Dennis King wrote:
> Neil McLeod wrote:
>>>> LL Mani thrôethad a ara
>> Despite the lenition in two of the MSS, I would be inclined to see an
>> invisible infixed 3rd sg masc pronoun here, referring to Tadc:
>> "If his charioteer had not deprived him".
>> What is the state of play with Class A infixed pronouns in the 10th
To answer my own question, there is a useful article by Strachan on 'the
Infixed Pronoun in Middle Irish' in Ériu i 153f.
> At some point along the way, "ní" begins to lenite on its own. Let's
> see... (he turns to _Stair na Gaeilge_) ...
Yes, Strachan notes that at p 163.
> Liam Breatnach deals with this in his chapter "An Mheán-Ghaeilge",
> §§10.4 and 11.1. Talking about the meaningless infixed 3rd sg. neuter
> pronoun, he says:
> “Dá réir sin, d'fhág an forainm iontáite a rian sa séimhiú a leanann na
> míreanna briathartha ‘ro, no,’ níos déanaí ‘do,’ agus an mhír dhiúltach
> ‘ní’” [...]
> As for timing, he says only that the generalization of ní+LEN happens
> "in Middle Irish":
> “Sa MG [...] déantar [...] ‘ní’ le séimhiú i bpríomhchlásail a
> ghinearálú [...]”
Strachan is equally general.
> This applies to the compound "mani" as well.
> Interestingly, the verb "traethaid" bifurcates in Modern Irish, giving
> us "traoch = overcome, subdue, wear out", which is transitive (cf. "tá
> mé traochta = I'm exhausted"), and "traoith = abate, subside; reduce;
> waste, consume", which can be either transitive or intransitive. The
> semantic range of earlier "traethaid" seems to mixed some of all of the
> I wonder if we can dispense with the putative infixed 3rd sg. masc.
> pronoun entirely here? Instead of:
>> "If his charioteer had not deprived him"
> "If his charioteer had not abated / subsided (= relaxed his effort)" ??
I originally tried 'If his charioteer had not grown weary'. But I
discounted this for a number of reasons. 1) There was no direct
indication elsewhere of his charioteer being weary (though he too was in
all the battles I assume) or wounded like Tadc. 2) It wouldn't really
explain why he went south rather than west. 3) The verb (in DIL at
least) appears to be exclusively transitive. But since, as you point
out, 'wearies' is both transitive and intransitive in Modern Irish, that
puts a different complexion on it.
On the other hand, there is no direct mention either of the charioteer
having deliberately or even negligently 'short-changed' Tadc. And if he
had done so, surely Tadc would have killed him rather than just the
As to the reading with the infixed pronoun: I do not see the lenition of
the 't' as due to a confusion about the mutuations proper to masc 3 sg
infixed pronouns. (Strachan confirms David's recollection that there was
no confusion on that point.) Rather, I think of it is a scribal
response to the presence of 'ní' (which caused lenition) - the scribe
being unaware of the infix's presence.
Perhaps it's a toss-up?