I have two questions, from a student perspective. Please let me know if
I am missing something here.
1. I haven't figured out how to access the manuscript yet, but I wonder
how certain we are that 'rsiasar' means 'arsiasar'. Could it be 'ro-
siasar' (he has sat (down)), given that 'siasar' could be 3rd singular
preterite of 'saidid' here?
2. Also I wonder how 'ar-síasar' (from 'ar-said') should be translated.
It looks like a combination of a preposition 'ar-' (GOI p. 497
translates "air (er, ir, etc.) before, for") and the verb 'saidid'
(sits). I would expect it to translate literally as "sits before."
DIL A 413.30 has a question mark before 'ar-said' and translates it
as "sits before....perhaps also in following in sense of stays, remains,
accumulates". Could there be an understood object in this type of
poetry? Could it be translated as "sat before him" or "sat before it"?
In general, is it OK to translate verbs containing prepositional
preverbs the same way as the plain verb without the preposition?
Here's the background to my questions.
On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 13:28:07 +0800, Neil McLeod scríbas:
>MOD’s MS READING (SCRIBAL CONTRACTIONS ETC IN CAPITALS):
>[a]rsiasar coimHdHi temrae scéo tailten suidHi coimHdemHair
>MY RESTORATION - AND DIVSION ACCORDING TO SENSE:
>Ar-síasar coimdiu Temrae scéo Tailten
>The lord of Tara and Tailtiu sat down, <snip>
>MOD takes ar-síasar to be pret. 3 sg. of ar-said (cf saidid, pret. 3 sg.
>síasair - see GOI §690). DIL A 415.12 has our word under ar-sissedar and
>suggests that it might be pret. 2 sg. >>
<< I'm a little confused by the DIL entry. Is it suggesting that
>"ar-siasar / ar-sesar" could possibly be the singular passive
>subjunctive with jussive sense? Thus "Let the king be seated"?>>