Part of revelations 2:27 from Tiomna Nuadha:

"Do bhéurad don ti bheireas ré a ithe mhanna fholuigheach"

I need help with pronuncing "bhéurad" and "bheireas"

Also, I how would we spell/pronounce these words ( in the proper grammatical form ) in modern Munster?

Thank you for your time! Much appreciated

It is

and it is Rev. 2:17 (not 2:27)

In An Bíobla Naofa it is:


do bhéurad = = (do) bhéar(f)ad = (do) bhéar(f)aidh mé = tabharfaidh mé or tabharfad = I will give
1st person singular future tense of do bheir (= tabhair)
Do bheir, do-bheir or just bheir (always lenited) is an old absolute form of tabhair.
éu, often written eu without accent (nonetheless a long e sound), today written éa
bhéurad / bhéarad is pronounced as spelled (u is silent, just broadening the r) [v´e:rəd]

an tí bheireas buaidh = an té a bheireann bua = he who overcomes
3rd person singular present tense, direct relative form (ending -as, which is not used anymore in Munster Irish, normal present ending -ann is used instead)
bheireas is pronounced as spelled (i, e silent, just slenderising the r): [v´er´əs]


BTW: I have some questions regarding the older language:

ré a ithe should mean "to eat a portion"? (cuid [de...] a ithe)
Dictionaries only have ré as a portion of time.
The portioned thing (mhanna fholuigheach) is a genitive phrase but separated from its headword. (i.e. ré mhanna fholuigheach/fholuighigh)
I’d think this is impossible in Modern Irish, isn’t it?

It could have a more general meaning in the earlier language (see this DIL entry). I can’t say whether it’s impossible in modern Irish, but as it doesn’t seem to occur in Dinneen, I’d be slow to use it.

You’re thinking of a wrong a – there is no “relative particle” and no a in infinitive phrases at this stage of the language (at least not in higher literature, like Bible translations, or theological and political commentaries by Keating, Conry, Carswell, etc.). For infinitives, do is spelt in full (réad d’ithe ‘to eat a thing’), in Keating sometimes do is used for relative particle in present and future, but that’s not classical usage.

There are exactly two leniting a things in Classical Gaelic (and since it’s a ithe, without h- or n- prefixed, a has to be leniting):
1. the possessive ‘his, its’,
2. the vocative particle.

Only the possessive works here.

Doesn’t help that the quote in the original post here is incomplete, it goes:



It’s not genitive (that’d be manna fholuighigh), it’s dative due to be following a preposition (don, modern den – but the base forms of the two prepositions were merged and written as do for centuries).

ré here is the preposition, not noun

modernized, it’d be: tabharfad don té a bheireann bua ní lena ithe den mhanna folaitheach ‘I will give to the one who takes vicotory a thing for (its) eating of hidden manna’ (ré a ‘for its’ has a referring back to ní … don mhanna fholaigh(th)each)

BTW, in the 1817 version of Bedell (see also scan on archive.org), the ní is missing. That’s why I generally try to check RIA, there are lot of typos, missing pieces, and other problems with the other versions, including the 19th century print (it also “modernized” a few classical phrases rendering them ungrammatical AFAIR).

EDIT: regarding do-bhéarad – there was no f there originally, and similarly in other long-é futures: laibheórad / laibhéarad ‘I will say’, iméachad / imeóchad ‘I will leave’, iméarad / imeórad ‘I will play’, inéasad / ineósad ‘I will tell’, etc.

Go raibh maith agat.