On So, 22.03.2009, 10:32, Neil McLeod wrote:
>>> BB Is fair tar mairt (cormac) gai . imochath imocath rai
>>> Lec IS fairtotharmairt agai imochath imochathrai .
> However, 'He intended a spear on him' is a bit odd. I would expect a
> word to do with throwing,
Indeed, most instances cited in DIL are followed by a verbal noun as
object of "tarmairt". But there are the odd examples without verbal
> However, BB's (original) reading is certainly defective in terms of
> syllables, while Lec's isn't. And I don't think we can get 'tarmait'
> into 'totharmairt'; or can we? Could it be a 'hypercorrect' (not quite
> the right term) deuterotonic re-formation with lenition to indicate it
> is relative (do-tharmait)? It might be possible to read the first 't' as
> a 'd', though it looks more like a 't' to me.
Something along these lines is a possibility to account for the unexpected
"totharmairt". It is clear that the verb was "tarmairt". This is probably
a compound verb *do-armairt. DIL does indeed record the verb under this
form, which, however, is never attested. It is conceivable that the poet
created the required extra syllable by "doubling" the initial preverb. The
model may have been provided by verbs like deut. "do-tuit" vs. prot.
"-tuit" or deut. "fo-fuasna" vs. prot. "-fuasna".
As for the second line "imochath imochathrai", I wonder whether there is a
dittography there? In any case, what we would expect in this line is a
local expression, e.g. "in battle" or so. I wonder if we can get there