On So, 22.03.2009, 15:47, Neil McLeod wrote:
> Ah yes, so there are. This one looks especially close:
> DIL D 200.54: ó TARMAIT in doíbel-dron cloch gach aonfhir in a ceann
> 'since the evil throng were each ABOUT TO THROW a stone at her'. Where
> the act of throwing is understood as implicit in the verb 'tarmait' used
> in connection with 'a stone'.
Yes, this is as close a parallel as we can get.
>> Something along these lines is a possibility to account for the
>> "totharmairt". It is clear that the verb was "tarmairt". This is
>> a compound verb *do-armairt. DIL does indeed record the verb under this
>> form, which, however, is never attested.
> Though there is the curious plural form 'do-rermartatar' at DIL D 54.
Ah yes, this is indeed deuterotonic. Otherwise, it is not especially
remarkable. It is augmented by "ro-", "-e-" is probably a spelling for
>> It is conceivable that the poet
>> created the required extra syllable by "doubling" the initial preverb.
>> model may have been provided by verbs like deut. "do-tuit" vs. prot.
>> "-tuit" or deut. "fo-fuasna" vs. prot. "-fuasna".
> If this was a bit too novel, it might explain why the scribe in BB went
> with something he was more used to writing.
Or what we have to reconstruct is "ro-tharmairt"?
> As to BB, I wonder if what we have there is the impersonal use listed as
> (b) in DIL? So 'a spear nearly fell on him'.
> Is fair tarmairt gai
> imo chath imo cath-rai
> It is on him a spear nearly fell
> throughout his battle, throughout his battle-field
But the examples in DIL for the impersonal use are all in the meaning "it
almost happened" and are construed with verbal nouns.