[83] "In corroboration of this (Mr. S.'s) hypothesis, I have frequently met de in old MSS. I have therefore adopted it in its proper place."—E. O'C.'s "Grammar of the Irish Gaelic." Dublin, 1808.
[84] In many places, this Prep. is pronounced hun.
[85] Tar éis, on the track or footstep. See O'Brien's "Ir. Dict." voc. éis.
[86] On consulting O'Brien's "Ir. Dict." we find son translated profit, advantage, cum a fight, combat, réir will, desire. From these significations the common meaning of air son, do chum, do réir, may perhaps be derived without much violence.
[87] See Gaelic Poems published by Doctor Smith, pp. 8, 9, 178, 291.
[88] There is in Gaelic a Noun cion or cionn, signifying cause; which occurs in the expressions a chionn gu because that, cion-fàth a reason or ground. But this word is entirely different from ceann end or top.
[89] Some confusion has been introduced into the Grammar of the Latin language, by imposing different grammatical names on words, according to the connection in which they stood, while they retained their form and their signification unchanged; as in calling quod at one time a Relative Pronoun, at another time a Conjunction; post in one situation a Preposition, in another, an Adverb. An expedient was thought requisite for distinguishing, in such instances, the one part of speech from the other. Accordingly an accent, or some such mark, was, in writing or printing, placed over the last vowel of the word, when employed in what was reckoned its secondary use; while, in its primary use, it was written without any distinguishing mark. So the conjunction quòd was distinguished from the relative quod; and the adverb post from the preposition pòst. The distinction was erroneous; but the expedient employed to mark it was, at least, harmless. The word was left unaltered and undisguised; and thus succeeding grammarians had it the more in their power to prove that the relative quod and the conjunction quòd are, and have ever been, in reality, one and the same part of speech. It would have been justly thought a bold and unwarrantable step, had the older grammarians gone so far as to alter the letters of the word, in order to mark a distinction of their own creation.
[90] From this use of the preposition air arises the equivoque so humorously turned against Mr James Macpherson by Maccodrum the poet, as related in the Report of the Committee of the Highland Society of Scotland on the authenticity of Osian's Poems, Append. p. 95. Macpherson asked Maccodrum, "Am bheil dad agad air an Fhéinn?" literally, "Have you anything on the Fingalians?" intending to inquire whether the latter had any poems in his possession on the subject of the Fingalian history and exploits. The expression partakes much more of the English than of the Gaelic idiom. Indeed, it can hardly be understood in Gaelic, in the sense that the querist intended. Maccodrum, catching up the expression in its true Gaelic acceptation, answered, with affected surprise, "Bheil dad agam air an Fhéinn? Ma bha dad riamh agam orra, is fad o chaill mi na còirichean." "Have I any claim on the Fingalians? If ever I had, it is long since I lost my voucher."
[91] This use of the preposition ann in conjunction with a possessive Pronoun, is nearly akin to that of the Hebrew
ל