234 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



And the next sentence is wrong : la vigne elle-meme, si on la 

 plante dans un terrain vierge^ se contentera cfun simple labour comme les 

 autres graines. No ! " Again, as to the vineyard, if they sow [plant 

 trees in] it in new ground, to get it ploughed one single time does not 

 suffice as in the case of other seeds", pmaneloole de on, eusanjof 

 hn wkah nbrre, mere wsop nwot rose etreuskai mmof 

 nthe mpkeseepe ncrooc. 



16. His version of [206, i] is little short of astounding, suivant la 

 parole de Paid : ' une parole dite avec le cosur vaut mieux que dix mille 

 autres paroles dites avec la langue\ This he has corrected into the real 

 quotation, fainie mieux cinq paroles, 6eXw TreVre A-oyous; but what a 

 disclosure of want of grammatical skill to edit as he did originally : 

 tiwes ti wnsaje ! ! For indeed the correction was the result of the 

 discovery of the source of the quotation, as is shown hy his helpless- 

 ness in the matter of a subsequent quotation, at [206, 4], le Seigneur a 

 dit aussi : ' mieux vaut parler avec le cceur qu^ avec la louche'' [!], where 

 the Coptic has, ebolhm pehwo inphet esare ttapro saje, "out 

 of the abundance of the heart the mouth is wont to speak ". 



17. And what judgment is to be passed on this passage ? 



I^t si tu as jamais He d la guerre, tu sais que si le peuple ne remporte 

 pas la victoire, le roi n'en est pas capable lui-meme. 



No doubt a good sentiment, but the logic ? 



"Why, the writer had just been talking of the vicarious punish- 

 ment inflicted on David through the sufPerings of his people ! And 

 the words mean, "unless the people be overthrown, one cannot pre- 

 vail against the king", for the Coptic has, [215, i], eimetei iite 

 plaos cotp meuscmcom epfro. 



But M. Bouriant has not fathomed the abyss in which is contained 

 the doctrine of the passive ! 



18. And his handling of the vocabulary shows how utterly at 

 the mercy of the winds of hazard he is at times when the word is not 

 absolutely commonplace. Here is a text, [215, 7], inpekswont 6 

 Biktor pahmhal eto Shot, "hast thou not recognized me, 

 Victor, my faithful servant?" And how does M. Bouriant render 

 this simple sentence ? 



sais-tu, Victor, mon serviteur, qui est en face de toi ? 



Here, instead of the adjective Shot, et-Shot, 'faithful', he has 

 made a clause, qui est en face de toi. 



