mainoff.gif
lastdyoff.gif
lastwkoff.gif
treeoff.gif
searchoff.gif
helpoff.gif
contactoff.gif
creditsoff.gif
homeoff.gif


The Daltaí Boards » Archive: 2005- » 2006 (May-June) » Archive through May 21, 2006 » Céard is brí le "clann"? « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Julia
Member
Username: Julia

Post Number: 11
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 06:19 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

OK, when I learned this word in "Now You're Talking" and a few other books, "clann" was used to have the very specific meaning of "children". As in, "An bhfuil clann agat?" meaning "Do you have any children?"

However. I just got off the phone with my boyfriend, who unlike me is Irish and had to suffer through the Leaving Cert. He swears that clann just means "family". He remembers writing essays about "mo chlann", which was definitely "my family" and not "my children".

So just curious...who's right? If "clann" can mean either "children" or "family", which is more prevalent, and are there conditions for using the specific meanings? I learned "teaghlach" as family; is there a different connotation with "teaghlach" than "clann"?

I really like trying to get a sense for the different connotations of supposed synonyms. And there's a five-euro bet riding on the argument! :)

Go raibh maith agaibh, a chairde!

(Message edited by julia on May 02, 2006)

FRC - Fáilte Roimh Cheartúcháin

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Maidhc_Ó_g
Member
Username: Maidhc_Ó_g

Post Number: 198
Registered: 05-2005
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 06:47 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

To my understanding, 'teaghlach' refers to those who live with each other in a single dwelling ; Mom, Dad, the kids - a family.

"Clann" refers to the children or descendants or the extended family, depending on the context.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ceolmhar
Member
Username: Ceolmhar

Post Number: 68
Registered: 11-2005
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 08:53 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

We've used "Clann" a lot in our Irish evening classes. It can refer to children/family just like in English.

Do you have a family? I have three kids.
An bhfuil clann agat? Tá triúr clainne/páistí agam.

I might be wrong, but I think 'clainne' is mostly used in Ulster.

(Message edited by ceolmhar on May 02, 2006)

(Message edited by ceolmhar on May 02, 2006)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 229
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 02:54 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Go bhfios dom using "clann" as "family" is Béarlachas promulgated by the school. In traditional Irish "clann" means one's descendants. So I wonder how could anyone write composition "Mo chlann" in the high highschool?!

The normal word for "family" is "teaghlach". Actually this is the word I have in "Everyday's Irish as a heading of "Family" topic", and this word is used in Census tables.

Re: páiste - this word is not good for "kids", as in many places it is synonim of buachaill/garsún and doesn't include gearrchaile/girseach. So "my children" is only appropriate to say "mo chlann".

(Message edited by Róman on May 03, 2006)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Seosamh Mac Muirí (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 03:50 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

>> ... is Irish and had to suffer through the Leaving Cert. He swears that clann just means "family". He remembers writing essays about "mo chlann", which was definitely "my family" and not "my children".

-- And suffer he did because he was wrong and he may rest assured that if he hit the Leaving paper with his 'mo chlann' for his family, as against 'his children', he lost marks.
I've seen this type of essay so often. It's going to have 'Tá barúil agam, tá .....' and so many other set semi-translations.

Bíonn siad á gceartú fós ag an tríú leibhéal i mífheidhmiú an fhocail seo chomh maith - they are still being corrected in 3rd level in their misuse of this word.
Bíonn na cainteoirí Gaeltachta, ní hionann is na cainteoirí dúchais Gaeltachta, contráilte ar an mbealach céanna seo. This is one of the distinguishing points between 'Guérla' líofa lofa speakers and the native Irish speakers.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pangur_dubh
Member
Username: Pangur_dubh

Post Number: 42
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 12:23 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Is trua liom cur isteach ar Rómain arís. Uair amháin, agus ar ndóigh fós, chiallaíodh/ciallaíonn "clann" the children - mar shampla: "mo bhean is mo chlann is mo chrúiscín lán".

Ach go dtí seo ní teanga marbh í an Ghaeilge. Mar sin, tá féidireacht ann go bhfuil athrú ag teacht ar chiall an fhocail. Im thuairimse, tá. Agus go dearfa, chuala mé daoine sa Ghaeltacht ag úsáid an fhocail 'Clann' le brí 'children' nó fiú amháin 'family' ag dul leis. B'fhéidir go seasfadh an caighdeán ar an bpointe, ach dar liom sé vox populi a athraíonn teanga agus a thugann isteach brí agus caighdeán nua.

Chomharlóinn duit comh maith gan bheith comh bhuartha sin leis an mBéarlachas. Tarlaíonn sé ó am go h-am, ach leanann an saol ar aghaidh agus ní thiteann an spéir. D'fhás mise fé réimeas a cháin gach botún (Sea, gach uile botún!), ach go h-áirithe an Béarlachas, agus sa mhodh sin a thacht aon ghrá agus gean don teanga i measc na ndaltaí, iad siúd ba chóir dóibh an Ghaeilge a labhairt inniu. Agus chun an fhirinne a rá, bhímís ag fanacht ar bhotúin le go bpléascfaimís le magadh a dhéanamh den ainniseoir a ndéanfadh rud mar sin. Bhí sé go h-uafásach, agus fós cuireann sé aithreachas orm smaoineamh air.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Seosamh Mac Muirí (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 01:41 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

>> .... an mBéarlachas. Tarlaíonn sé ó am go ham, ach leanann an saol ar aghaidh agus ní thiteann an spéir.

- Mura mhiste dom mo smut a shá ar ais san ábhar, is é an chaoi go dtiteann an Ghaeilge i gcás den chineál so. San am go dtiteann, éiríonn leis an nGuérla. (Tá Tomás Mac Síomóin faoi agallamh ar RnaG faoi láthair agus an cheist seo faoi thrácht aige.)


>>> ...réimeas a cháin gach botún (Sea, gach uile bhotún!), ach go háirithe an Béarlachas, agus sa mhodh sin a thacht aon ghrá agus gean don teanga i measc na ndaltaí, ..

-- Eagarthóirí agus múinteoirí a tharraingíos tuarastal as an nGaeilge atá i mbun a leithéide ar na saolta seo agus ní hé an dalta cráite atá i gceist. Bítear ag súil le laige an dalta agus glactar leis, ach is ceart a bheith ag súíl le barrfheabhas ag an té a shaothraíonn pingin mhaith as an teanga a chur os comhair an phobail, an dalta cráite ina measc.

Tá an cleas seo an-simplí ar fad. Ní hionann 'clann' na Gaeilge agus 'parents plus siblings' an Bhéarla. Ní fheicim aon ródhraíocht ag baint leis an méid sin.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Julia
Member
Username: Julia

Post Number: 12
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 06:20 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Wow, go raibh maith agaibh for all of the insight--and I thought this was a simple question! (Agus tá brón orm faoi an Béarla...Thuig mé an formhór de na barúla thuas, ach ní féidir scríobh chomh maith le sin.)

So, if I follow the above: Either "clann" can mean "family" *or* "children", or the former use is Béarlachas. And if it is Béarlachas then it's not a legitimate meaning--that is, unless you consider that some native speakers now use "clann" as "family", or that meaning in a language tends to shift and change over time (which is not necessarily a problem).

I always thought that Béarlachas specifically referred to instances where an English idiom or expression was translated directly into Irish, breaking the general rules of Irish syntax. Like saying "Canaim Gaeilge líofa" instead of "Tá Gaeilge líofa agam". Basically using Irish words, but retaining English grammar.

Whereas in the case of "clann", it seems more like the word has gained an additional meaning (among both native and non-native speakers)--without violating Irish grammar.

(As for the case of the Leaving Cert, I hope he didn't lose points, as "clann" was the term that his teachers taught him and everyone else in his class used.)

I'm still not sure who wins the bet, though. I think we may have to declare a draw.

FRC - Fáilte Roimh Cheartúcháin

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Riona
Member
Username: Riona

Post Number: 175
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 06:38 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

I think that maybe there is no such thing as a simple question. Having said that I'll ask what I assume must be simple, but which will undoubtedly become difficult. Wouldn't you lenite clannif mo comes before or do you not lenite when there are 2 consenants in a row.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ceolmhar
Member
Username: Ceolmhar

Post Number: 69
Registered: 11-2005
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 11:32 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

No matter what you say Róman, clainne/páistí will always mean 'kids' to me. Unless I've been wrongfully taught in the Gaelchutúr.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 230
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 03:08 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Ceolmhar - I just said that in many places of Ireland you will be mis-understood. It is up to you what you do having this information. If you wish to be mis-understood - it is none of my business.

Pangur-dubh: I completely disagree with your point of view. The fact that some people in Gaeltacht parrot bad Irish as heard sometimes on TV or radio (from non-native speakers) doesn't validate those words. And yes, "tabhair suas" means "give up" in a sense that you pass some object upwards, for stopping some activity there are many other NATIVE idioms (like éirigh as). And it has nothing to do with perfectionism. There is "Gaeilainn bhlasta" and there is "Géarla" - take your pick.

Julia - There is no discussion. "Clann" is "children", "family" is "teaghlach". Your friend was wrong. And if (a big if) he was taught this way by his teacher - his teacher was wrong too; Irish teaching quality is unfortunately deplorable. As I was told other day some Irish teachers hate the language - although it makes me wonder why did they choose teaching career in that case.

p.s. Tá Gaelainn bhlasta agat <- Is much more interesting option than "Gaeilge líofa". although nothing wrong with the second option - only that it is overused and has become cliché.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pangur_dubh
Member
Username: Pangur_dubh

Post Number: 44
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 07:59 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Rómain, I am we sorry that will have to disagree on this one. I am not a native speaker, however as one who learned Irish, in Ireland, as a 4 year-old, and who used it on a daily basis in educational, social and professional milieux, I find, sadly, that your approach discouraging, being reminiscent of that which I encountered as a child - one which engendered an undying hatred of the language in the heart of many thousands of my contemporaries. (What a loss to the language!) Frankly, I am worried. If Irish is to survive it needs the goodwill of all Irish people and those abroad as well. And the term 'Géarla' (I do not find it in my dictionary [Ó Dónaill]. A neologism, doubtless a combination of Gaeilge and Béarla) strikes me as dismissive of those who do speak the language in a less than classical way. To be honest, it does speaks to me of perfectionism. But perhaps someone will enlighten me as to its exact meaning. I may yet be mistaken.

The state of Irish as a spoken language is such that it needs every friend and support it can get. In learning what is a fairly difficult language, 'Géarla' and similar terms are, I believe, quite discouraging and alienating, and therefore they make me very uncomfortable. They speak to me of an overzealous and purist approach that in reality serves the Irish language ill.

The bottom line is this: Irish will not survive because some speak it in a perfect and classical manner: on the contrary it will only survive because it is a living language in the mouths of those who use speak it as best they can, errors regardless. In learning and speaking Irish, therefore, there should be nothing which is dismissive of efforts, however imperfect. Rather, I claim that such efforts should be valued and cultivated and encouraged. But if nothing less than perfection will do, then the misguided and destructive process that I witnessed in my youth continues all these decades later. I note with some bitterness that the same criteria of purity and perfection are never applied to the speaking of English, in Ireland, England or America. Is it not the case that there will surely be time enough to worry about purity of language when there are enough people speaking the language to ensure its future as a living means of communication. Until then I strongly urge that a more relaxed attitude, even allowing for "...The fact that some people in Gaeltacht parrot bad Irish as heard sometimes on TV or radio...", is more likely to succeed and to gain friends for Irish. A relentless insistence that dying Irish rely solely on purity of speech for its restoration is the surest way finally to kill off Irish as a spoken language.

As to not being understood in misusing the word 'clann', I doubt it. Irish speakers will most certainly understand, if only from context, and will be more than willing to meet a learner half way. Besides, even in the unlikely event of a complete lack of comprehension, the process of reaching an understanding of exactly what is intended is a learning process in itself, and probably involves some fun too.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Asarlaí
Member
Username: Asarlaí

Post Number: 133
Registered: 01-2005


Posted on Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 09:10 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

I totally agree with you Pangur dubh.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lughaidh
Member
Username: Lughaidh

Post Number: 1300
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 12:02 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

They speak to me of an overzealous and purist approach that in reality serves the Irish language ill.

To my mind, speaking bad Irish without any attempt to improve it serves the irish language ill as well. The learners who aren't able to make any sentence without mistakes in syntax, vocabulary, morphology and phonetics, serve the irish language ill as well.

Those who try to speak correct Irish aren't overzealous or purists, they are just serious.

(Message edited by lughaidh on May 04, 2006)

Tír Chonaill abú!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Searlas
Member
Username: Searlas

Post Number: 44
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 01:08 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

There's nothing wrong with trying to speak "correct" Irish, and indeed I would hope that everyone strives for it. On the other hand, there's no need to belittle those who don't meet some imagined standard of perfection. Those that feel the need to put others down like that just end up making an ass of themselves.

Searlas

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pangur_dubh
Member
Username: Pangur_dubh

Post Number: 45
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 05:56 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Asarlaí:

I am happy to note your agreement.

Lughaidh:

You said: "...Those who try to speak correct Irish aren't overzealous or purists, they are just serious..." I didn't claim they were. I was expressing doubt as to the value of terms such as 'Géarla'. The use of such terms has so often in my experience been indicative of purism and excessive zeal. Let me set this against my experience here in France. Although my French is far from perfect, my kind neighbours would never dream of halting the flow of conversation to tell me that I was using "Anglicisms", as I undoubtedly do. Instead, they compliment me and tell me how much my knowledge of their language has improved since I've been here. And yes, it is improving all the time, but with such encouragement to support me, why wouldn't it!

Incidentally, I have posted often enough for you to have an inkling that I try to use good Irish. I also try to use good English, as it happens. However, there was a time when my Irish was atrocious. It improved with use, quite naturally. Nevertheless, the critical, blaming attitudes of those days were far from helpful, and I cannot help but contrast them with my experience here in France.

Searlas:

You have said in few words what took me many.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Riona
Member
Username: Riona

Post Number: 176
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 07:13 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

I don't know that Roman and Lughaidh are trying to belittle people who havn't got perfect Irish yet. I think that they just have a desire to retain the linguistic integrity of the language. The hard thing is to communicate this and correct sweetly without making people feel like fool-wits. Pangardub is right in his example of his French neighbors. Encouragement and showing by example is more effective for most learners in the end than stopping them in mid-sentence and trying to fix things then. Part of learning a language is learning how to use it correctly but it does not come all at once, and one word like clann being slightly misconstrued should be the least of linguistic worries, though it is good to know what is correct usage. So I still want to know why clann isn't lenited after mo.

Beir bua agus beannacht.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 231
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 03:17 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Riona - thanks for insightful remark.

Pangur dubh - you seem to live in idealised world. Irish IS NOT in the same position as French or English. Neither of these languages has so few native speakers that a crowd of learners can OVERWHELM them.

Just month ago there was a surrealistic discussion if learners of Irish can claim to speak "dialect" of Irish. Neither in France or England nobody would fancy to claim that mistake-ridden speech is "a dialect". Yes, your neighbours are helpful - glad for them. but your neighbours are fully aware that your mistakes DON'T THREATEN survival of French. The fact that some French learners make a couple of mistakes doesn't change the big picture - you will never aggressively insist that your speech is correct and the French needs to be "modernised". Haven't you read about proposals "to skip" mutations in order "to modernise" Irish?

This is the sad truth - Irish is a threatened language. And in order for it to survive (and not to become Géarla) - it needs careful cultivation. We have to hold breath when Gaeilgeor dúchais is speaking and listen. Your lax accepting of ANYTHING even if it doesn't make sense in Irish (like "tabhair suas" - which no monoglot would guess means "éirigh as") will simply destroy the langauge.

And it is nothing about belittlement. Since when saying that somebody is mistaken is belittlement? Is it this new education philosophy which prohibits correcting anyone out of fear of political correctness? When you speak German and use a wrong form - you make mistake, and you are corrected; when you speak Irish and do a blatant one - then it is "to be encouraged and supported", nothing can be corrected for sake of offending.

So ok, let's speak like this "Tá mé Liotuánach. Tá mé áthasach. Labhraíonn mé Gaeilge go maith. etc" Is it this kind of Irish you are for?

Enraged,
Is mise

(Message edited by Róman on May 05, 2006)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 232
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 03:19 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

So I still want to know why clann isn't lenited after mo.



But it is! I swear it is - "MO CHLANN" and no other options. Don't trust those "caring modernisers" of the language!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dearg
Member
Username: Dearg

Post Number: 150
Registered: 10-2004


Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 07:21 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

A Rómain,

Aren't there plenty of examples of languages changing to use wrong versions of spelling or grammar, and that becoming the standard? Just in my lifetime 'perused' and 'comprised' have changed their meaning significantly, and 'shall' has pretty much dropped out of American English completely. I cringe at spellings like 'donut' but realize it's becoming standard nonetheless.

Isn't American English 'wrong' by English standards? Don't you think the British were decrying the American's terrible English 200 or 300 years ago, just as you're decrying bad Irish? Is American English any less of a valid language now because of that?

On a much wider scale, couldn't English be called Frenglish because of the huge influx of French words hundreds of years ago? Isn't that just part of the evolution of the language?

Don't get me wrong: People should certainly try to learn Irish correctly. But there's only so much you can do. Striving for perfection means a language would never change, and as we can see from Old Irish to modern Irish, it's already changed plenty just as other languages have. Irish is going through a tough time, and if it becomes Anglicized--well, that's just part of its history, just as French has become part of English.

P.S.--No, I'm not a linguist.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucy (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 07:41 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

A Róman, If we were to judge your English in the same manner you criticize others, you would come up quite short. While fairly good, it is full of errors. I suggest you use the same charitable manner toward others in their attempts at learning as is given to you.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 08:23 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

“your approach discouraging, being reminiscent of that which I encountered as a child - one which engendered an undying hatred of the language in the heart of many thousands of my contemporaries”

As has been pointed out before, historic conditions led to the hatred of Irish by Irish people, not schooling. Recall beatings were used to instil English into the Irish in the 19th century. So where is the hatred of English?

“(What a loss to the language!)”

There is no loss; they have no interest. Period. Any interest they have is more from the ‘Heritage Boom’ one sees coming back and forth in the Anglo countries. Interest in Irish may be on an upswing since the 90’s as interest in the native past of English speaking countries (Maori emancipation in NZ, sacred object redressal in Canada) continues. The problem in Ireland is that people know they are the natives, so it muddles the water. But since native Irish is left out of the question, I think the hub ub about this is not in the realm of the language but says more about the sentimentality of the British culture majority in the Republic. Like most sentimental things it is not really taken that serious. (yes, I agree with DJ Webb –Ireland is basically part of the UK, culturally, at least).

“Frankly, I am worried. If Irish is to survive it needs the goodwill of all Irish people and those abroad as well”

Yesterday evening going back to the NW, a fellow began speaking in Donegal Irish into his phone. I only noticed he was speaking Irish when we came to Maynooth station and all the people getting off the train shaking their heads and as if to say “wanker!”. This alerted me to the man and his speech. He was setting up a meeting with someone, and he may have been a translator as he had to be in the Dáil on Tuesday (although what he might be translating from those useless bastards is another question –I say translator as his Irish was great, but I suspect a very good learner as despite having Donegal verbal forms, it was his accent. He had the nasalisation of Donegal, but he was soft but not like in the Gaoth Dobhair way which I’ve heard more than in south Donegal which I think is harsher and garbledy). Thus, he may have been making money from it. He also had the luxury of not having to work to such strict hours as the wage slaves who got off at the station, so could go back home to Sligo or Donegal. Yet he has no respect. Wanna see the looks I get when seen to be reading an Irish book on a bus. 7-heads, anyone?

Like the mythical about-to-learn tattoo person, the ‘brimmed-of-goodwill-but-just-waiting-for-the-push’ fills Ireland, but goddamn if I can see one. This is an immature notion. Sure, there are many with goodwill, but they have to do something. Look, in Ireland the top 20 major housing developers have decided among themselves where over a million people have ended up living and growing up in the last generation –do you think the machines that live in semi-detached houses are going to buck the trend and speak Irish? The machines that pay 100’s of thousands of euro so that the speculators and government can reap huge amounts? The land nor houses are not worth that amount, so by hoisting the prices the money is sucked out of the economy and locked into property creating real money for a few from virtually nothing. The block heads who boast about their houses are not going to have the character to do something so time consuming as learning Irish which to do so for a suffiently large cohort would be to question the very paradigm on which their culture is based and then challenge it.

That is why northern Catholics and Unionists are hated or the butt of humour in the South –they act as a challenge to the lazy moron culture that started in Dublin and infects the rest of the Republic, the doff-the-cap to the neo-lords yet believe one is independent.

“And the term 'Géarla' …perhaps someone will enlighten me as to its exact meaning. I may yet be mistaken.”

Perhaps nothing –you know what is meant by it. Calqued Irish. English referents ran thru Irish to distort the native idiom.

Put it this way: all grammatical sentences in Irish = a1; in English = b2. It has been found that only small subsets of sentences that are possible are ever used in the spoken language. Non-natives often use phrases that are correct grammatically but referentially incorrect (as can be seen from my written Irish in Daltaí) in a related example. Call these set a2 and b2

Now for 'Géarla', two things are occurring, where the languages can use similar grammar but so not in real speech a near equivalent is used, such as in ‘tabhair suas…’ or a completely new form is given ‘is the hunger on him?’

So one is getting either rearranging the language or distorting it. I am tempted to use ‘é’ more often in my Irish than is natively correct for ‘it’ (distortion), or some people like to say ‘sé caint anois’ for ‘he is talking now’ (rearrangement). There are perhaps more subliminal distortions such as the use of certain terms that only come from been part of a particular experience –urban and country dwellers use language differently. However, the language does seem to have certain semantics –once James (American, in army) made some remark. As a native English speaker I got it –it was very subtle. Lughaidh and the other fluent non-natives had to ask what he meant. Thus, there are other ways that just the pure grammatical that one can err on, however, most things seem to show up on the grammatical level eventually.

“The state of Irish as a spoken language is such that it needs every friend and support it can get.”

Wrong. Most ‘soft’ definitions conflate ‘slightly interested’ with ‘fluent’. The basic line is this: Irish needs native speakers. Period.

The descendants of learners now may be the natives of the future, but without a neo-native population there is no point. Once Irish was called ‘pig-Latin’, soon with will become but a neo-Latinate substitute.

Shaw’s Road and West Belfast was exceptional –the only pity (as I see it) is that they were amateurs and made a mess –they got the economic and social bits most right, but the technical and referential elements spoken about above were missed. Irish needs both together. I mean, what is going to happen is that some learners are going to learn Irish and then meet ‘Irish-speakers’. There will be such a difference that they will be separate languages. How can one be involved in language training if what you see as the target language is not spoken and everyone is speaking pigeon?

The other problem is that as each speaker of this pigeon Irish is learning it anew each generation, it co varies with the English of the learner, so that (as is happening) Irish people speak either a British English or a ‘mid-Atlantic’ variety, their Irish will follow suit. Since you want Irish to be some sort of auxiliary tongue that scavenges off English for its phonetics, semantics etc I think the practical outcome of your intent is to act to undermine your expressed desires, just as any methodologies for training Irish I may come up with may be used in the future to spread pigeon Irish by traitors…

“They speak to me of an overzealous and purist approach that in reality serves the Irish language ill.”

Most of the zealots want no English words in Irish and then ignore every other part in which they were exactly Englsih. Such people as that are what you found manning Auzwitch

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 08:23 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

“it will only survive because it is a living language in the mouths of those who use speak it as best they can, errors regardless.”

No it needs to be in the mouths of a native population who will not be making mistakes, as it is their language. If systemic mistakes are been made, it is learners who are speaking, and a language with no natives and all learners will never be right. I mean it is only a mistake if relative to right it diverges

“In learning and speaking Irish, therefore, there should be nothing which is dismissive of efforts, however imperfect.”

Since when does calling a spade a spade –ie, a learner is often wrong, constitute an attack on their reasons for starting? If a guy from Poland who came here in January is deemed to have better English than me, that is incorrect, and that’s it. I know we live in an age of philosophical relativity, but that sort of relativity does not occur in the physical world. If I fall off a roof, no matter how soft I want that concrete, it will not be anything less that hard. No matter how much it is wanted, learners are not native. I will never be native, even if in time I am as ‘good as’. Remember Lughaidh was dismissed once by someone who turned out to have no production ability in Irish, with the words that they were Irish, so their opinions counted more than his, a fluent speaker and linguist!

“Rather, I claim that such efforts should be valued and cultivated”

Efforts yes, not mistakes. Anyway, people are not babies. The sort of support needed is structural, not linguistic. No use telling people ‘You can do it!’, if there is nothing to support the real learners or force (as in needing it economically) the rest to actually use it. The support you posit is both abstract and patronising. Real support is tangible

“I note with some bitterness that the same criteria of purity and perfection are never applied to the speaking of English, in Ireland, England or America”

Oh yes! In Dublin my native speech is looked down on by the likes of secretaries I have to deal with who are of a lower SES than myself and whose all round faculty in English is less than mine just because my accent, even tho I use the Queens grammar (saw for seen etc) or switch to colloquial forms as required while their dog ‘TV3’ English which has no other registrars that the one, is held up as an exemplar. This is one reason to rail against the dog Irish that would come about –it has no other domain that the middle classes and will be as a consequence rigid. Real Irish should have all sorts of registrars for different levels of formality, region, writing etc.

Most people here are native English speakers so do not make mistakes. Even native ‘mistakes’ are formulaic or regional or personal. You cannot compare them to mistakes from learners.

“Is it not the case that there will surely be time enough to worry about purity of language when there are enough people speaking the language to ensure its future as a living means of communication. Until then…”

Answer A: If they were that body of speakers they would have internalised all the mistakes and so would be too lazy to learn it right

Answer B: if they were in a community they would produce kids, and those kids would be natives, so the question of right or wrong would be moot.

You are looking for support and the argument only works in an abstract world –in the real world these native pools of neo-speakers are not forming nor are native-Irish cohorts growing. Thus I have to conclude the purity arguments are erroneous as you have in reality a body of learners and no natives and these learners are getting a bit of cúpla focal and no more. They are not producing wee sprouts with the native tongue

“…parrot bad Irish as heard sometimes on TV or radio...", is more likely to succeed and to gain friends for Irish”

Succeed it will when the only criteria for success is that someone remember that once there was a language called Irish and nothing else. Where are the native speakers of this new Irish? Friends? Rapists you mean!

“A relentless insistence that dying Irish rely solely on purity of speech for its restoration is the surest way finally to kill off Irish as a spoken language.”

Nobody is calling for purity of speech an answer to anything. This is a case of winning your argument by attacking straw men

“As to not being understood in misusing the word 'clann', I doubt it. Irish speakers will most certainly understand, if only from context, and will be more than willing to meet a learner half way. Besides, even in the unlikely event of a complete lack of comprehension, the process of reaching an understanding of exactly what is intended is a learning process in itself, and probably involves some fun too.”

Look language changes and I don’t think the paistí/clann question is too important, but it does suggest a symptom of not even allowing the original template language a look in

“I totally agree with you Pangur dubh”

Do you agree with one point or all, or did you think of the actual physical scenarios of the outcome of what was stated above? Are you just a flag-boy?

“Although my French is far from perfect, my kind neighbours would never dream of halting the flow of conversation to tell me that I was using "Anglicisms", as I undoubtedly do.”

Taking drugs? I’ve been out in France for 3 months learning the ugly language and got nothing but abuse left, right, and centre. “Tu es un pédé”. Indeed.

“And yes, it is improving all the time, but with such encouragement to support me, why wouldn't it!”

What like a flower improves with rain?

“It improved with use, quite naturally”

It improved because YOU learned more and applied it. Some magic process where nice people patted you on the back and like the “Power Within” it just grew, did not do it

“The hard thing is to communicate this and correct sweetly without making people feel like fool-wits”

People will take up insult anyway as you don’t tell them you brilliant they are. The fact that there are people who sit back and allow this to go on lets the perp to get away with it. It is the same philosophy that allowed my last landlord, a hyperstrung loud boorish bully, to have respect from people.

Evil occurs when people do not stop it –Irish will be raped if the Géarla continues

“So ok, let's speak like this "Tá mé Liotuánach. Tá mé áthasach. Labhraíonn mé Gaeilge go maith. etc" Is it this kind of Irish you are for?”

Yes people do what it. How many went for the dictionary too?

“But it is! I swear it is - "MO CHLANN" and no other options. Don't trust those "caring modernisers" of the language!”

Buy why? Does a liquid stop ICM now? Is it too Klingon to realise /x/? As a side point Klingon is doing grand. If we had a cult religion behind Irish it would be great. Think Tom Cruise can be persuaded to learn it?

(Message edited by admin on May 05, 2006)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 08:24 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

I wonder, will anyone read it, ar chor ar bith?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

(Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 10:28 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

have ye thought of anger managment? boyo?
deep breath....exhale. feel better now?
count to ten..10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
sad bet true

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 233
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 10:30 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

Aren't there plenty of examples of languages changing

Can you distinguish between language change from within (like in Irish you don't say "fer" anymore, but "fear") and decay of language when every second word is taken from other language?

quote:

Don't you think the British were decrying the American's terrible English 200 or 300 years ago, just as you're decrying bad Irish?

Please, I beg you - can you give examples in which way American English is so decryable? Suggestions about petty spelling issues (travelled vs traveled, color vs colour) are not welcome. There is NOTHING about American English that makes it anyway SUBSTANTIALLY different from British English. "Tá mé fear" vs "Is mise fear" - IS a substantial difference.
quote:

On a much wider scale, couldn't English be called Frenglish because of the huge influx of French words hundreds of years ago?

Irish has plenties of Latin and English words - nothing wrong about that. But can you mention any GRAMMAR point in which English is "French" now? There are NONE. English in its structure is as Germanic as it gets - the same aul' Low German if you like.

But dropping copula, mutations, slender/broad distinction is KILLING Irish language. What is the difference between "cat" and "chat" and "cait" - or is it the same word all over in this "nua-Géarla"?

To sum it short - I am ok with "cóta" (English), "garsún" (French), capall (Latin) but I don't accept "clann"="family" or "tabhair suas"="give up". There is a FUNDAMENTAL difference between a word which doesn't exist and therefore is borrowed and banishing native word/idiom because someone finds it easier to translate word-for-word from English.

quote:

If we were to judge your English in the same manner you criticize others, you would come up quite short. While fairly good, it is full of errors. I suggest you use the same charitable manner toward others in their attempts at learning as is given to you.



Dear Lucy - take your "charity and pity" with you. I don't know how it is in your native "politically correct" America, but in my country switching debate to personal things (Your English is bad so shut up) is considered RUDE, UNEDUCATED, and IGNORANT, as it means that the other party has nothing to say for the debate itself so they start a personal attack. YES, English is not my native tongue. I WISH you could speak my tongue at least twice as BAD as I speak English - but you DO NOT, and you NEVER WILL BE. So don't educate me on the merits of my English.

The most important point is that I am fully aware of the fact that English is a foreign language for me, so I NEVER EVER pretended that I can challenge native speakers about what iis right and what is wrong. Could my English be better? Most probably. But to be frank - I DO NOT CARE about that tongue. Anytime I meet foreigners I make a conscious effort not to speak English - 'cause I care much more to practice my other tongues. So yes - you can snipe at my English - I don't give a damn about that language. I have enough of it to get along, full stop.

(Message edited by Róman on May 05, 2006)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 11:40 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

"have ye thought of anger managment? boyo?
deep breath....exhale. feel better now?
count to ten..10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
sad bet true"

I was not angry when writing it!

Perhaps doing tests I am been more than anyaltical and more than a little ready to write, but I was not attacking Pangur Dubh, I was mearly responding to the letter they wrote. I also wrote it in Word, and was surprised it was so long when I posted it, too long in fact to go in one go.

As for the BF reference -that is humour. It is when we identify with our ideas we get very open to insult...

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dearg
Member
Username: Dearg

Post Number: 151
Registered: 10-2004


Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 02:19 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Robert & Roman,

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Irish be relegated to a transliterated-English (well, except maybe for that guy that pops up here once in a while, calling for the simplification of Irish *grin*). I think most (all?) people here would agree that Irish should be learned and used correctly.

The question is, if it's not being learned correctly, what do you do about it?

Some people seem to think that you criticize the speakers by calling what they speak 'Géarla'; others suggest that you take what you can get, try to help them, and move on.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ceolmhar
Member
Username: Ceolmhar

Post Number: 70
Registered: 11-2005
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 03:32 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

I think I'd prefer people speaking "Géarla" than not attempting to speak any form of Irish at all.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Seosamh Mac Muirí (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 03:51 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

>>> I think I'd prefer people speaking "Géarla" than not attempting to speak any form of Irish at all.

That's okay, but should we pay them to run programs on radio and television?
With all the thousands of hours of natural speech recorded, there is no excuse for people arriving into jobs in media without presentable Irish. They are only exacerbating a difficult situation.


>>> Some people seem to think that you criticize the speakers by calling what they speak 'Géarla'; others suggest that you take what you can get, try to help them, and move on.

There are two points either moving or lurking through this thread, dar liom.

1. The semantic range of 'clann', which doesn't encompass 'parents+children unit' and
2. the cultural propriety of correcting (to which 'Géarla is wrongly connected in some peoples' minds).

Both are entwined in some peoples minds by matters which are not seen or mentioned in the thread itself.

Point no. 1 is ongoing in Ireland with an annual letter to Foinse by a selfappointed reformer who was laughed out of the newpaper with a following letter from 'Tomas Cleireach' last year. Tomás Ó Cléirigh wrote his letter in this amadán's rules and brought the house down, and brought a laugh to my face, repeatedly. Learners with weak or imperfect Irish have nothing to fear from people like Ó Cléirigh, who indeed writes very seldom, or myself, who believe that so-called reform of what has been continually undergoing quiet reformation (as late as 1995: tuis. tabh.) is crazy. Dropping genitive is pre-emptive and preposterous. I know native speech is not perfect, nor was it 60 years ago, but there is a time that is proper to everything. I'm guessing genitive drop is about 100 (or 200) yrs. down the line.
Similarly, 'clann' stays in its semantic range. In 50 years time we may take a look at it again. If it has moved by dint of English speakers to encroach on 'teaghlach' or 'muintir', okay, we'll see what has happened. Until then, clann is clann, muintir is muintir and teaghlach is teaghlach. I don't see anything wrong with that.

2. Rómain, Lughaidh agus Robert have a cultural take on language different to a lot of Daltaí from the Anglophone area. I've seen this in class so often some years ago. My impression was that Spain comes close to the Anglophone take on learning intake, and being linguists at heart our friends here are, I imagine, straining at the leash to jump in and put some matters straight, which probably frustrates them no end when they don't.
'Guerla' refers to Irish in use in the public domain in Ireland by some lazy reporters, psuedo-native speakers who adopt a lazy approach and slump all listeners to a boring interlanguage of tasteless and meaningless interjeckings of English and misconceptions. It has come up for comment of late from one of our sharpest minds who retired to Catalonia some years ago. http://www.library.nuigalway.ie/bibltran/authors/Mac_Siomoin_Tomas.htm I paid attention to him the night before last on RnaG and he resolved my doubts. Tuigeann sé an scéal - he knows what's going on and it's not all bad.
Guerla - Géarla is now rampant on radio and tv. It is not nice, creid uaim é and it is avoidable. People who take up jobs with Irish ought to be able to achieve more than 'I bees seen a soft cletic mist, like, just, there, ahem, arisin on de bog' begora the day mee grandmother'll give birth ta mee' and that English representation of Géarla may give some of you an idea of what we're talking about. (for cletic imagine 'celtic') We realise that the speaker meant 'mother' and not grandmother, but on a childrens program should we allow a speaker of such register near them, to be recorded and broadcast?

Feicfimid linn a chairde. We'll see how we go. Nach shin é an saol - Isn't that life?

Is miorúilt sibh go léir agus ní thugaimid faoi deara an méid sin sách minic - you all are a miracle, striving at Irish like this, and we seldom note the fact.

Is mór an gar sibh go léir. You're all great to have around.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Riona
Member
Username: Riona

Post Number: 177
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 07:44 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

A chairde,

I'm really enjoying this thread, it really addresses a huge and rather untacklable problem.

Correct Irish is very much more important than correct English in the sense that a couple of people's bad English doesn't pose threat to the language's survival in tact as a viable language. With Irish, unfortunately, every single speaker has an impact on the language and it's state of existance as time progresses. That is why I want to learn it the right way and not mess it up. True native speakers, as Robert says, are the key to it all, though learners are immensely important too of course.
More later.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucy (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 08:05 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

A Róman - You misconstrued what I said. I did NOT say "your English is bad, so shut up". I asked that you be as polite with learners' mistakes as they are with yours. Your spin on that is your own concoction.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 235
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 09:53 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Lucy - Either you mis-understand completely the debate that is going on, or you intentionally keep me a fool. Nobody is even correcting anyone here, so your comment about "being polite with learners' mistake" is out of place.

So if you don't follow the thread, I will make a short wrap-up for you - the debate is whether it is acceptable not to correct obviously wrong Irish for sake of "encouraging" people or such lassez-faire approach is simply dangerous for a language in such a precarious state as Irish is. So we discuss options THEORETICALLY, nobody is correcting anyone yet. Is this clear?

So don't get fixated on me and my English. My English (say if get amnesia tomorrow) is not a matter of universal importance to get such an extensive coverage over here - please move on to more important topics.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 236
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 10:01 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Dearg - you made a valid point.

I think if someone learnt language in a wrong way - there ain't much that we should do about it, especially if the person is unconcerned herself.

But then, as Seosamh has put it nicely, the question is - do we have to pay such people to promulgate incorrect Irish on TV and radio? Or maybe they shouldn't aspire to media career before they get basics of the language right (like "clann", "teaghlach" distinction).

Second point - what shall we do if such people start aggressively defending their "brand of Irish" as a "dialect". Shall we call the bluff, or pretend that this ill-Irish IS a "dialect". In such situations, we say in Lithuania - "It ain't funny anymore". I think under such circumstances those people are even a threat to language.

Ceolmar - Of course Géarla is better than nothing. But under one condition - if it is only a transitory stage before a person moves on to higher level of Gaelainn bhlasta. But if the person thinks he is "OK" with this? And passes this "Géarla" to his children? I don't know - subject to debate.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Duine (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 02:47 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

To resolve what exactly "clann" means you should look it up in what is the most authorative Irish dictionary which is Foclóir Uí Dhónaill, which states that it means children and descendents, but not family in the broader sense.

At www.englishirishdictionary.com, 'clann' is given as 'offspring' for instance.

The word to describe your wider family is 'muintir'.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Duine (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 02:50 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

P.S. If Julia wants something to convince her friend that clann doesn't mean what he thinks it is, he should know that in the definition of "the family" as stated in the constitution of the Irish Republic, it is given in Irish as "An Teaghlach", not "clann".

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Odwyer
Member
Username: Odwyer

Post Number: 14
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 03:58 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

If you wanted to say something like, "You are nice" what would be the word order in Gaelic? DOes "Have you niceness" work?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pangur_dubh
Member
Username: Pangur_dubh

Post Number: 46
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 04:49 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Rómain,

I note that you you signed off as "enraged". My argument was never intended personally against you, and if, as I fear, you have taken my comments personally, then perhaps I have been too robust in my arguments. If this is the case I regret it and apologise.

Regarding your response to Ceolmhar: "Ceolmar - Of course Géarla is better than nothing. But under one condition - if it is only a transitory stage...". In essence this is fairly close to what I have been advocating all along. I believe that if restoration were to be successful, then as a critical mass of speakers emerged, newspapers, books, films etc would play a role in settling down the language and standards would assert themselves. Perhaps we have not been all that far apart after all - although from reading subsequent postings I would be less than happy with so-called Gearla as a starting point for Radio and TV journalism..

But if after all, we have not moved closer in our understanding, perhaps it is better that we we agree to differ and let the matter settle down. Besides, I have pretty well exhausted argument in this matter.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Cionaodh
Member
Username: Cionaodh

Post Number: 232
Registered: 05-2005


Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 04:49 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Odwyer, when you first arrive at the discussion forum page, you'll notice a link labelled "start a new thread" in the upper right corner of the page. If you want to start a discussion about something that no one else is already chatting about, that's the way to do it.

http://www.gaeilge.org

FRC - Fáilte Roimh Cheartúcháin

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Student of Irish (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 06:41 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

"You are nice"



There might be a few ways of saying this, depending on what is meant. For example, if you wanted to say "you are nice," as in "doing nicely," it would be "Tá tú go deas."

If you wanted to say someone was a nice person, it would be "Is duine deas thu."

There may also be other ways, with their own differences in meaning. Keeping in the spirit of this thread, I wonder if "Tá tú deas" would work also, or would that simply be a Géarlism?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Odwyer
Member
Username: Odwyer

Post Number: 15
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 10:41 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

I am sorry I did not start a new thread, I just figured my question was too trivial to start a new discussion. Go raibh maith agat.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 240
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 09:55 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Student of Irish - "Tá tú deas" is regrettably, Béarlachas. All adjective that convey subjective judgement (and you agree that "niceness" is subjective) are used with "go" only.

So only "Tá(nn) tú go deas."

But of course, if "nice" means "cute, attractive" I doubt if "deas" is the most appropriate word.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 241
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 09:57 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Duine - if we are at this, then can please explain where is the dividing line between "teaghlach" and "muintir"? As I understand "teaghlach" is very formal word not readily used in day-to-day situations? Or there is more difference to it?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Croga75
Member
Username: Croga75

Post Number: 72
Registered: 01-2006


Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 12:24 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

This is from my book "teach yourself Irish" (Diarmuid Ó Sé agus Joseph Shiels)


Traditonal Irish society thought of the family as the extended family of 3 generations (grand parents, parents and children)and not the conjugal family of of 2 generations(parents and children) the following terms were, and still are, used.

teaglach(m) : from tach (house) meaning houshold, extended family.

líon tí :(lit. complements of the house), same as above

muintir (f) : used in muintir an tí (the occupants of the house), and in mo mhuintir (my parents- lit. my folks)

clann (f) : refers to a couple's children, so mo chlann does not correspond to my family.

There is no exact equivalent of the word clann in english, but id the origin of the English word clan, a tribal or kin-group claiming decent from a presumed ancester; so Clann Chárthaigh(the McCarthy Clann), would be decended from Cárthach(died AD 1045). The word for children in general is leanaí(also páistí or gasúir). The old word tuismitheoir, plural -í(parent(s) has been revived and in use in official jargon. Likewise social change has increasingly led to the teaghlach being equated with the conjugal family.


I copied this word for word.


I hope this helps.

Ní Bheidh Mo Leithéid Arís Ann!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Duine (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 12:25 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Rómán, 'Teaghlach' means 'family' as a household. The word come from the word 'teach'. It's the closest word there is in Irish to a family in the nuclear sense.
Muintir is much broader. It means family in a much broader sense, from siblings, parents and children, to aunts, uncles, cousins etc. But muintir is often used in speech just to refer to your immediate family.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Croga75
Member
Username: Croga75

Post Number: 73
Registered: 01-2006


Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 12:26 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

oops tach = teach. tá brón orm

Ní Bheidh Mo Leithéid Arís Ann!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 242
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 11:36 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Go raibh míle maith agaibh, a Chroga75 is a Dhuine!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Peter
Member
Username: Peter

Post Number: 139
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 01:43 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Céard faoi “muintir na tuaithe”, “muintir Chois Fhairrge” etc. ? Ciallaíonn an focal seo “daoine na háite ina bhfuil siad ina gcónaí” chomh maith. Ar ndóigh, tá ‘chuile sheans go bhfuil gaol fola acu uilig le chéile... But, still

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Urnua (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 05:03 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

In school, we always used clann or muintir to mean family, teaghlach to mean household. Teaghlach doesn't appear in Irish school books til you reach secondary as far as I remember as considered too complicated!

Also, this site is good to look up words in case you never saw it before http://www.englishirishdictionary.com/home

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dearg
Member
Username: Dearg

Post Number: 152
Registered: 10-2004


Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 05:35 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Go raibh maith agat, a Croga75.

That was a very interesting lesson. (Bhí sé ceacht an-suimiúil.) [??]

http://greann.com

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lughaidh
Member
Username: Lughaidh

Post Number: 1305
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 08:07 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Student of Irish - "Tá tú deas" is regrettably, Béarlachas. All adjective that convey subjective judgement (and you agree that "niceness" is subjective) are used with "go" only.

So only "Tá(nn) tú go deas."



That may be true in Connemara Irish. It isn't, most of the time, at least in Ulster. People say "tá sí deas" there, not "tá sí go deas".

Tír Chonaill abú!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Student of Irish (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 09:51 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Thanks Lughaidh for the clarification. I'm sensing some folks construe the lack of "go" as "incorrect" depending on their dialectical preference.

Anyway, I started a new thread on this subject so as not to digress from this very interesting subject of "Clann."

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Caitriona (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 08:17 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Re. Urnua's comment:
‘In school, we always used clann or muintir to mean family, teaghlach to mean household. Teaghlach doesn't appear in Irish school books til you reach secondary as far as I remember as considered too complicated!’

Yep, I think that’s it, although I think 'clann' is used in many secondary schools now to mean 'family'. The language changes whether we like it or not and as so many people have grown up with this meaning, it has that meaning in real life for them.
As a múinteoir bunscoile I encountered 'clann' as 'family' over and over again. My husband and children have the same understanding of the word from their schooling in Ireland. This whole thread has been amazing to me as I see that the dictionaries do in fact say 'children' and not 'family' is the meaning. It’s like the time I discovered (as an adult) that ‘Amn’t I?’ is wrong. Having used ‘Amn’t I?’ for years, I was dumbfounded when I found out it was wrong.

So I went back to the textbooks we used in school and in each one found 'clann' or more often 'an chlann go léir' meant 'family' and 'páistí' or 'leanaí' was used for the children. I couldn’t find one instance of 'clann' being used for the children alone. Now, here’s a thought: Nobody was going to ask primary school children, 'An bhfuil clann agat?' or 'Cé mhéid daoine atá i do chlann?' if 'clann' meant their offspring because obviously they wouldn’t have any. There are many lessons in primary school about the 'clann' meaning 'family'.

Here are some examples from the books I looked up:
1. Teach Yourself Books. Irish p. 220 (Vocabulary) clann, a family, children
2. Beginner’s Irish Dictionary (Gill & Macmillan) p. 6 clann, family
3. Lá Faoin Tuath ( An Roinn Oideachais) p. 18 Chuaigh an chlann go léir cois farraige.( includes the parents)
4. Bun go Barr C.J. Fallon p. 27 Bhí mo chlann go léir … (includes Mom and Dad)
5. Seal ag Léamh F p. 32 Chuaigh an chlann go léir go dtí an t-aerfort. (It includes Mom and Dad).
6. Cleachtaí Gaeilge don Ardteist ( Dingle/Howard) p65 Tháinig a mhuintir go léir, idir chlann agus chliamhain.


Anyone want to translate that last one for me? Tháinig a mhuintir go léir, idir chlann agus chliamhain?
Thanks agus go raibh míle maith agaibh, mo chlann anseo and I don’t mean my children, but that I feel this is like a family, this community of daltaí.
:)
C

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Róman
Member
Username: Róman

Post Number: 247
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 03:03 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Does it prove that language has changed? Or that some peole in Galltacht were sloppy learners? For people from Gaeltacht "clann" means children, nothing else.

This is one of the instances I was talking about: learners trying to impose English logic on Irish language to detriment of Gaeilgeorí dúchais.

Regrettable!!!

(Message edited by Róman on May 11, 2006)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aonghus
Member
Username: Aonghus

Post Number: 3121
Registered: 08-2004


Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 04:03 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Tháinig a mhuintir go léir, idir chlann agus chliamhain.

His whole family came, both offspring (covers several generations) and relations who married in.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Wee_falorie_man
Member
Username: Wee_falorie_man

Post Number: 11
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 11:03 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

hmm ...

The glossary of my book "Teach Yourself Irish" by Myles Dillon & Donncha Ó Cróinín says:

clann [klaun] f. g. clainne, pl.-a family, children (coll.)

Also, in Lesson 1 Vocabulary page 29:

clann (klaun) f. children, family

And on page 165 the translation to Exercise 3 page 30, i.e., "Tá an chlann óg." is "The family is young."

Are Professors Dillon and Ó Cróinín wrong?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Student of Irish Dialects (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 12:22 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Scriobh Róman:

quote:

For people from Gaeltacht "clann" means children, nothing else.



I can't help but wonder if some folks have a case of "dialectical myopia" especially after reading in Ó Siadhail's "Learning Irish" the following definition for "clann":

clann: family, offspring, children

Furthermore, "family" is listed as the first definition by Ó Siadhail, implying that that meaning is more prevalent than the others.

So, could it be that due to lack of exposure to other dialects, some folks consider certain definitions of a word to be wrong when in fact the word may have other definitions that are perfectly acceptable depending on the dialect?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dennis
Member
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 1335
Registered: 02-2005


Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 12:53 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

There is a two-page article in Ciste Cúrsaí Reatha (1992) on the political and genealogical uses of the word "clann": Clann: sliocht, aicme, páirtí (p. 42-43). The article doesn't concern itself with the differences between "clann" and "teaghlach" and "muintir", but rather with entities such as Clann Suibhne, Clann Dónaill, Clann Riocaird, Clann Liútair, Clann Bhullaí, Clann na Talún, Clann na Poblachta.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Peter
Member
Username: Peter

Post Number: 151
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 05:16 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Why? Gaeltacht people use the word ‘clann’ in the meaning of ‘family’, but, as I see it, it has much broader sense in comparison to the English countertpart in that it refers to all your relatives, and is not limited to spouses and children, e.g. Clann ‘ac Dhonnchadha, Clann ‘ac Chonghaola (you can freely use “muintir” for the same purpose: Muintir Dhireáin, Muintir Fhlaitheartaigh). Many people have already pointed at it, I wonder why you are still arguing. And there’s no denying that “clann” has the meaning child (or children) in “ag iompar cloinne”, or in “tá triúr clainne agam, a deir sé liomsa, clann aoibhinn iad...”

Please, correct me, if you think I’m wrong, but 'An bhfuil clann agat?' implies ‘children’ exclusively. No other option.

'Cé mhéid daoine atá i do chlann?’ refers to the [broader] family.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dennis
Member
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 1336
Registered: 02-2005


Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 08:03 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

'An bhfuil clann agat?' implies ‘children’ exclusively.

Chuir sé sin focal eile i gcuimhne dom: cúram.

gan chlann = gan chúram = childless

An bhfuil cúram ort? = An bhfuil clann ort / agat?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Caitriona (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 11:32 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Re. Post 3121
GRMT, a Aonghuis

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aonghus
Member
Username: Aonghus

Post Number: 3129
Registered: 08-2004


Posted on Friday, May 12, 2006 - 04:02 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Fáilte romhat, a Ch.

Seanfhocal an lae:
Fear gan bean gan chlann,
Fear gan beann ar aoinne.

(Ní hamhlaidh dom!)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pangur_dubh
Member
Username: Pangur_dubh

Post Number: 51
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Friday, May 12, 2006 - 07:12 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

A Dhennis,

B'fhéidir go mbeadh suim agat. Fós i Hiberno-English, baintear úsáid as an téarma "the care". Mar shampla: "How are all the care?" Ar ndóigh, is aistriúchán díreach é.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Seosamh Mac Muirí (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, May 12, 2006 - 08:59 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

>>> ...And on page 165 the translation to Exercise 3 page 30, i.e., "Tá an chlann óg." is "The family is young."
Are Professors Dillon and Ó Cróinín wrong?

-- Nílid, ach meabhraigh ar an abairt sin seal. Aois na ngasúr atá faoi thrácht (cé ná fuil cóip den leabhar céanna anseo lem' ais faoi láthair).
Is cosúil go bhfuil amhras fós ar dhuine nó beirt againn anseo thuas faoin bhfocal. For some this question may be a matter of setting the limits of where they construe 'family' rather than being a problem of setting the limits of 'clann'. Your target language is the target. Let nothing get in your way is go n-éirí sin libh.



©Daltaí na Gaeilge