The Scottish Celtic review

Gaelic Orthography— Common Mhinkes. 28")is prefixed to the vowel. Hence"gosuighfinn " = "gon suighfinn,"and "bo sui>fh(i ''^" tron suighfi," "go Mbhra" = " sjon Idbhra,""go meastar"="goa meastar," and "go raibh" = "gon raibh,""go naibeoi'uinn " = " gon aibeoruinu," "go neugfuinn " = " gon^ugfuinn," "go niobhthaoi " = " gon iobhthdoi," "go niosddoi" ="gon iosdaoi," "go n61fa" = "gon 61fa," and "go nuimhleocha" ="gon uimhleocha." The fact, therefore, tliat eclipsis takes placeuniformly in modern Irish, when the word immediately followingthis conjunction begins with an eclipsable consonant, proves conclusivelythat the nasal of the conjunction is au organic and nota mere euphonic letter. The regular preservation of the nasalbefore words beginning with a medial consonant or with a vowel,is,likewise, proof to the same effect.3. Among the relics of eclipsis still existing in Scottish Gaelicmay be mentioned " gu ma " and " gu bheil," which alone affordsufficient proof that the nasal oi gu, 'n is the oi-iginal termination,and not a mere euphonic letter. " Gu ma," in such phrases as" Gu ma fada beo thu " (long may you live), " Gu ma slan a thilleastu" (happy may you return), is for "ga mbadh" = "gu'mbadh " = Old Gael, "com-bad." " Gu bheil," which occurs so frequently,is for " gu bhfeil " = " con-feil." In these formulse, thetefore,h of badh is eclipsed by m, undfotfeil by bh in consequenceof the original nasal termination of the conjunction. In fact, in" ma" or " madh," ??i=ri6, and in "bheil," bh=iif. We thus seethat, so far from the view of Dr.Stewart and others in regard tothe n oi gic'n being correct, viz., that it is a mere euphonic letter,the very opposite holds true, for instead of the nasal being addedto the conjunction for euphony, it is dropped for euphony in certainpositions, in accordance with the law applicable to a primitivenasal ending.The influence of this law explains the frequent occurrence ofgu, 'n without the nasal. The law, however, does not affect ScottishGaelic to the same extent and with the same regularity asmodern Irish, which is in a less advanced state of phonetic decaythan its sister dialect. In the Irish Scriptures, for example, wehave met with no instance in which this law is violated, so far asthis conjunction is concerned; and, even in Scottish Gaelic, theinstances are fewer than one not acquainted with the extent towhich the law influences spoken Gaelic in all parts of the High-