Author |
Message |
Dubhghaill
Member Username: Dubhghaill
Post Number: 2 Registered: 06-2005
| Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 07:59 pm: |
|
From what I have learned from an elderly Irish speaker from Limerick, "Conas tá tú?" is not actually Munster, but a compilation from the days of standardization. The actually Munster is "Conas taoi?" (which I like quite a bit). Does anyone know what the other pronouns used with this are (sé, sí, sibh, etc) Go raibh maith agat Dónall |
|
Lughaidh
Member Username: Lughaidh
Post Number: 374 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 07:04 am: |
|
Táim / tó, tú Táir / taoi tá tám táthaoi, táithe, táidh tá(i)d These are really archaic (Classical Irish). Those that are still (rarely) in use in Modern Irish (Munster dialect) are: táim táir, taoi tá sé táimid tá sibh táid. |
|
Breacban
Member Username: Breacban
Post Number: 106 Registered: 11-2004
| Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 08:00 am: |
|
conas ta tu is actually pronounced as conas tantu in some cork dialects. I was told by an old speaker that the classic text or font more accurately approximates the sounds of irish in the munster dialect at least. |
|
Diarmo
Member Username: Diarmo
Post Number: 123 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 10:46 am: |
|
So in what Gaeltacht(aí) were tá mé, tá tú, tá sé, tá sí , táimid, tá sibh and tá sinn in use when the standard was developed? In some of them or just one area in particular? who were the main architects of standardisation? |
|
Jonas
Member Username: Jonas
Post Number: 703 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 10:54 am: |
|
What Lughaidh say is correct, but táir and taoi are hardly ever used anymore. The phrase "Conas taoi" is indeed used sometimes, but I'd say that "Conas tánn tú" is more common. |
|
Lughaidh
Member Username: Lughaidh
Post Number: 382 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 06:41 pm: |
|
Conas atánn tú, with a regular habitual present ending -ann (which is an innovation, it’s not an old thing at all). >So in what Gaeltacht(aí) were tá mé, tá tú, tá sé, tá >sí , táimid, tá sibh and tá sinn in use when the >standard was developed? standard: táim, tá tú, tá sé, tá sí, táimid, tá sibh, tá siad Connemara: táim/tá mé, etc, táimid/tá muid, etc. Donegal: tá mé, tá tú, tá sé, tá sí, tá muid, tá sibh, tá siad Munster: táim, tá(nn) tú/táir, tá sé, tá sí, táimid, tá sibh, táid/tá sibh. The standard conjugations are mainly a Connemara one (the simplest one, those of Munster and Donegal are sometimes more complicated so they've notbeen used for making the standard) >who were the main architects of standardisation? Not people from Donegal, anyway. They choose the most regular and "central" forms, so most of the time they agree with Connemara forms. |
|
Lúcas
Member Username: Lúcas
Post Number: 202 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Friday, June 17, 2005 - 12:36 pm: |
|
A Dhiarmo, a chara, You asked quote:who were the main architects of standardisation? That's a long story described in "Ó Chaint na nDaoine go dtí an Caighdéan Oifigiúil", by Cathal Ó Háinle, in Stair na Gaeilge, Coláiste Phrádraig, 1994, lch. 745-794. Here is my abbreviated spin ar an scéal. Debate had raged for decades, since at least the revival of Irish in the late 19th century, about the need for a standard Irish. On one side were people arguing against any artificial standard ... the best model for Irish prose composition is to be found ... in the mouth of the Irish speaker ... what really offends the ear and mind of the native Irish listener is the sort of stiff unmanageble stuff that is written by the pendant who has scrupulously 'avoided provincialisms'. The man who 'avoids provincialisms' simply avoids the language. Sounds like Lughaidh doesn't it, but this one was written in 1902. On the other side of the coin was that idea that Modern Irish needed a standard like the literary standards of Old and Middle Irish. Irish lost its mainstay when, after long centuries of activity, it ceased to be written, and fell entirerly under the feeble guardianship of oral transmission, to suffer the the rapid wearing process fated to all rude tongues lacking the backbone of a fixed literary canon... Monks provided the canon for Old Irish while Bardic poets provided the canon for Middle Irish. That begged the question, who would provide the canon for Modern Irish? It turns it was Rannóg Aistriúcháin an Oireachtais that provided the canon. Rannóg was founded by the Dáil in 1922 to translate all laws into Irish. In 1957, the Taoiseach, Éamonn de Valera, commissioned the Príomhaistreitheoir of Rannóg, Séamus Daltún, to write a standard. He talked to native speakers, teachers and linguists to publish Gramadach na Gaeilge agus Litriú na Gaeilge: An Caighdéan Oifigiúil in 1958. In 1978, de Valera appointed Niall Ó Dónaill as the editor of Foclóir Gaeilge Béarla. Ó Dónaill started where Daltún left off. He points this out at the beginning of his dictionary: Is iad na foirmeacha caighdeánacha ad ar na focail a bhfuil míniú ag gabháil leo. Tá na foirmeacha sin bunaithe ar na rialacha a leagadh síos sa leabhrán Gramadach na Gaeilge agus Litriú na Gaeilge: An Caighdeán Oifigiúil (B.Á.C. 1958-60). Ar ndóigh, bhí caighdeánú le déanamh ar an iliomad focal a bhfuil malairt leaganacha orthu agus nár luadh sa leabhrán sin. I gcomhar le chéile a shocraigh Rannóg an Aistriúcháin agus Foireann an Fhoclóra caighdeánú na bhfocal sin. De thoradh an taighde a ghabh le hobair an fhoclóra b'éigean corrfhoirm a bhí socraithe cheana Min a athrú agus beagán forialacha breise a chumadh. I gcás nuathéarmaí teicniúla is iad Coiste Téarmaíochta na Roinne Oideachais a shocraigh na foirmeacha caighdeánacha.Ó Dónaill, lch. vii. So I guess you could say the architects of the Caighdéan were the three D's; de Valera, Daltún, and Ó Dónaill. I know de Valera came from America, but I am not sure where Daltún came from. However, Niall Ó Dónaill was born in Donegal in 1908. (Message edited by lúcas on June 17, 2005) Mise le meas, Lúcas Ceartaigh mo chuid Gaeilge, mura miste leat .
|
|
Lughaidh
Member Username: Lughaidh
Post Number: 402 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Friday, June 17, 2005 - 08:25 pm: |
|
Ok, but Donegal or not, what are Donegal features in Standard Irish? I don't see many. O Dónaill could be born anywhere, the Standard wouldn't have taken more features from Donegal Irish. >The man who 'avoids provincialisms' simply avoids the language. That sounds right. A standard language is needed for official texts, not more, i think. Now, since the language is endangered, i think that using a standardized language instead of the living dialects isn't a good thing for Irish (it is, for other languages that aren't endangered): native Irish should be emphasized instead of a non-natural kind of Irish. In Gaeltacht Gaelscoileanna, i was told that Standard Irish was taught, then the children who are native speakers think that what they talk at home isn't right, since they're taught another kind of Irish at school. I think it's very bad: they should be taught both local Irish and Standard Irish, and that these are equally good. |
|
Lúcas
Member Username: Lúcas
Post Number: 204 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Friday, June 17, 2005 - 10:14 pm: |
|
A Lughaidh, a chara, The story of the devolpment of Caighdéan gets even stranger. Séamus Ó Grianna, whose pen name was Máire, had a long-standing feud with An Gum, the publishing branch of the government. He refused to have any of his work printed in anything other than seanchló and also refused to adopt the standard spelling. For example, he always used the Ranna Feirste personal pronoun leithe instead of the Caighdéan léi. While resisting the use of the standard, he helped develop it. He was on Ó Dónaill's team developing the standard foclóir. Mise le meas, Lúcas Ceartaigh mo chuid Gaeilge, mura miste leat .
|
|
Lughaidh
Member Username: Lughaidh
Post Number: 403 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 08:38 am: |
|
Now O Grianna is dead, I've books by him, and they're in the modern cló, and the spelling used is a standard Donegal one, so Standard including some Donegal features (at random, apparently)...: di when we say daoithe in Donegal, x an tseantsaoil (Donegal for x an tseansaoil), smaoinigh (for Donegal smaoitigh), achan (instead of standard gach aon), goidé (instead of standard cad é)... Niall O Dónaill did its publication - strange way of standardizing. |
|
Lúcas
Member Username: Lúcas
Post Number: 208 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, June 25, 2005 - 09:56 am: |
|
I have Cora Cinniúna Imleabhr 1 agus Imleabhar 2. I did not realize Niall O Dónaill edited them. I also did not know he "standardized" it sort-of. Thanks, Lughaidh. Yes, it is strange way of standardizing, but it is An Gum, the government publishing house. They have always seemed a little odd to me. Their initial idea of restoring Irish literature was to translate English works!?! Mise le meas, Lúcas Ceartaigh mo chuid Gaeilge, mura miste leat .
|
|
Lúcas
Member Username: Lúcas
Post Number: 209 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, June 25, 2005 - 11:31 am: |
|
A Lughaidh, a chara, It troubled me that Ó Dónaill might actually edit Ó Grianna. How repulsive to think a lexicographer would edit Ó Grianna, Shakespeare, Goethe, Voltaire, ... Mickey Spillane, or any writer's published works? What mere wordsmith would have the audacity to change literature? I thought you had to be wrong, Lughaidh. So I set out to prove you wrong. Forgive me, but I quickly discovered you were right. As luck would have it, I just got a copy of Máire's Cúil le Muir from ebay. It was published in 1961 in the seanchló, eight years before the author's death in 1969. Last term we read stories from Cora Cinniúna Imleabhar 2 in my Irish class. It was published in 1993. One of the stories we read was "An Codlatóir," republished from Cúil le Muir. So, I seized the opportunity to compare the original to the republished version. I only got to the second sentence in Cora Cinniúna's version before I found the lexicographer's evil hand. In Cúil le Muir the second and third sentences read as follows: Ní mhusgóladh urchar gunna mhóir iad dá sgaoiltidhe ós a gcionn é. Acht níorbh' é seo a' leannán a bhí ar Dhomhnall Mhaire Báine. However, Ó Dónaill olc changed several spellings in just these two sentences.: Ní mhuscóladh urchar gunna mhóir iad dá scaoiltí ós a gcionn é. Ach níorbh é seo an leannán a bhí ar Dhónnall Mháire Báine. I think it is reprehensible that Ó Dónaill directly violated the author's wish not to change his spelling. Like a thief in the night, he did it after Ó Grianna's death! I should not be surprised since the cur changed his own name from Ó Domhnaill to Ó Dónaill in 1952. God save us from elitist editors. (Message edited by lúcas on June 25, 2005) Mise le meas, Lúcas Ceartaigh mo chuid Gaeilge, mura miste leat .
|
|
Aonghus
Member Username: Aonghus
Post Number: 1635 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 03:17 pm: |
|
quote:How repulsive to think a lexicographer would edit Ó Grianna, Shakespeare, Goethe, Voltaire, ... Mickey Spillane, or any writer's published works? However repulsive it is, it is normal practice. I very much doubt that the texts of Shakespeare preserve 16th century orthography. And I know that Goethe's writings have been edited for orthography and usage - since I have old and new versions. The case in Irish however, is that there was no written standard from the 17th to the mid 20th century: so that the changes when they came were accumulated and drastic. And they were more obviously artifical than normal standardisation which is gradual and imposed by the civil service. I think the "cur" is a little strong. |
|
Lughaidh
Member Username: Lughaidh
Post Number: 418 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 08:04 pm: |
|
There is more than simply spelling, Aonghus. Di and daoithe aren’t the same word, an tseansaoil and an tseantsaoil aren’t the same form, smaoinigh and smaoitigh aren’t the same word, and so forth. In Modern editions of Shakespeare and Goethe, i think (i hope!) they’ve not changed the words or the forms, just modernized the spelling. |
|
Aonghus
Member Username: Aonghus
Post Number: 1636 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 04:14 am: |
|
In what I have seen of Goethe, they have (sometimes) removed forms which are not in the standard. It is less done in poetry, but often in prose. "Di" and "Daoithe" convey the same meaning. Most languages which have dialects and a standard will see that kind of editing happening (often by the author). You won't for example see the article "Det" used for Der/die/das in the writing of a Berlin author, except in direct speech. But det is what he/she will probably say. |
|
Dennis
Member Username: Dennis
Post Number: 73 Registered: 02-2005
| Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 11:14 am: |
|
Tarlaíonn sé i mBéarla an lae inniu freisin, agus sách minic. Scríobh J. K. Rowling na leabhartha Harry Potter i mBéarla, ceart go leor, ach ní an saghas Béarla a labhraítear i Meiriceá. Séard a léann muid abhus anseo ná "aistriúcháin". Athraítear "whilst" go "while", "biscuit" go "cookie", "jumper" go "sweater", "gormless" go "clueless", "colour go "color" agus mar sin de. |
|
Aonghus
Member Username: Aonghus
Post Number: 1638 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 12:01 pm: |
|
gan trácht ar "Sorcerer" a dhéanamh de "Philosopher"! |
|
Lughaidh
Member Username: Lughaidh
Post Number: 421 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 02:33 pm: |
|
>In what I have seen of Goethe, they have (sometimes) >removed forms which are not in the standard. It is less >done in poetry, but often in prose. Strange. >"Di" and "Daoithe" convey the same meaning. "Freisin" and "fosta" as well... |
|
|