as being of the female Sex; as, laogha calf, iseana gosling, uana lamb, &c.[30].
Diminutives inan; as, rothana little wheel, dealgana little pin, &c.
Derivatives inas, which are, for the most part, abstract nouns; as, cairdeasfriendship, naimhdeasenmity, ciuineascalmness, breitheamhnasjudgment, ceartasjustice, maitheasgoodness, &c.
Derivatives inair,ach,iche, which are, for the most part, agents; as, cealgaira deceiver, sealgaira huntsman, dorsaira door-keeper, marcacha rider, maraichea sailor, coisichea foot traveller, &c.
Names of such kinds of trees as are natives of Scotland; as, darachoak, giuthasfir, uimhseannash.
Most polysyllables whereof the last vowel is broad, are masculine.
Feminines.Nouns signifying females are feminine; as, beana woman, mathaira mother, boa cow, &c. Except bainionnach or boirionnacha female, marta cow, capulla horseormare, but commonlya mare, which are masculine, and caileann or cailinna damsel, masculine or feminine.[31]Mark, vi. 28.
Some nouns denoting a species are feminine, even when the individual spoken of is characterised as a male; as, gabhar fhirionn,a he-goat. Psal. l. 9.
Names of countries; as, AlbainnScotland, EirinnIreland.
Names of musical instruments; as, clarsacha harp, piob,a pipe.
Names of the heavenly bodies; as, Griansun, Gealachmoon.
Names of diseases; as, teasacha fever, a' ghriuthachthe measles, a' bhreacthe small-pox, a' bhuidheachthe jaundice, a' bhuinneach,a diarrhœa, &c.
Collective names of trees or shrubs are feminine; as, giuthasacha fir wood, iugharacha yew copse, seileacha willow copse, droighneacha thorny brake.
Diminutives inagorog; as, caileaga girl, cuachaga little cup.
Derivatives inachd; as, iomlanachdfulness, doillearachdduskiness, doimhneachddepth, rioghachdkingdom, sinnsireachdancestry, &c.
Abstract nouns formed from the genitive of adjectives; as, doilleblindness, gilewhiteness, leisgelaziness, buidhredeafness, &c.
Many monosyllables inuafollowed by one or more consonants are feminine; as, bruacha bank, cruacha heap, cuacha cup, cluasan ear, gruagthe hair of the head, sguaba sheaf, tuadha hatchet, tuathpeasantry.
Almost all polysyllables, whereof the last vowel is small, except those inairandiche, already noticed, are feminine.
A few nouns are of either gender; Salma Psalm, creidimhbelief, are used as masculine nouns in some places, and feminine in others. Cruinnethe globe, talambthe earth, land, are masculine in the nominative; as, an cruinne-céthe globe of the earth. Psal. lxxxix. 11., xc. 2.—D. Buchan. 1767. p. 12. 15; an talamh tioramthe dry land. Psal. xcv.5. The same nouns are generally feminine in the genitive; as, gu crìch na cruinneto the extremity of the world. Psal. xix. 4.; aghaidh na talmhainnthe face of the earth. Gen. i. 29. Acts xvii. 24.
Of Declension.
Nouns undergo certain changes significant of Number and of Relation.
The forms significant of Number are two: theSingular, which denotes one; and thePlural, which denotes any number greater than one.
The changes expressive of Relation are made on nouns in two ways: 1. On the beginning of the noun; 2. On its termination. The relations denoted by changes on the termination are different from those denoted by changes on the beginning; they have no necessary connection together; the one may take place in absence of the other. It seems proper, therefore, to class the changes on the termination by themselves in one division, and give it a name, and to class the changes on the beginning also by themselves in another division, and give it a different name. As the changes on the termination denote, in general, the same relations which are denoted by the Greek and Latin cases, that seems a sufficient reason for adopting the term case into the Gaelic Grammar, and applying it, as in the Greek and Latin, to signify "the changes made on theterminationof nouns or adjectives to mark relation".[32]According to this description of them, there are four cases in Gaelic. These may benamed, like the corresponding cases in Latin, theNominative, theGenitive, theDative, and theVocative.[33]The Nominative is used when any person or thing is mentioned as thesubjectof a proposition or question, or as theobjectof an action or affection. The Genitive corresponds to an English noun preceded byof. The Dative is used only after a preposition. The Vocative is employed when a person or thing is addressed.
The changes on the beginning of nouns are made by aspirating an initial consonant; that is, writinghafter it. This may be called theAspiratedform of the noun. The aspirated form extends to all the cases and numbers. A noun, whereof the initial form is not changed by aspiration, is in thePrimaryform.
Theaccidentsof nouns may be briefly stated thus. A noun is declined by Number, Case, and Initial form. The Numbers are two:SingularandPlural. The Cases are four:Nominative,Genitive,Dative, andVocative. The Initial form is twofold: thePrimary form, and theAspirated formpeculiar to nouns beginning with a consonant.
In declining nouns, the formation of the cases is observed to depend more on the last vowel of the nominative than onthe final letter. Hence the last vowel of the nominative, or in general of any declinable word, may be called thecharacteristicvowel. The division of the vowels intobroadandsmallsuggests the distribution of nouns into two Declensions, distinguished by the quality of the characteristic vowel. The first Declension comprehends those nouns whereof thecharacteristicvowel isbroad; the second Declension comprehends those nouns whereof thecharacteristicvowel issmall.
The following examples are given of the inflection of nouns of the
FIRST DECLENSION.
Formation of the Cases of Nouns of the First Declension.
Singular Number.
General Rule for forming the Genitive.—The Genitive is formed from the Nominative, by insertingiafter the characteristic vowel, as, bàs mas.death, Gen. sing. bàis; fuaran m. afountain, g. s. fuarain; clarsach f.a harp, g. s. clarsaich. Feminine monosyllables likewise add a shorteto the Nominative; as, cluas f.an ear, g. s. cluaise; làmha hand, g. s. làimhe[34].
Particular Rules for the Genitive.—1. If the nominative ends in a vowel, the genitive is like the nominative; as, trà m.a timeorseason, g. s. trà; so also beatha f.life, cro m.a sheepfold, cliu m.fame, duinea man, DonnchaDuncan, a man's name, and many others. Except bo f.a cow, g. s. boin; cu m.a dog, g. s. coin; bru f.the belly, g. s. broinn or bronn.
2. Nouns ending inchdorrrhave the genitive like the nominative; as, uchd m.the breast, sliochd m.offspring, feachd m.a host, reachd m.statute, cleachd m.habit, beachd m.vision, smachd m.authority, fuachd m.cold, sprochd m.gloom, beannachd m.a blessing, naomhachd f.holiness, earr m.the tail, torr m.a heap. Except slochd g. s. sluichd m.a pit, unless this word should rather be written sloc, like boc, cnoc, soc.
3. Monosyllables ending inghorthaddafor the genitive; as, lagh m.law, g. s. lagha; roth m.a wheel, g. s. rotha; sruth m.a stream, g. s. srutha. Except àgh m.felicity,grace, orcharm, g. s. aigh[35].
4. Monosyllables characterised byioeither drop theoor addafor the genitive; as, siol m.seed, g. s. sìl; lion m.a net, g. s. lìn; crioch f.a boundary, g. s. crìch; cioch f.the pap, g. s. cìche; fion m.wine, g. s. fiona; crios m.a girdle, g. s. criosa; fiodh m.timber, g. s. fiodha. Except Criost or Criosd m.Christ, which has the gen. like the nominative.
5. Many monosyllables, whose characteristic vowel isaoro, change it intouand insertiafter it; as, gob m.the bill of a bird, g. s. guib; crodh m.kine, g. s. cruidh; bolg or balg m.a bag, g. s. builg; clog or clag m.a bell, g. s. cluig; lorg f.a staff, g. s. luirge; long f.a ship, g. s. luinge; alt m.ajoint, g. s. uilt; alld m.a rivulet, g. s. uilld; car m.a turn, g. s. cuir; carn m.a heap of stones, g. s. cuirn. So also ceol m.music, g. s. ciuil; seol m.a sail, g. s. siuil. Except nouns inonand a few feminines, which follow the general rule; as, bròn m.sorrow, g. s. bròin; lòn m.food, g. s. lòin; cloch or clach f.a stone, g. s. cloiche; cos or cas f.the foot, g. s. coise; bròg f.a shoe, g. s. bròige. So also clann f.children, g. s. cloinne; crann m.a tree, g. s. croinn. Mac m.a son, has its g. s. mic.
6. Polysyllables characterised byeachangeeaintoi; as, fitheach m.a raven, g. s. fithich; cailleach f.an old woman, g. s. caillich[36]. These two suffer a syncope, and adde; buidheann f.a company, g. s. buidhne; sitheann f.venison, g. s. sithne.
Of monosyllables characterised byea, some throw awayaand inserti; as, each m.a horse, g. s. eich; beann f.a peak, g. s. beinne; fearg f.anger, g. s. feirge. Some changeeaintoi; as, breac m.a trout, g. s. bric; fear m.a man, g. s. fir; ceann m.a head,end, g. s. cinn; preas m.a bush, g. s. pris; breac f.the small-pox, g. s. brice; cearc f.a hen, g. s. circe; leac f.a flag, g. s. lice. Gleann m.a valley, addse, g. s. glinne. Some addato the nominative; as, speal m.a scythe, g. s. speala. Dream f.people,race, gean m.humour, have their genitive like the nominative. Feall f.deceit, g. s. foill or feill. Geagh m.a goose, makes g. s. geoigh.
7. Nouns ineufollowed by a liquid, changeuintooand insertiafter it; as, neul m.a cloud, g. s. neoil, eun m.a bird, g. s. eoin; feur m.grass, g. s. feoir; meur m.a finger, g. s. meoir; leus m.a torch, g. s. leois. Beul m.the mouth, g. s. beil or beoil; sgeul. m.a tale, g. s. sgeil or sgeoil. Other nouns characterised byeuaddafor the gen., as, treud m.a flock, g. s. treuda; feum m.use,need, g. s. feuma; beum m.a stroke, g. s. beuma. Meud m.bulk, beuc m.a roar, freumh f.a fibre,root, hardly admit ofa, but have their gen. rather like the nom.
8. Monosyllables characterised byiachangeiaintoei; as, sliabh m.a moor, g. s. sleibh; fiadh m.a deer, g. s. feidh; biadh m.food, g. s. beidh or bidh; iasg m.fish, g. s.eisg; grian f.the sun, g. s. greine; sgiath f.a wing, g. s. sgeithe. Except Dia m.God, g. s. De; sgian f.a knife, g. s. sgine.
Piuthar f.a sister, has g. s. peathar; leanabh m.a child, g. s. leinibh; ceathramh m.a fourth part, g. s. ceithrimh, leabaidh or leaba f.a bed, g. s. leapa; talamh m.earth, g. s. talmhainn.
TheDativesingular of masculine nouns is like the nominative; of feminine nouns, is like the genitive; as, tobar m.a well, d. s. tobar; clarsach f.a harp, g. s. and d. s. clarsaich; misneach f.courage, g. s. and d. s. misnich.
Particular Rules for the Dative of Feminine Nouns.—1. Ifewas added to the nominative in forming the genitive, it is thrown away in the dative; as, slat f.a rod, g. s. slaite—d. s. slait; grian f.the sun, g. s. greine, d. s. grein.
2. If the nominative suffered a syncope in forming the genitive, or if the last vowel of the genitive is broad, the dative is like the nominative; as, buidheann f.a company, g. s. buidhne, d. s. buidheann; piuthar f.a sister, g. s. peathar, d. s. piuthar.
TheVocativeof masc. nouns is like the genitive; of feminine nouns is like the nominative; as, bàs m.death, g. s. bàis, v. s. bhais; cu m.a dog, g. s. coin, v. s. choin; grian f.the sun, v. s. ghaoth.