an bóṫar tirim, aċt nuair ḃíonn an bóṫar fliuċ, siuḃaltar ar an gclaiḋe. People walk on the road when it is dry, but when the road is wet they walk on the path. Where is the nominative case of the so called passive verb here? Evidently there is none. The verb stands alone and conveys complete sense. If we wish to express the nominative, the Autonomous form of the verb cannot be used. In the above sentence we might correctly say: Siuḃlann sé (siad, sinn, na daoine, etc.), but not siuḃaltar é (iad, sinn, na daoine, etc.)
Probably classical scholars will draw analogies from Latin and quote such instances as, Concurritur ad muros. Ventum est ad Vestae. Sic itur ad astra. Deinde venitur ad portam; where we have intransitive verbs in an undoubtedly passive construction, and therefore, by analogy, the true signification of siuḃaltar in the above sentence is “It is walked,” and it is simply an example of the impersonal passive construction. Now, if conclusions of any worth are to be drawn from analogies, the analogies themselves must be complete. The classical form corresponding to the Irish Bítear ag siuḃal ar an mbóṫar nuair ḃíonn an bóṫar tirim, etc., or táṫar ag siuḃal ar an mbóṫar anois is wanting, and therefore the analogy is incomplete and deductions from it are of little value.
One of the strongest arguments we have in favour of the Autonomous verb is the fact that the verb “to be” in Irish possesses every one of the forms possessed by transitive and intransitive verbs. The analogy with Latin again fails here. Táṫar ag teaċt.
