iii), beside the original dyfod. The form dỿwad became dw̄́ad in the dialects, and this is the spoken form both in N., and S.W. But in part of Dyfed a form dṓd developed (apparently from *dowod < dỿwod); this was used by Wms., and has since been in common use, chiefly in verse in free metres.
The noun dovot W.M. 33 ‘a find’ is a different word, being for do-ovot a.l. i. 94 (also dohovet [read ‑ot] ib.) < *dỿ-w̯o-vot.
(4) All the forms given in dictionaries, containing the tense stems of these verbs, such as äu, athu, elu, eddu ‘to go’, dawed, dawad, delyd, doddi ‘to come’, gwnelyd ‘to do’, are spurious. Silvan Evans misquotes D.G. 306 dywad as an example of dawad, s.v.; but admits that the others do “not occur in the infinitive”! see s.v. delyd.
x. Origin of the forms. (1) af < *aᵹaf: Ir. agaim ‘I drive’ √ag̑‑: Lat. ago, Gk. ἄγω, Skr. ájati ‘drives’. The verb had middle flexion in Brit., cf. ë-yt ‘goes’ < *ag̑-e-tai (' drives himself, goes’) § 179 iii (1). Hence the perf. euthum < *aktos esmi § 182 iv (1), and the plup. athoeẟ ib. (2). For the voicing of th to ẟ in eẟyw, aẟoeẟ see § 108 iv (2). Stokes’s reference of eẟwyd ‘ivisti’ to √ped- Fick4 ii 28 (still quoted, e.g. by Walde2 s.v. pēs) is made in ignorance of the facts.—On dos see (7); on mynet § 100 iv.
(2) The subj. stem el- comes from the synonymous root *elā‑: Gk. ἐλάω ‘I drive’; in the pres. ind. the stem was *ell‑, prob. for *el‑n‑, Thurneysen Gr. 314, as in Ir. ad-ella ‘transit’, di-ella ‘deviat’; in W. *ell-af was driven out by af, but the subj. elwyf remained. W. delwyf is probably, like gwnelwyf an analogical formation. The reason why the 3rd sg. has no ‑o may be that these forms superseded an old 3rd sg. middle *elhyt and 3rd sg. gwnech which had no ‑o. The view that gwnêl is a re-formation is borne out by the actual survival of gwnēch.
(3) The stem of gw̯naf is *u̯rag‑, √u̯ereꬶ- ‘work’ § 100 i (2). In the pres. and impf. ind., therefore, the flexion was exactly the same as for af, stem *ag‑; this led to its being assimilated to af in other tenses. The old root-aor. sg. 1. gwrith, 3. gwreith became gwneuthum, gwnaeth like the perf. of af, § 181 vii (2).—The old perf. of √u̯ereꬶ- is preserved in the 3rd sg. in Ml. W. guoreu, goreu § 182 ii (1), Ml. Bret, guereu, gueure, guerue.—It does not seem possible to derive goruc from the same root; this occurs as sg. 1. 3. in Corn. gwrûk (grûg etc.); it probably represents a synonymous form associated with goreu on account of accidental similarity; possibly < *u̯er-oik‑, √peik̑-: Skr. pįs̑áti ‘carves, adorns, forms, prepares ', pés̑aḥ ‘form’ (: Lat. pingo, with ‑k̑/g̑- altern.); cf. Duu an goruc b.b. 39 ‘God made us’.
(4) The v.n. gwneuthur is for gwneithur g.c. 112, 128, w.m. pp. 93, 94 (p 16), b.ch. 62 (cf. anghyfreith wneuthur r.p. 1296, i.e. wneithur) § 77 viii. The original v.n. was *gwreith < *u̯rek-tu‑; by the loss of ‑r- after the initial this became gweith, gwaith ‘work’. The form *gwreith occurs, written guereit, in enuir ith elwir od guur guereit b.a. 37, which appears elsewhere as enwir yt elwir oth gywir weithret
