thanks for taking on the job again.
> Is é fáth arna bad maidm for Congal Cláen ina goí ría nDomnall
> ina f*irinne, úar bad maidm forsin ainf*írén resin fírén.
> "The reason for it being a defeat for Congal Claen in his falsehood by
> Domnall in his truthfulness, was because the false was overcome by the
> 'arna' takes the subjunctive and 'bad' is the 3rd person singular past
> subjunctive. I am up in the air about the second 'bad', should it be
> the subjunctive again?
Actually things are much more complicated. The MS reads "buaid" in both cases where you wrote "bad", and "búaid" "characteristic, special quality" it is in both
instances. The key to the whole sentence lies in the correct analysis of the small word "arna". What it must be is this: the preposition "ar" "for, on account of" + relative
particle "a" which is syncopated away, so that nothing of it remains, + relative negative particle "na/ná" + 3rd sg. pres. indicative of the copula represented by zero. This
small word therefore translates as "on account of which (= why) is not". What follows "arna", is a basically normal copulaic sentence, with the predicate "búaid"
immediately following the copula, the subject "maidm" coming next. The verb of the causal clause introduced by "úair" is also the copula, which is not expressed on the
So, I'd write:
Is é fáth arná búaid maidm for Congal Cláen ina goí ré nDomnall ina f*írinne, úar búaid maidm forin ainf*írén résin f*írén.
"This is the reason why the defeat of Congal Cláen in his falsehood by Domnall in his truth is not the special quality (of the battle), because the special quality (of it is/lies)
in the defeat of the untruthful by the truthful."
Does the construction of the sentence sound a bit awkward to you? Actually it is awkward. The same construction will be repeated in the next two statements. We could
rephrase the sentence in English, in order that it becomes a bit clearer:
"The first special quality of the battle lies not in the historical fact that Congal Cláen of the Dál nAraidi was defeated by Domnall mac Áedo of the Uí Néill (and that the
supremacy of the Uí Néill was established in the North), but rather in the ideological fact that an unjust person was defeated by a just one."
A few more remarks to the normalisation: In classical OIr. we would have to write "ina f*írinni", but since we are normalising to a state of the language where final vowels
had all become schwa, we can keep the "-e" of the MS. After "for" the article can be expressed by forms with or without "s". Since the MS has "arin", I chose the s-less
form "forin". The preposition "ré, ría" takes the dative. Since the dative singular always lenites in Ir., I write "résin f*írén". In class. OIr. the article ought to be "résind".
> Should it be nasalized after 'úar'?
No, "úair" doesn't itself cause a mutation, but it would have a nasalising relative clause, if a compound verb followed (which is not the case here). Note: "úair" "because"
has a palatalised "r"; "úar" with non-palatalised "r" means "cold".