a mhairfeas-which form is this and what is it for?

Context please!

I'd say it's probably 2nd person future:

Faid a mhairfeas tú - while you live. But I'd prefer to see the sentence.

It looks like the relative form, an Foirm Choibhneasta, of the verb mair. This is very common form of the verb used in relative clauses, especially in the Irish of Connacht and Ulster. The rule is applied to type one, or first conjugation verbs by replacing the ending

• -nn in the present tense with the ending -s.
  
• -idh in the future tense with either the ending -s or the ending -eas.
  

For example:

Caighdeán Oifigiúil:Sin smaoineamh a mhairfidh go deo.
Foirm Coibhneasta:Sin smaoineamh a mhairfeas go deo.
That's an idea that will live forever.

Caighdeán Oifigiúil:Sin fear a mhaireann saol crua.
Foirm Coibhneasta:Sin fear a mhaireas saol crua.
That's a man who lives a hard life.

Source: Dónall P. Ó Baoll and Éamonn Ó Tuathail, Úrchúrsa Gaeilge, Eagrán Leasaithe, Institúid Teangleolaíochta Éireann, p. 210

If I'm not mistaken, the following phrase is seen throughout the leaving certificate papers:

Freagair na ceisteanna seo a leanas

...strange if the standard is supposed to be "a leanann"

The phrase I got is from this weeks Foinse

Cen tam a mhairfeas an triu rialtu do Blair...

When a dutchman writes in Irish:

Cén tachar a mhairfeas an triú Rialtas do Blair:

How long will Blair's third governemnet last.

It's still awkward with achar instead of am.

"am" is just plain wrong, but maybe I should blame the editor and not the journalist.

This weeks Foinse is rotten with typos - nobody seems to have proof read Bréandán Mac Gearailt's article at all - it look like somebody used poor OCR on worse handwriting...

I apologise to Alex and the editor:

The headline is
"Cén fhad a mhaireas tríú Rialtas Bhlair"

How long will Blair's third government last

couldnt remember the exact sentence!

A Fhir na mbróg,

quote:

...strange if the standard is supposed to be "a leanann"

Yes, it is indeed strange. The Chrisitian Brothers note that the verb lean, with its relative form leanas, is one of only three verbs that have unique relative forms in the Caighdeán Oifigiúil. The other two are

• the verb bí with relative forms atáim, atá, atáimid, atáthar, and
  
• the past and conditional form of the copula when it is used before a vowel or fh + vowel: an duine ab óige; a an rud ab fhearr a dhéanamh.
  

The good brothers then go one to state the rule for the relative form I gave earlier in this thread saying, "Although outdside the Caighdeán Oifigiúil, this direct relative form in
-s is used widely in literature, prayers, and conversation." In effect, they seem to saying the standard is this, but the predominant usage is that.

Source: New Irish Grammar by the Christian Brothers, C.J. Fallon, 1999, pp. 144, 145.

Scottish Gaelic speakers still say "nach maireann" although they no longer understand "maireann" as a verb, but think of it as an adjective. They would analyze the phrase as:
(nach = who is not) + (maireann = alive),
instead of
(nach maireann = who lives not).

Some Munster speakers may not quite understand why one says "a leanas," but it's alway been a common formula and they never stopped using it.

Juste to precise things:

The relative ending -(e)as is used:

-In Donegal and Connaught Irish, in the direct relative, affirmative sentences, in the habitual present and in the future.

That is to say, you WON'T hear it in Munster (except in "a leanas"), you won't hear it in indirect relative, in negative sentences, and in other tenses or forms.

So:
-Is mise a rachas 'na bhaile amárach (Ulster)
-Nuair a bhíonns tú tinn fanann tú sa mbaile (Connaught)
BUT:
-nuair a bheidh tú/bheir ann, tucfadsa (Munster)


-is mise a bheas ann
BUT: -sin an áit a mbeidh mé (indirect relative)


-is tusa a dhéanfas an obair sin
BUT:
-is tusa an fear nach ndéanfaidh an obair sin (negative)


-is tusa a théas ’na bhaile go luath (U)
-is tusa a théanns abhaile go luath (C)
BUT: -is tusa a chuaigh abhaile go luath (past)
-is tusa a rachadh abhaile go luath (conditional)


The relative ending is an archaic feature that was the rule since Old Irish at least.

You'll find it in both Scottish Gaelic and Manx as well.

(Message edited by Lughaidh on April 11, 2005)

I'd avoid referring to the Gaelic relative ending as "an archaic feature," since most people don't understand that to mean "a feature that has been in use since the beginning" (which is what it is), but rather "an outmoded, anachronistic feature with no place in the modern language" (which it isn't).

The word "alway" in my message above, on the other hand, is an (unintended) archaism in the latter sense (or…?).

(Message edited by Peadar Ó Gríofa on April 11, 2005)

A Pheadair > what should i use then? archaic means archaic... are there other words to express what i mean?

Perhaps "ancient"?

Perhaps "no longer used in Munster, and therefore ignored by the Official Standard."

The relative ending is a longstanding feature that has been the rule since Old Irish at least.

>no longer used in Munster, and therefore ignored by the >Official Standard

Quite right! But many Munster features don't exist in the standard as well (in morphology for example: verbs etc).

But many Munster features don't exist in the standard as well

That's right, and likewise many Ulster features, and even some that are common to all the dialects. The Official Standard deforms and impoverishes them all.

and likewise many Ulster features

I mean, besides those common to Connaught and Ulster, and those shared by Mayo and Ulster. There are also distinguishing features common to Ulster and Scotland, to Munster and Scotland, to Waterford and Scotland, etc.

A Chairde:

"The Official Standard deforms and impoverishes them all."

And, I assume this is what is taught in Irish schools and colleges?

It mirrors the impovcerished, deformed version of Irish history taught as orthodoxy under the revisionist historical establishment.

Hybridity is heresy.

dc

Revisionism hasnt all been bad for Irish history or Irish politics..even though we may not love CC O Brien, K Myers or E Harris sometimes their views can be quite interesting..self criticism is good....Having a standard in Irish lets us get a basis where from we can study dialects at a later stage..hybridity is important to progress..

Yes, but...

"My own quarrel is not so much with standardisation as with the official standard we have got...But what kind of standard could avoid the ill-effects of the official standard? An unbiassed one would help, but what is really required is a basic reorientation in the direction of increased tolerance all round. It should not be a case of "sharing out the grief", as the official handbook expresses it, whether fairly or unfairly, but all the natural dialects should be accomodated, while eliminating non-significant variation.
This would require the restoration of portions of the full spelling, and the codification of much wider grammatical and lexical choices. In fact, a more tolerant standard exists in the combination of Ó Dónaill's dictionary and the Christian Brothers' grammar, but lexical variants are approved only for 'non-official' situations, grammar choices are still insufficient, and spelling issues remain unresolved."

— Ciarán Ó Duibhín

See also:
http://www.daltai.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/daltai/discus/show.pl?tpc=21&post=22273#PO ST22273

>A Chairde:

>"The Official Standard deforms and impoverishes them >all."

>And, I assume this is what is taught in Irish schools >and colleges?

Yes and that’s why (or at least one of the reasons for which) young native speakers often don’t understand many words that are used by their grandparents (i remember having heard an interview of John Ghráinne, seanchaí from Rannafast, Co. Donegal, who said that). That’s a pity, especially when these words haven’t been recorded or written down by anybody.

>It mirrors the impovcerished, deformed version of Irish >history taught as orthodoxy under the revisionist >historical establishment.

i dunno for history, but for the empoverished version of the Irish language, it is true.

>Hybridity is heresy.

i wouldn’t go as far as u! hybridity is heresy when it's not natural, and especially when it results from laziness and ignorance. (teachers mix all dialects becaus ethey just don't know anythin about them an think that you can do such things. A sentence like "do chonac buidéal sa mbaile ar thábla na cisteanaí" is just impossible: it mixes grammar and vocabular of the 3 dialects. "Dublin Irish" is a bit like that (standard grammar, mix of munster, connaught, ulster and english pronounciation + anglicisms and mistakes, and school clichés: go dtí, beidh mé ag... instead of the real future, almost no declensions nor lenitions and eclipses...)

school clichés: go dtí, beidh mé ag...

...do instead of i gcomhair / faoi chomhair / le haghaidh / fá choinne, faoi dhéin, etc...