Elements of Gaelic Grammar — Story, Setting & Ideas

Stewart's Analytical Method

Stewart's approach is visible in his treatment of improper prepositions. He lists compound phrases such as do chòir (near, implying motion) and os ceann (above), then notes that nearly all contain a noun preceded by a simple preposition. He identifies ceann, aghaidh, lorg, barr, and taobh as real nouns used elsewhere. For words like son, cum, and reir, which appear only in these phrases, he infers they are nouns too, forming phrases of identical structure. This reasoning shows Stewart's commitment to regular patterns over ad hoc explanations.

Orthographic Controversy: ceann vs. cionn

Stewart devotes a sustained passage to the spelling of os ceann, where the noun is almost always written cionn despite being ceann elsewhere. He rejects the idea of two distinct nouns meaning 'top' and argues that varying spelling to distinguish prepositional use from nominal use undermines the stability of written language. Such variation, he says, disguises the word's identity and misleads readers into thinking the forms are radically different. This critique reveals Stewart's concern for orthographic consistency as a foundation for linguistic clarity.

Etymology in Practice: dh' fhios

Stewart traces the improper preposition dh' fhios (to the knowledge of) to an original application to persons only, citing Gaelic songs where it carries affectionate regards. He argues that this specific meaning was gradually overlooked, and the phrase came to be used interchangeably with do chum and dh' ionnsuidh in a general sense. He then suggests that the form ghios is a corrupt writing of dh' fhios. This analysis exemplifies Stewart's method: he uses historical usage and semantic narrowing to explain grammatical change, grounding his claims in textual evidence rather than abstract rules.

Readers approaching Stewart's grammar should attend to his footnotes and asides, where he often engages in detailed linguistic argument. The work rewards those interested in the reasoning behind grammatical rules, not merely their application. Stewart's insistence on evidence and his willingness to question received orthography make this a valuable document for understanding how 19th-century scholars approached a language with a strong oral tradition but an evolving written standard.

Years shelving Elements of Gaelic Grammar, I’ve often paused over Stewart’s gentle fussing with ceann and cionn, that patient tracing of words to their roots—it feels like listening to someone tidy a beloved room. The same quiet devotion lives in An Outline of the Phonology and Morphology of Old Provençal — Themes and Context, where another tongue’s sounds are held with equal reverence. Two grammars, one long hush.