quote:

Coimeádann Daltaí na Gaeilge ár gceart chun teachtaireachtaí a athrú nó scriosadh, ach ní bheidh muid freagrach as a bhfuil iontu.

Shouldn't that be:

Coimeádann Daltaí na Gaeilge ár gceart chun teachtaireachtaí a athrú nó scriosadh, ach ní bheidh muid freagrach as atá iontu.

?

Má tá Foclóir G-B (Ó Dónaill) agat, féach "a 6.2" ar leathanach a haon. Mar shampla, "sin a bhfuil ann = that is all there is".

I don't understand!

How about "I was thinking about what I saw in the library". My first guess would be:

Bhíos ag smaoineamh air a chonaic mé sa leabharlann

Should that be:

Bhíos ag smaoineamh air a bhfaca mé sa leabharlann

If so... why?!

quote:

Bhíos ag smaoineamh air a bhfaca mé sa leabharlann.

Yes, but note that it's "ar", not "air" here. The "a" functions as a pronoun, so you don't want another pronoun ("air" = ar + é) just before it. The sense is usually pretty inclusive: not just "what I saw ..." but "all that I saw...".

Bhíos ag smaoineamh ar a bhfaca mé sa leabharlann.

quote:

If so... why?!

B'fhéidir go mbeadh súil siar ar stair an fhocail úsáideach (or maybe not). Pé scéal é...

Old Irish had a nasalizing demonstrative relative "a" = that which, what. This has survived into both Modern Irish and Scottish Gaelic. For example:

"a ngaibther isin buinniu" (Würzburg Glosses, ca. mid 8th cent.) = what is played on the pipe = "a ngabhtar (seinntear) ar an mbuinne (bhfeadóg)"

In Mod. Irish, the reflex, or direct outcome, of this OI demonstrative is "a + indirect relative". In Scottish Gaelic, it's "na + direct relative":

Sin a n-ólaim. = That's all I drink.
Is leat a bhfuil agam. = Everything I have is yours.

Chaill e na bha aige. = He lost everything he had.
Chuir e ceist mu na thachair. = He asked about what happened.

Hmm...

So we have:

That's what I drank.
Sin ar ól me.

That what I saw.
Sin a bhfaca mé.

That what I want.
Sin a bhfuil uaim.

That's what I drink.
Sin a n-ólaim.

Looks like we need to update our list:

1) When there's a preposition

An bosca a gcuireann sé na litreacha isteach ann.

2) When there's possession

An duine a raibh mé ag caint lena athair.

3) When working with a pronoun

Sin a rabhas ag smaoineamh air!

But... I've often been asked questions as follows:

Cad a dúirt sé?
Cad a chonaic sé?

Can anyone explain why "a ndúirt" and "a bhfaca" weren't used?

Thanks for the reply by the way, Dennis, very insightful.

Compare:
That's all what I drank. = Sin ar ól me.
That's what I drank. = Sin a ól mé.

That's all what I saw. = Sin a bhfaca mé.
That's what I saw. = Sin a chonaic mé

That's all what I want. = Sin a bhfuil uaim.
That is what I want. = Sin atá uaim.

In the first sentences you are referring to "all, everything". "A" is no relative particle but a real pronoun meaning "all that/what".
In the latter sentences "a" is no pronoun but a simple particle referring to sin (and so being a direct relative particle).

"Sin a rabhas ag smaoineamh air!" = That's what I was thinking about.
Here "a" is an indirect relative particle because of "air" which is itself referring to "sin"
This is different from "Sin a bhfaca mé" without any "air"
The usage of this pronoun "a" is independent of the usage of "sin" or any other pronoun, if you perhaps thought so.
In fact it occurs without any antecedent at all.
E.g.: Chonaic mé a bhfuil ann = I saw all what was there.

Cad a dúirt sé? = What did you say?
Cad a chonaic sé? = What did you see?
Here you use an direct relative particle.
In questins like this you would not use "all that/all what" or "what all" neither in English nor in Irish (wrong: "*Cad a ndúirt sé? = *What all did you say?"), except in some English dialects.

But you perhaps could say:
An sin a ndúirt sé? = Is that all what he said?
Ar chuala tú a ndúirt sé? = Did you hear all what he said?

Lars

>>In the latter sentences "a" is no pronoun but a simple particle referring to sin (and so being a direct relative particle).

But if it's refering to "sin", how can it not be a pronoun? I mean, what else but the (anaphoric) pronouns do "refer"?

Funny, still, that I drew the exact same inference from all the data I had: that the relative particle is not a pronoun. (It's important in syntax, because it means the structure is not the same, say, as in French or English)

quote:

I was thinking about what I saw in the library.

So how do you translate the above?


Bhíos ag smaoineamh _____₁ a ___________₂ mé sa leabharlann.


1 = "ar" or "air"
2 = "chonaic" or "bhfaca"

quote:

That's what I drank. = Sin a ól mé.

Should that not be:

Sin a d'ol mé.
That's what I drank.

Anyway, moving back to the original sentence:

Ní bheidh muid freagrach as a bhfuil iontu.
We won't be responsible for anything that's in them.

Ní bheidh muid freagrach as atá iontu.
We won't be responsible for what's in them.

Am I right in the above?

quote:

Ní bheidh muid freagrach as a bhfuil iontu.
We won't be responsible for anything that's in them.

Tá go maith.

quote:

Ní bheidh muid freagrach as atá iontu.
We won't be responsible for what's in them.

Ní maith liom é sin. Deir mo chluas gur leagan lochtach den chéad cheann atá ann. Bhainfinn úsáid as an gcéad cheann go ginearálta, agus as abairtí eile mar iad seo a leanas le bheith níos cruinne:

Ní bheidh muid freagrach as aon rud / an méid / na barúlacha / meancóg ar bith atá iontu.

Is é sin le rá, tá rud éigin ag teastáil idir "as" agus "atá".

Just wondering... is "bhíos" a Munster construction of 'bhí mé? It (bhíos) isn't anywhere in Ó Siadhail.

Yes, "bhíos" is the mostly Munster equivalent of "bhí mé". Forms like "bhíos" are called "táithe" (= welded), and forms like "bhí mé" are called "scartha" (= separated).

Baintear úsáid as "bhíos" i gConamara uaireanta, i bhfreagraí go háirithe:

- An raibh tú ar scoil inné?
- Bhíos.

GRMA. Sin ach rud eile é go gcaithfidh mé a éisteacht do.