The Scottish Celtic review

ThisGaelic Orthoijraiili>j— CommoiL Mldakes. -05Marc xiii. 19 (Ref. Eil.) :" amhuil nach robh a'leithid ami otlioiscach na cruitheaclid," for, " .imliuil nach robh a leithid anno thoiseacli na cruithcachd "(Ed. 182G).1 Cor. V. 11 (Ref. Ed.) : " maillc r' a' leithid so de dhuine," fur_" maillc r'a leithid so do dhuine" (Ed. 182(5).2 Cor. ii. 7 (Ref Ed.) : " air eagal gu-m bitheadh a' leithid so dcdhuine," for, " air eagal gu 'm biodh a leithid so do dhuine(Ed. 1826).2 Cor. X. 11 (Ref Ed.) :" Sinuaitiicheadh a' leithid sin dedhuine so," for, " Smuainichcadh a leithid sin do dhuine so"(Ed. 182(j).2 Cor. xii. 2 (Ref Ed.) :" a' leithid sin dc dhuine," for, ". . .aleithid sin do dhuine " (Ed. 1826).2 Cor. xii. 3 (Ref Ed.) :" Agus b' aithnc dhomh a'leithid sinde dhuine, " for, " Agus b'aithne dhomh a leithid sin do dhuine"(Ed. 1826).1 Cor. V. 5 (Ref Ed.) : " A' shandiuil so dc dliuiuc," for, " Ashamhuil so do dhuine " (Ed. 1826).Gal. vi. 1 (Ref Ed.) :" togaibh suas a' shamhuil sin de dhuine,"for, "togaibh suas a shaniluiil sin do dhuine " (Ed. 1826).It is unnecessary to multiply examples, the article havingbeen substituted in the Ref Ed. (1880) for the poss. pronoun,almost invariably in the singular, but in no instance in theplural'alteration, clearly the result of the editors havingmistaken the jtarts of speech, has been defended by the Rev. Dr.Clerk in the Inverness Celtic Muyazine. But it may be easilyshown that, in " a leithid sin do dhuine " (such a man), " aleithid do chaisg " (such a passover), " a shamhail sin do dhuine "(such a man), and similar formulae, the article is altogetherinadmissible.1. The nasal of the article is never elided before nouns beginningwith I or s in any case of the singular ; and the plural isna in all the cases, except the genitive in which it is nan {nambefore a labial). Before nouns beginning with s, the article preservesthe dental {t) as well as the nasal in the gen. and dat. sing,masculine, and in the nom. and dat. sing, feminine. The genitivefeminine is always na. If, therefore, the article were admissiblein the above foniiulre before leithid and samhail, the form wouldbe an, not a', in the singula!-, and na, not an, in the plural. Butan is never used in the singular nor na in the plural in theseformulae, which is sufficient proof that a before leithid and