One phrase this Pimsleur course has drummed into my brain like a nail beneath a hammer is the phrase "An dtuigeann tú Gaelainn?", as I've said elsewhere.

I have a whacky idea that may get me laughed right out of this forum, but I'm going to ask it anyway because what the heck:

dig /dɪg/
–verb (used with object), dug, dig‧ging. Slang.
1. to understand: Can you dig what I'm saying?

dtuigeann... dig...

Is this mere coincidence or a by-product of Irish- and African-American linguistic intermingling from way back in the day?

Know what I'm saying? Ya dig?

Well, at least a couple places agree with you
www.urbandictionary.com
www.thefreedictionary.com

Both give tuigim as possible origin. Other sites listed the exact same information and text as TFD, so I won't keep posting links. This is what a quick search yielded. I'm sure you'd find a ton more if you look a little deeper.

So, you're not alone at least. I've heard the word often enough in the context, but I wonder where it started in English language. This could be an interesting project. =) I don't think anyone can laugh at you. It's plausible, and you have some support from Google.

(Message edited by aindréas on October 06, 2006)

Considering the Irish and African West Indies connection, this is quite possible, and pretty interesting of a concept freisin. Apparently Domhnall stumbled on a new one, never heard of that or seen that mentioned here, it is to truth a small world.

Beir bua agus beannacht

My thanks to you, a hAindréas. This was just an "AHA!!" moment for me while driving down the road listening to this CD. I've alwasy been a firm believer that there's nothing new under the sun, so it does me good that I'm not the first to come up with this theory. Dig?

I have been thinking about this as well, and with a twist...

"Dig" was also very popular with the Beats, as well as the word "daddio." Applying the term to men of their fathers' and grandfathers' generations (or simply to other "squares"), daideo would be the equivalent of calling them "grandpa"

so...did both dtuig- and daideo work their way into beatnik slang as well?

I heard on the radio that exact explation for the origin of the slang sentance "do you dig?". Apparently Irish Slave (shame on them) owners in America when the language was still in use by Irish emigrants use to speak it. As a result some of the black slaves picked up some Irish and then made there own slang from it.

The word 'twig' as in 'do you twig?' meaning 'do you understand?' has been used here, England and elsewhere for some time. There's obviously a fairly good chance that this is another anglicised form of our 'tuig'.

Just to James_Murphy, isn't Ó Murchú the Irish for Murphy? I've never seen Murchadha (I cant talk, I'm Ní Dhonnchadha or Dhonnchú!)

"One phrase this Pimsleur course has drummed into my brain like a nail beneath a hammer is the phrase "An dtuigeann tú Gaelainn?", as I've said elsewhere.

I hate that phrase! No one in Ireland says it! We say "An labhraíonn tú Gaeilge?" I know there is a diff. idir labhraíonn agus dtuigeann, (gramaticly speaking) but its more natural to say labhair and Gaeilge.

Spicydragon quote:

"Just to James_Murphy, isn't Ó Murchú the Irish for Murphy? I've never seen Murchadha (I cant talk, I'm Ní Dhonnchadha or Dhonnchú!)"

Ó Murchadha = Murphy. Google has 30,200 entries.

""An dtuigeann tú Gaelainn"

I hate that phrase! No one in Ireland says it! "

Yes, they do. That's how Munster people say it.

"We say "An labhraíonn tú Gaeilge?" "

That sounds like pure Béarlachas. "An bhfuil Gaeilge agat?" is the normal form.

A chairde,
How about the word "snazzy". It reminds me of the Irish word "snas" (wealth, elegance, neatness, polish); "snasach" glossed, varnished, neat, trim, elegant, regular, tidy. Some slang dictionaries hazard the guess that it is "snappy+jazzy".
Another influence from Irish might be the American "in the hospital" versus the British English "in hospital".
As far as amiable Irish and African-American relations, maybe you should read up on the N.Y. draft riots during the Civil War.
The word "dig" means more than understand:
to appreciate, to enjoy, to love. One slang dictionary states:"[1950s][US Black] to discuss, to converse. (all orig. jazz musician use, thence adopted by the fans; ult. ? Wolof dega, to understand.)

http://members.aol.com/lochlan/septs.htm

Genelach Clainni Birn (Mac Murfaigh, Murphy)

Ó Murfaigh, then.

Antóin is definitely right on this one.
My teacher who is from the Músgraí gaeltacht, says that "An dtuigeann tú Gaelainn?" is quite correct. Also, Pimsleur teaches (in Lesson 4 I believe) that, "I speak Irish." is " Tá Gaelainn agam." which further backs up what Antóin was saying. The phrase that Spicydragon is familiar with, "An labhraíonn tú Gaeilge?", must be from another part of Ireland.

As for Irish influence on English slang:

Sometimes people say, "Smashing!" when they say that something is good. It seems to me like this comes from, "Is maith sin."

(Message edited by wee_falorie_man on October 06, 2006)

"Just to James_Murphy, isn't Ó Murchú the Irish for Murphy? I've never seen Murchadha (I cant talk, I'm Ní Dhonnchadha or Dhonnchú!)"

Ó Murchadha is the original spelling of the name ('grandson or descendant of Murchadh').
As it's pronounced o: mur@xu: the simplified spelling Ó Murchú has become much more common.

The spelling Ó Murchú can clearly lead to confusion about the name's origin as it would appear to mean 'grandson of Muirchú/Murchú' ('sea-hound'), a name which did exist and is entirely distinct from Murchadh.

Also, generally I oppose the 'simplification'(or butchering) of our language's orthography which went on through most of the 20th century.


p.s. Ní Dhonnchadha is the correct spelling of your name. One could easily mistakenly assume Ní Dhonnchú means 'granddaughter of Brown-Dog'!

"Also, generally I oppose the 'simplification'(or butchering) of our language's orthography which went on through most of the 20th century."

You tell it, brother! Actually, I'm so inexpert in the language at this point that simplification would benefit me, but on principle the Anglicization of Irish does not sit well with me. Like it's not enough the language was driven close to extinction thanks to English.

"Actually, I'm so inexpert in the language at this point that simplification would benefit me,"

Funnily enough, I found Irish much easier to get my head around when I started using the older spellings.
I remember in school finding changes like 'naomh' (saint) > 'naofa' (holy) baffling. Likewise scríobh > scríofa, ith > ite etc. Whereas in the original orthography it's so clear and logical: you simply add 'tha/e' or 'ta/e' to the end as with other words: naomhtha, scríobhtha, ithte.

I especially found the different forms of verbs ending in -(a)igh very awkward eg. athraigh, athrú, athraím, athraithe, athruithe (plural) etc and only mastered it after becoming familiar with the 'old' forms -athruigh, athrughadh, athruighim, athruighthe (plural and verbal noun).

True, the traditional spellings can seem a bit unweildy, especially when using the 'h' instead of the ponnc (dot over consonant indicating lenition) but they are logical and still represent, for the most part, Irish as it is still spoken better than the Caighdeán mess (trá nom. & gen vs. tráigh nom., tráighe gen. is a classic example).

Lastly, I'm not in the least bit reluctant to admit that a large part of my support of true Irish spelling (likewise the use of the Gaelic script whenever possible) is purely aesthetic. I don't think written language should always be reduced to it's most basic interpretation, merely a means of representing the oral language. If that was the case then all languages may as well abandon their alphabets in favour of the international phoenetic alphabet. I believe that written language is an immensely important part of every language's heritage and unique identity and should be cherished & cultivated. The inevitable changes needed occasionaly over time made in a way sympathetic to the language's traditions and it's readers.


(Sorry if this sounds a bit of a rant but I can get heated on this subject.)

Scríobh James:

Funnily enough, I found Irish much easier to get my head around when I started using the older spellings.

I found the same thing. And I find trying to teach Irish is more difficult because of the inconsistencies created by the Caighdeán.

I found the same as one has less information to consider, -ach --> aigh done consistently is less to remember than if one has -(a)igh and also -(a)í, as there is then the issue of knowing the transformation, knowing how they are linked, and knowing they are (generally, but not always) the same sound

"-ach --> aigh done consistently is less to remember than if one has -(a)igh and also -(a)í,"

Do you mean this?
Feminine nouns ending in -(e)ach (e.g. cláirseach):

Traditional-
Nominative: cláirseach. Plural: cláirseacha
Dative (when used): cláirsigh
Genitive: cláirsighe

Perfectly simple and regular, just as you'd expect with a feminine noun e.g. Nom. cos, pl. cosa, Dat. cois, Gen. coise.


Caighdeán-
Nom: cláirseach. Pl: cláirseacha
Dat: cláirsigh
but-
GEN: CLÁIRSÍ


Surely this kind of nonsense is of no benefit to the language. I remember encountering these irritating irregularities for the first time and it genuinely turned me off Irish for a while setting back my learning of it a good deal.

Yes, James, its that sort of irregularity that confuses learners to begin with, as one does not have all of the background information to tie it all together.

What makes it worse is that there is a difference in sound between -igh /j/ and -í /i:/, and this point has been conflated by the spelling.

For me, an inflectional language, where it has regularities, should have this mirrored in its orthographic system, or at least, no phantom elements introduced.

In the above example, I dont know why the gen sing of harp did not stay clairsighe; maybe it was a dialect thing. Regardless, the principle of our discussion still holds.

As far as I recall, the Caighdeán was based on the recommendantions by one linguist after previous committies had done little after 2 decades.

"I heard on the radio that exact explation for the origin of the slang sentance "do you dig?". Apparently Irish Slave (shame on them) owners in America when the language was still in use by Irish emigrants use to speak it. As a result some of the black slaves picked up some Irish and then made there own slang from it". Well before we get a collective cic up the **** , I would like to take issue with this. First of all apart from some plantations being owned by friends of King James not many catholics would have had estates in the new world. We were subjected to the enslavement of the penal laws ourselves during the period in question 1700-1860. Is it not likely that the irish transported to the carribean islands such as barbados and monserrat the so called "red legs" brought their language and slang with them. Carribean culture has had a huge impact on both british and american street culture. Many of the servants on the plantations may also have been irish. A lot of the slave traders were also african it might be noted!!!!

while what you say about irish catholics is true, the "scots-irish" who made up the bulk of irish immigration to america just before and after the revolution were indeed irish and form a large base from which the population of the american southern aristocracy is formed - particularly west of the appalacians.

and indeed, if it weren't for the complicitness of african leaders with the european slave-trading powers there could not have been a slave trade. that is not to say that what took place was in any way permissible, or that the participating europeans' guilt is in any way mitigated, but there are others equally guilty who get a pass, it seems.

Weren't the Scots-Irish descendents of the Ulster planters and predominently Protestant?

yes, but that doesn't make them not irish. i did affirm that the socioeconomic position of catholics in the british empire would have precluded the existance of catholic plantation/slave owners save the most exceptional circumstances in the american south.

the original comment from Daithi-engo, however, simply mentioned "irish slaveowners," and not "catholic irish slaveowners."

the bulk of the catholic irish came over during and after the famine. the difference between "lace curtain irish" and "shanty irish" was not just economic. the "lace curtain irish" were protestant 'old money' (those families had been here 100-200 years by the time the famine rolled around) while the shanty irish were catholic 'newcomers.'

for the most part, the catholic irish were so poor because they were catholic and thus all the education and economic opportunities available to the protestant elite in ireland (and throughout the uk) were denied the catholic irish because of their religious affiliation. the difference in socioeconomic status was produced by the difference in religion once the law got involved.

As I mentioned before I lean towards the Carribean angle, it just makes more sense to me.

Beir bua agus beannacht

A Antaine,
The Linguistic Atlas and Survey of Irish Dialects by Heinrich Wagner had the words "Protestant" and "Catholic" and asked for the Irish term for those words. In Ulster the most common response for Protestant was "Albanaigh", followed by "Gaill". Compare "Teampall Gallda" (Protestant church). The Catholics are called "Daoine Gaelacha" in some instances. This would indicate that the Irish speakers considered the Protestants as Scots or foreigners. How about ethnic Scots from Ireland?
Catholic+Irish-speaking+colonized = Irish.
Protestant+English-speaking+colonizer = British

Does taking Irish territory and living there make them Irish? Are Americans the same as Indians? Are Volga Germans Russians? The Penal Laws seemed to know who the Irish were, why don't you?

And how long does one have to live in a place to be of that place?

By your argument, we are all citizens of the Olduvai Gorge, and impudent invaders everywhere else.

I suggest you also research your categorical statement about the Penal Laws:
http://www.law.umn.edu/irishlaw/chron.html

A Aonghuis,
Why don't you argue with the respondents of the LASID who did not consider the Protestants as Gaeil or Éireannaigh? Ever heard of the "Ulster Custom" exempting Protestants from oppressive measures? The Plantáil is right out of Machiavelli.

The arguments of "Unregistered Guest"(the thesis) and Aonghus(the antithesis) are an example of Hegel's Dialectic in it's most classic form. Now to come to the synthesis ...

Um, to get back to the original topic of this thread, some of you may be interested in the book Green English, reviewed here:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/reviews/greenenglish.htm

This was remaindered a while ago (we'd acquired some copies from Daedalus Books) so it can probably be had for a song via a used book dealer.

Unregistered guest

Ní ionann Gael agus Éireannach.

Tá protastúnaigh gaelacha ann, agus caitlicigh gallda, sa lá atá inniu ann; agus is Éireannaigh iad tré chéile.

Agus níl fonn orm bheith ag plé le cladhaire nach bhfuil sásta a ainm a chuir lena thuairim.

WFM:
ar aghaidh leat ag sintéisiú!

a couple of points -

a) no, it doesn't make european descended americans the same as native american indians - however how often do we hear the rejection of the notion that irish descended americans can lay any claim to being irish - that living in an area a generation or two means that one belongs to that culture. one can't have it both ways - one can't say that plantation descendants are not to be considered irish after five centuries, but irish-americans need to shut up about being irish after one or two generations.

b) don't forget that if you are saying that one doesn't change with relocation, that the planters were scots who were originally irish colonists anyway. so in some twisted, perverted sense they can be seen as "returning home" - albeit on the backs of, and to the great misery of, their "countrymen," being used as a weapon against them by the british gov't.

so either way you slice it, they are irish either because five centuries is long enough to come to belong to a place, or because you can never change your background and they were of ireland long before they were of scotland.

one of the biggest tragedies brought on by the plantations is the partition of ireland - both politically and culturally. since packing the plantation descendants onto boats and sending them back to scotland is, to say the least, impractical - the only chance of rectifying that situation is for the plantation descendants - who aren't going anywhere - to identify themselves as irish and become a full part of the fabric of the culture. they are part of the island now, and have been for quite some time.

People can't be made to pay perpetually for the sins of their fathers - that does nothing more than perpetuate hatred and bigotry and violence. if a modern plantation descendant has wronged someone themselves then by all means the full force of law should be brought to bear on them. if they are guilty of nothing more than being born into a community whose ancestors were used some five centuries before to displace another innocent community by a bigotted government then there is nothing to hold against the modern descendant.

Now, i don't know who you are, unregistered guest, but mind you this statement comes from someone who is usually accused of being 'too republican'

I agree with everything Antaine has said. Noone should be punished for the sins of their ancestors, but rather people should be judged on their own merrits and/or flaws.

Beir bua agus beannacht

I'd quibble with b) since the plantation was mostly by Lowlands Scots, who were not generally gaels.

But I agree with the broad thrust of Antaines argument.

Scríobh mé:

quote:

Ní ionann Gael agus Éireannach.

Tá protastúnaigh gaelacha ann, agus caitlicigh gallda, sa lá atá inniu ann; agus is Éireannaigh iad tré chéile.

Sa Sacs Bhéarla:
Irish and Gael are not identical.

There are Gaelic Protestants and Catholics who are not Gaelic these days; but they are all Irish.

Bunreacht na hÉireann, Airteagal 2:

Article 2

It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.

Airteagal 2

Tá gach duine a shaolaítear in oileán na hÉireann, ar a n-áirítear a oileáin agus a fharraigí, i dteideal, agus tá de cheart oidhreachta aige nó aici, a bheith páirteach i náisiún na hÉireann. Tá an teideal sin freisin ag na daoine go leir atá cáilithe ar shlí eile de réir dlí chun bheith ina saoránaigh d'Éirinn. Ina theannta sin, is mór ag náisiún na hÉireann a choibhneas speisialta le daoine de bhunadh na hÉireann atá ina gcónaí ar an gcoigríoch agus arb ionann féiniúlacht agus oidhreacht chultúir dóibh agus do náisiún na hÉireann.
Airteagal 9

1. 1° Ar theacht i ngníomh don Bhunreacht seo is saoránach d'Éirinn aon duine ba shaoránach de Shaorstát Éireann díreach roimh theacht i ngníomh don Bhunreacht seo.

2° Is de réir dlí a chinnfear fáil agus cailleadh náisiúntacht agus saoránacht Éireann feasta.

3° Ní cead náisiúntacht agus saoránacht Éireann a cheilt ar dhuine ar bith toisc gur fireann nó toisc gur baineann an duine sin.

2. 1° D’ainneoin aon fhorála eile den Bhunreacht seo, maidir le duine a shaolaítear in oileán na hÉireann, ar a n-áirítear a oileáin agus a fharraigí, agus nach bhfuil aige nó aici, an tráth a shaolaítear an duine sin, tuismitheoir amháin ar a laghad is saoránach d’Éirinn nó atá i dteideal a bheith ina shaoránach nó ina saoránach d’Éirinn, níl teideal ag an duine sin chun saoránacht nó náisiúntacht Éireann, mura ndéanfar socrú ina chomhair sin le dlí.

2° Ní bhainfidh an t-alt seo le daoine a saolaíodh roimh dháta achtaithe an ailt seo.

3. Is bundualgas polaitiúil ar gach saoránach bheith dílis don náisiún agus tairiseach don Stát.

Tá me ag ceapadh go mbeadh se nios fearr mar a thogaint isteach cach gan pe bhraoin de fuill Éireannach iontu as tire anois. Nuair a thárla se an éachtra seo ní mbeidh pé duine ann seachas scatha "neanderthall" thuaidh i d-tóraigh. Bhuel, b'eigin dom nios dairire anois, bhios ag tracht le thana mar gheall ar statis aontaithe agus na slabhai a bhi ann fado fado. Ni rábhas ag caint faoin an gceist, cé hiad na fior hearannach no nach hiad ach do bhi se i dtaobh cen pairt a glacadh na duine gaelach sna gnó slábhacach. dhearfainn na cuirtear an milleadh ar iar ghluainn s'againne.

crabadawn -fool
buncawn -lump or tuft of grass
a'mach -(to a) young lad
bokt! -poor result/exclamation

ar buile ~ bullin' (mad)

Breacban,
Could you translate your message into English? It is difficult to understand with so many fadas missing and it doesn't appear to be grammatically correct. What is scatha, statis? (stáit?), slabhai (sclábhaí?), gluainn?
Since this part of the forum is English and Irish I think it would well to post bilingually for the benefit of learners.

This is the second comment concerning my poor grammar and the ommision of fadas etc. In a previous post, a reference was made to the word "seafóid". Well as stated previously I dont have the benefit of a dictionary to hand, everything I write is off the cuff. I believe that this is good practice for a fluent conversation with a native speaker (my ultimate aim). I still laugh when I recall a student who was trying to converse with some locals in the gaeltacht with a dictionary in his hand hand. My point is that nobody is perfect, a student should learn to seperate the good posters from the bad. I am only a student I never claimed to be an expert. This site is full of people who are experts in grammar but write only in ENGLISH!!!!
By the way just to demonstarte everyones fallabilty here,
Unregistered Guest you said:
"Since this part of the forum is English and Irish I think it would well to post bilingually for the benefit of learners" this should read, I think..
"....I think it would be better...." So to end if you correct your english and identify yourself I'll translate my irish!!!

I think that its nice for people to be able to write in Irish and practice even if it isn't perfect, isn't that good practice to try without a dictionary if you're clever enough to do a fairly decent job? So Breacban, I don't mind a lick as long as you don't want me to try and translate your sentenses :), I have enough trouble with more experienced writers' sentenses. :)

Beir bua agus beannacht