I'm just learning about agam, agat, so on and so forth. Ó Siadhail gives both agam and 'am, agat and 'ad, againn and 'ainn. When do you use the short version? Its written later in the chapter that one uses short contrast forms to say something like "an teach seo 'ainne" "this house of ours".

The text reading though says "Tá a fhios 'am go bhfuil posta maith 'adsa ansin.... tá an ceart 'ad."

I don't understand when to use the short and when to use the regular one.

Go raibh maith 'ad, (there's another example, cén fath?)

Harrison

I thought "'am" was just a contraction of "agam." It sure helps the flow of words the way contractions do.

That's a very Connemara thing. I think you can use the short forms whenever you want, in speech. But it needs to be confirmed by someone who knows Connemara Irish better than me.

Go raibh maith agaibh. What you said, Lughaidh, sounds right .

Yup, that's how it is. The short forms are very often used in Conamara, Cois Fhairrge and the Aran islands. Nothing wrong with using the long forms, though - and it's better to use them when speaking to non-Connacht speakers.

But I'd never write the shortened form. There's plenty of abbreviations in every language, but there's ones that are "grammatically accepted" when written and others that aren't. For instance, all of the following are perfectly legitimate:

aren't
wouldn't
can't
I'll
We'll
don't
I'm

but you won't see my write:

Me 'n' John went to the shop.

instead of:

Me and John went to the shop.


It's particularly annoying when people do as such with a language you're just learning. For instance, Lughaidh regularly writes "ag + [verbal noun]" as simply " ' [verbal noun] " and other examples (like the one this thread is all about). These can be quite confusing for a learner.

As for what are the "accepted" contractions in Irish, I'm not entirely sure... For instance, when "agus" is contracted to one syllable, some people write it as:

is

while others write it as:

's

while others write it as:

agus

and simply let the reader pronounce it as they wish. That's exactly how I work with "and"; I don't pronounce that "d", but I'm not going to dictate how the reader pronounces it, so I give the standard spelling.

So... I would advocate writing the standard form, ie. "agam". If you're not going to write with standardized spelling (that is to say you write with the spelling of a particular dialect), then I would at least suggest you don't contract things.

Mo thuairimse!

Ó Siadhail says that with seo/sin, the short forms MUST be used :

"Tá an teach sin 'amsa go deas" (not "sin agamsa")


What with the other dialects ?

Other dialects don't use the short form.

> It's particularly annoying when people do as such with a language you're just learning. For instance, Lughaidh regularly writes "ag + [verbal noun]" as simply " ' [verbal noun] " and other examples (like the one this thread is all about). These can be quite confusing for a learner.

Hear, hear! (or is that here! here! ?)

Thank you Fear_na_mbróg.

's can also be contraction of the copula "Is" making it even more confusing.

quote:

> It's particularly annoying when people do as such with a language you're just learning. For instance, Lughaidh regularly writes "ag + [verbal noun]" as simply " ' [verbal noun] " and other examples (like the one this thread is all about). These can be quite confusing for a learner.

Hear, hear! (or is that here! here! ?)

Thank you Fear_na_mbróg.

I'm going to jump the gun here for fear of being misinterpreted...

Lughaidh, my comment wasn't fashioned as an insult or any sort of negative remark, but simply as a bland statement of my opinion... so please don't take offence to it!

>It's particularly annoying when people do as such with >a language you're just learning. For instance, Lughaidh >regularly writes "ag + [verbal noun]" as simply " ' >[verbal noun] " and other examples (like the one this >thread is all about). These can be quite confusing for >a learner.

I do that because i speak like that. And there's another reason: learners all learn the forms with "ag" + verbal noun and they're taught that they've to pronounce /eg/ + verbal noun. Actually, it's completely wrong because no native speaker pronounces it like that, except in few cases. Before the Caighdeán Oifigiúil, in printed books, the "ag" was written quite as it has to be pronounced: a' or 'g, and only "ag" when the preceding word ends on a consonant and the next one on a vowel.

People say:

tá mé ’déanamh (written tá mé a’ déanamh before the Caighdeán, i think)

tá mé ’g ól

tá Seán a’ déanamh

tá Seán ag ithe


So, four cases with different pronounciations and shortenings of "ag", according to what sound comes before and what sound comes after. In the old spelling, all that was clearly written, and then learners used to pronounce more properly than now. The same thing could be told about the article "an", which is rarely pronounced /@n/.

As a beginner, I can say that :

1/ It's been a long time since I've known that "ag" and "an" are hardly ever pronounced as they're spelt

2/ the way Lughaidh contracts the forms is really not what impedes me to understand what he writes.


Learners are not that dumb....

Max

I think reducing "an" and "ag" in writing is a question of register. In English I tend to write "is not" and "there is" more often than "isn't" or "there's", even though the latter are what I actually say most of the time. Right now I could write "I spoze you're not askin' fer my opinion". Why? Well, "because i speak like that", to quote Lughaidh. But it would strike most English speakers as an inappropriate register to use here. It looks like I'm deliberately trying to come across as jokey or ill-educated. It certainly calls attention to itself! Similarly, most of us do not replace letters with apostrophes in the words "an" and "ag" in normal Irish prose. Lughaidh chooses to be special. Writing constantly outside the normal register, he makes his language call attention to itself -- to the extent that the "forme" comes close to overshadowing the "fond". Unfortunately, the "look at me" quality of using the wrong register can get a bit wearisome.

Lughaidh, there's pplleenntty of English words which I don't pronounce as they're written -- but I still spell them properly:

and : My pronunciation is "an"
I love you : I love "ya"
I killed him : I killed "im"
I was singing: "I was singin"

A good example is words like "playing", "singing", "eating" in English. I don't pronounce the final "g" in these words, while many many many other people do in different parts of the world. I could spell them as:

I was playin'.
I was singin'.
I was eatin'.

but I don't, I give them their correct, proper, accepted spelling. Just because I've written the "g", doesn't mean that I'm dictating that the reader has to pronounce that "g" -- all I've done is drawn a picture which the reader recognises as a word, and then they pronounce that word as per their own pronunciation. So when a passage is written with correct spelling, I still give it my own pronunciation:

Mary, I love ya! Do ya wanna come swimmin' wit me? We can drive down to da beech if ya want.

The human brain is designed, and very well at that, to interpret the speech of others who speak with difference accents, or who speak different dialects, to be able to "recognise" exactly what word is being spoken. Just look at the programmes we have on television: some are Australian, some are American, some are Scottish... sure I can even understand that French fella on big brother.

Written word however is a different animal altogether, it is our own invention. Evolution did no shape it. We're not particularly proficient at deciphering others' written speech, so we come up with standard spellings. Take the word "you" for example... I have about 5 different pronunciations for this word, depending on the context.

I love ya.
I don't love Mary, I love you.
Are yiz comming swimming?

and so on...

Anyway, to the point. What I suggest (and advocate) is that people just spell thing as they're supposed to be spelt, and let the reader worry about pronunciation.

I could go on all night giving examples:

could have : coulda
should have : shoulda
want to : wanna
want a : wanna

Or as a New Yorker would say: Jeet? No, jew? Would you know to interpret that as: Did you eat? No, did you?

>>all I've done is drawn a picture which the reader recognises as a word, and then they pronounce that word as per their own pronunciation.

the point Lughaidh was making is that, normally, you don't have a choice as regard to the pronunciation of "ag".
still, there are plenty of people who, not being natives, are strongly influenced by spelling and tend to pronounce "ag" as it is spelt in all contexts even though it's hardly ever pronounced [ag] by the natives...

quote:

the point Lughaidh was making is that, normally, you don't have a choice as regard to the pronunciation of "ag".
still, there are plenty of people who, not being natives, are strongly influenced by spelling and tend to pronounce "ag" as it is spelt in all contexts even though it's hardly ever pronounced [ag] by the natives...

Don't shape the language to the learner.

I wonder how many English classes teach that:

me you him her us them

are pronounced differently depending on the context. I'd say very few if any do -- but this in no way means that we should start messing with the spelling of "you". I mo thuairimse féin of course!

is e mo thuairmse fein.

>>Don't shape the language to the learner.

This is neither my intention, nor Lughaidh's

>>me you him her us them
are pronounced differently depending on the context.

There is absolutely no obligation to pronounce them differently depending on the context (as opposed to "ag" in Irish).


I agree with the fact that once the spelling is standardized, people should comply with it.
But most of the arguments you use are irrelevent.

For me, it basically boils down to this:

I don't come here to learn pronunciation.*

I come here to learn spelling, grammar, and the written language.

While I appreciate that Lughaidh and Max are trying to help, I just want to let them know that it confuses beginners like myself.


*--Not usually, anyway. I use RnaG for pronunciation, cadence, and conversational flow. And our local volunteer teachers (bless their hearts!) all speak different dialects and often remind and correct us on using "ag" and other words properly.

>I think reducing "an" and "ag" in writing is a question >of register. In English I tend to write "is not" >and "there is" more often than "isn't" or "there's", >even though the latter are what I actually say most of >the time. Right now I could write "I spoze you're not >askin' fer my opinion". Why? Well, "because i speak >like that", to quote Lughaidh. But it would strike most >English speakers as an inappropriate register to use >here. It looks like I'm deliberately trying to come >across as jokey or ill-educated.

There's a huge difference. In English, you can say "he is not". In irish, you can't say /ta: m’e: eg dul/, people say /ta: m’e: dul/. You can't say /ta: m’e: eg lawr’t’ l’es’ @n m’an/ but /ta: m’e: lawr’t’ l’es’ @ m’an/. Nobody says that even when talking in "official" contexts.

>It certainly calls attention to itself! Similarly, most >of us do not replace letters with apostrophes in the >words "an" and "ag" in normal Irish prose. Lughaidh >chooses to be special. Writing constantly outside the >normal register, he makes his language call attention >to itself --

I choose not to write in an artificial way. Many learners speak in an artificial way because of spelling. I think it's a pity.

>Lughaidh, there's pplleenntty of English words which I >don't pronounce as they're written -- but I still spell >them properly:

If i wrote Irish as i pronounce it, you won't understand :-) . The spelling I use is the standard one, including specific forms that are in use in Donegal (Standard Irish is far from Donegal Irish, so i've to use accepted written forms in order not to deform my dialect). I spell properly: have a look at Donegal books like Na Rosa go Brách, Rotha Mór an tSaoil, books by O Grianna etc. I spell my words as they do.


>but I don't, I give them their correct, proper, >accepted spelling. Just because I've written the "g", >doesn't mean that I'm dictating that the reader has to >pronounce that "g" -- all I've done is drawn a picture >which the reader recognises as a word, and then they >pronounce that word as per their own pronunciation.

There’s more than only pronounciation there: teangaí isn't a pronounciation of teanga, it's a different form. éisteochaidh isn't the same form as éisteoidh even if it has the same meaning. When Aonghus writes "bhíos", it's not a spelling thing, it's a different form than "bhí mé" and if you write "bhí mé", people from Munster won’t read "bhíos", and if you write "bhíos", what is supposed to be the Donegal pronounciation since that form doesn’t exist in Donegal?

>So when a passage is written with correct spelling, I still give it my own pronunciation:

>Mary, I love ya! Do ya wanna come swimmin' wit me? We >can drive down to da beech if ya want.

These are pronounciation things, not forms. Forms are etymologically different. Someone from Coolea wouldn't write "bíng" for "binn" though he says "bíng". That's a special pronounciation of one word. Now if he says "raghair", will he be allowed to write it or to deform his Irish and write "rachaidh tú" ? In my opinion, writing only in the strict Official Standard Irish in every informal context is bad: learners who don't have the opportunity to hear natural Irish will believe that only the Standard exists, and will be lost whenever they'll hear any native speaker. Learners should be taught the main features of Gaeltacht Irish because that's real Irish, the caighdeán oifigiúil is a constructed kind of Irish.

>The human brain is designed, and very well at that, to >interpret the speech of others who speak with >difference accents, or who speak different dialects, to >be able to "recognise" exactly what word is being >spoken. Just look at the programmes we have on >television: some are Australian, some are American, >some are Scottish... sure I can even understand that >French fella on big brother.

English and Irish are different, because English dialects are mainly based on different pronounciations of the same words. In irish, vocabulary, syntax, pronounciation and morphology are a bit different in dialects.

[I deleted my earlier post which on second reading might have suggested I was advocating a dialect-less Irish, which is not what I'm advocating.]

Lughaigh,

Regardless of the grammatical origin of the spelling changes, what's confusing to a beginner like me is all the apostrophes for missing letters/syllables.

It's bad enough that agus is sometimes abbreviated as "is" instead of "'s", and that RnaG speakers all speak differently--now all your abbreviations just add to my mental clutter. :-)

An intermediate or advanced Irish student could certainly learn quite a bit from your posts. Maybe using those spellings makes more sense in the all-Irish forum?

(Message edited by dearg on June 15, 2005)

Maith thú, a Dhearg,

I have no difficulty with any departures from standard English because I am well versed; but should I be asked to sort through all the variations on Irish, I'd be lost, perhaps forever.

It might also be a question of habit :

In French, we use the apostrophe a lot, and we don't have a choice.

In a very formal way, we could say (or write) :

J'entends qu'avant demain il t'appelle pour s'excuser d'avoir eu l'audace de n'être pas venu.

Actually, there are a number of books written exactly like Lughaidh writes = indicating actual pronunciation. The book Scéalta ón mBlascaod is one of those books, professor Kenneth Jackson (who recorded the storied from Peig Sayers) wrote:

"The aim is to give as closely as possible, within the limits of the ortography, exactly what the story-teller said, including all dialectisms, all individual peculiarities, and all instances of plain bad gramar"

"Tá áit 'sa Bhlascaod Mhúr siar 'sa chnuc go nglaotar an Dún air. Dún na gCannríon an tseanainim a bhí air. Fadó riamh ní raibh 'san oileán mhúr ach aon tig amháin ; do bhí lánû phósta ann agus a gclann. Do bhíoch múrán le déanamh ag an mnaoi, do bhíoch sí anachúramach er rith an lae ; ba ghnáthach lé a bheith a' sníomh lín agus ola. D'fhanach sí suas go déanach 'san uíhe, mar do bhíoch iminíomh uirthi chuin breis oibre do dhéanamh. Aon uíhe 'mháin do bhí sí anadhéanach er an dtínteán, agus do bhuail chúihe isteach beirt bhan. Do bhí fhios aici go math nárbh' aon mhná fónt' iad, ach ní raibh seóid le déanamh aici."

Ach ní mholfá an leabhar sin do tosaitheoir!

Tá na leabhair a luaigh Lughaidh beagnach cáighdéanach, agus tá leaganacha mar a bhíonn aige iontu.

(The books Lughaidh mentioned are close to the standard, and use the forms he uses)

I think the problem is that most books for beginners focus on a narrow subset of the Standard, leaving out all the permitted forms and exceptions.

That’s it, Aonghus. Narrow standard. Narrow standard don't allow to read much in Irish: there's (almost?) no native Irish literature written in narrow standard. In grammar books, they just should give the narrow standard forms and main dialectal differences, and then learners can choose what they want to use, and at least they'd be used to see other forms, even if they don't use them.

Max > I don't use apostrophes because of the influence of French, but just because i need them to write (quite) as i speak Irish...

Lughaidh, my point was :

the apostrophe is not used in the same way in French and English. In French, the use of the apostrophe is obligatory, and we use it a lot.

As a consequence, we don't view it as the anglophones do.

I guess this is why I don't find it confusing at all to see things like :

a' déanamh
mise 's thusa
'chuile dhuine

etc.

quote:

An intermediate or advanced Irish student could certainly learn quite a bit from your posts. Maybe using those spellings makes more sense in the all-Irish forum?

Although I can see Dearg's point that these contractions and variations from the "standard" written word can be confusing, I feel indebted to members like Lughaigh that give beginners like me the opportunity to see the Irish language outside of the NSS (Narrow Subset of the Standard). I think that part of the learning experience, especially when it comes to languages, involves confusing incidents and occasions where the new or different approach appears to have a negative effect on the learner. But I think it's precisely those times that we can make our best progress. I hope that the more advanced members continue to post in styles outside of the NSS. I'm sure if one of us beginners doesn't understand some contraction that one of the other members, beginner, intermediate, or advanced, will come to our rescue.

Le meas,

Dáithí