Atkinson— I^^w Inflexional Forms of the Verb in Irish. 433 
The following instances will suffice to exemplify the 
laws : — 
Present Tense. 
I. WHO-Clauses. 
The man -who -strikes, . . An -peA-p "buAiteAf. 
The men who-strike, . . riA fi|\ iDUAiteA-p. 
In these «^?7^o-clauses the relative form obtains throughout. 
[In general the language is adverse to constructions such as 
/, who strike, &c., but if used, they must follow the rule; it 
is Iioho strike thee would have to be rendered by if nnfe bti^il- 
exs-p uti ; but in these cases the language in general either 
uses some other construction, such as the emphatic affix 
bti^itim--pe, or inserts a formal antecedent, if iiiife xmi fe^f 
bii^ite^f uu.] 
II. WHOM-Clauses. 
Here the verb agrees with its subject, the relative-iorm in 
-Af being only used with (2nd and) 3rd singular. Hence we 
have : — 
The man [the men] whom I strike, An 
thou strikest, 
he strikes, 
we strike, 
you strike, 
they strike. 
|:eA|\ [nA buAitini. 
btiAiliiA [buAileAf uu]. 
"btiAiteA-p fe. 
"buAitimi'-o. 
"btiAitci'. 
btlAltlt) pATD. 
Of course, in the last example, fi^*o cannot be used if the 
subject is expressed in the shape of a noun, e. gr. : — 
The woman whom the men strike. An beAn buAi'Li'o nA pp. 
These distinctions tend to obviate misunderstanding. Take, 
for instance : — 
The women whom the men strike, nA ninA btiAilit) nA fijA. 
The women who-strike the men, nA ninA "buAiteAf nA p|A. 
There is certainly great advantage of definiteness in the 
structure by this rule ; whereas the confusion which the modern 
misuse has introduced is serious. 
