420 
Proceedings of the Boyal Irish Academy. 
But in the jj/t^ra/ lie does not use -A.nn ; thus : — 
42, 22 iToeAnAniAOi'o-ne. j 46,8 aii eifei^AeocAiX) An "oiAung ? ^ 
5 50 Ti-eijAeocAit) tiA "OAOine. | 46, w c<\ iaacato ah "oixun^ ? 
Now, take the modernized edition of this Catechism by 
O'Eeilly [1822]. Qi.e.gr,:— 
Donlevy, p. 142 :— | O'Reilly, p. 116 :— 
oixxDiiige p [i.e. 0]A'oiii§i'o p]. I oiTOUi^eAtm p. 
Here we have the wholly unwarrantable modern use of the 
ending -A.nn. 
Or take the edition of O'Gallaher's Sermons by Canon 
Bourke, 1878, where the same alteration is observable, though, 
of course, it had begun in the old edition. On p. 44 we have 
a paragraph, which may be given as a specimen : — 
44, 21 Anns an t-saoghal-so . . . eirigheann gach nidh . . . ; ann kit sin, 
teagmhann. . . . On6ruigli^««M . . . agus tarcuisnighe^ww. . . . 'Bidh.eann. . . . 
In every case here, the old edition [18 07 J preserves the pro- 
per form, p. 29^ — the independent form, badly spelt no doubt, but 
with a perfectly just appreciation of the fundamental difference 
in the function of the two endings, -e-6vtin and -1*6. 
In the so-called Munster- version of the N. T. [1858], the 
wrong use of the ending -Arm is very common. The 1st chap- 
ter of St. John contains the following instances of the improper 
use : — 
Verse 5 Agu-p -poittp^iori An ^potuf. 
9 An -poUif, "oo foittp^ion. 
12 An "oivAni, 'oo cjAei-oion, 
15 An ce cigion. 
23 An ce tiugAn. 
Verse 27 An ce cipon. 
29 11 An "Oe, cogAn peACA An x>. 
30 cigion "ouine. 
33 An ce "bAifoeAn. 
^ Nouns of multitude are treated as either singular or plural, much as in 
English. 
- Here the text is : — eirighe gach ni . . . n-ait a dteagmhuinn [after prep, cum 
relat.']. Onoraidh , . . tarcuisnidh . . . Bi . . . 
