I thought this was interesting because it calls into question several topics I have seen discussed here such as multiple meanings of words and the standardization of vocabulary usage.

Today in my Interpersonal Communications course I listened to a lady give a presentation on what she called the "three person breakdown paradox" which basically says that if all parties are not present when meanings are being established, communication breakdown will begin the moment another party is introduced.

As a Mexican-American woman, not to mention a Hispanic Studies major, she is really interested in communication between Spanish speakers and Non-Spanish speaking people. As she gave this presentation, it really hit home for me and Irish, because I find myself running into this problem all the time and can see potential for others to do so also...

Three Person Breakdown Paradox

A teacher (A) is teaching the Irish language class to first year students. Throughout the class she uses the words "léiriú agus léirithe" instead of "sampla agus samplaí" because that is how she was taught. So as time goes on her students (B) have learned that "léiriú agus léirithe" are the teachers way of saying "examples."

Today a new boy (C) arrives to the school. At the end of class he asks a girl sitting next to him (B) if he can barrow her notes to help him catch up. She tells him that the teacher always leaves her notes in a pile on the table for students to barrow and walks out the door. The boy walks up to the table but doesn't see the notes.

Later that day the boy and girl run into each other and the girl asks him if the notes were helpful. He says, "that the notes weren't on the table." The girl says yes they were, "I saw them when I left." The boy says, "No the only thing he saw was a pile of 'drawings' marked 'léirithe' on the table."

Person (A) the teacher, and Person (B) the girl, had established that the word "léirithe" which actually means "illustration" can be used to signify "example." Communication breakdown began because Person (C) the boy, was not present for this assigning of meaning and therefore took "léirithe" at face value.

What do people here think? Do you think this is happening with Irish?

Mo léir, is léir go raibh breall ar an mbuachaill!

That comes of narrowing the range of the word illustration in English, which means example!

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/illustration

But otherwise, I think the point is well made, and occurs especially when people try to form 1:1 relationships between words in different languages, while not grasping the full range in each language.

http://www.focal.ie/Search.aspx?term=illustration

The word for a drawing to explain is léaráid

---

léir [aidiacht den chéad díochlaonadh]
glan, soiléir le feiceáil nó le tuiscint (labhairt go léir; is léir go bhfuil); cruinn, cliste (obair luath léir).
go léir (ar fad, uile, go hiomlán (na daoine, an lá, go léir)).
léiriú [ainm briathartha][ainmfhocal firinscneach]
a dhéanamh léir, míniú; cur in ord, socrú (do chuid oibre a léiriú); críochnú (béile a léiriú); cur i láthair nó ar stáitse (dráma a léiriú).

léir [ainmfhocal baininscneach]
mo léir! ((in abairt) mo léan! mo chreach!).

léaráid [ainmfhocal baininscneach den dara díochlaonadh]
plean nó líníocht sceitse nó pictiúr i leabhar, agus araile.

Well I'll probably sound ignorant here... but when I hear "illustration", I think "picture". Any other meaning I sort of distill from the context.

Well, she actually had a list of Spanish "examples"...I just choose that because it was the vocab card I was on at the time of writing. ;0)

While I agree with Aonghus about the problems of 1:1 equivalents, I see another lesson coming out of this.

Perhaps, we should not be so eager to assign implied meanings to things...one of the more interesting facts and figures to come off the Oxford Dictionary website is that English has a conservative estimate of 500,000 words, however only 40% (200,000 words) are original words with original meanings. The other 300,000 words are degrees, variations, and alterations to the original 40%!!!

Not that we would ever do this, but we could literally make our current dictionaries 300,000 words lighter and we could still effectively communicate in any given circumstance...

When it comes to Irish, I do not mind words like "caith" which has multiple meaning like "to spend and to throw" because even though it is the same word, there is a specific meaning that can by easily understood given the context of the phrase...

However words like "crúigh, bligh, and réitigh" are a problem because crúigh and bligh both mean "to milk." And while these two words have the same meaning, "crúigh" is really used for the milking of cows. When the action is the same for all things milked...

"Réitigh," as in another thread, is the other side of the coin...here we have one word with multiple concepts when the dictionary definition is "to solve." It also has a whole list of implied meanings such as "to prepare, to arrange, to resolve, to iron or straighten out..." and sadly these implied meanings seem to be used more often.

Now I know nothing is going to change here, but I think that the paradox "illustrates" that there is danger in meanings and it might be a good idea for languages out there to cut off some of their vocabular fat... :0)

If I understand you right, you're arguing for some sort of "Bunghaeilge" like Basic English. In principle it's a fine idea but in practice I think it would weaken the language.

It doesn't hurt English because the English speech community is so much bigger. If you try learning Basic English and stopping with that, you'll be in trouble. It may be enough to make yourself understood, but you'll meet an awful lot of people you can't understand yourself, because they're speaking normal English. So there's a sort of social pressure to go on and build on that.

In Irish I'm afraid the story would be different. There aren't enough native speakers (or speakers of near-native richness and fluency, we'll say) for the same pressure to be maintained. Learners mostly talk to other learners, and if they can all communicate and understand each other in Bunghaeilge, what incentive is there for them to go on and learn all those lovely synonyms? My fear is that linguistic richness would be lost, not just set aside for later as it winds up being with Basic English.

Then again, by "linguistic richness" I suppose I more-or-less mean "fat dictionaries", so losing it might be exactly your goal.

As I've mentioned before, I'm a big fan of multiple definitions, as long as they're valid, for the same word and think that the more definitions the merrier. I know this would be much to the chagrin of some folks, but I just can't help loving all the different ways words, both individually and in phrases, can be used.

But, as Aonghus has pointed out to a question of mine on another thread, there are indeed folks who are uni-definitional. That is, they only accept the first definition of any given word. It was also pointed out that using "galánta" for posh might not be the best choice since it's so far down the list (Number 3) of definitions for that Irish word.

Do Chinniúint discussed the word réitigh above and that it might be a good idea for languages out there to cut off some of their vocabular fat... :0). Which got me to thinking about the word réitigh. Do Chinniúint also points out that there are many definitions for that word. My thoughts go to "get along with" whenever I hear this word, since I have heard and read, read, read that phrase réitíonn sé go maith leis, etc in that educational series Turas Teanga so many times.

But then, just moments ago, I was shocked and bewildered to find out that in Ó Dónaill's Foclóir Gaeilge-Béarla the definition "get along with" is way, way down the list of definitions for réitigh. It's down at Number 5! So, I'm in a quandary about using réitíonn to mean "get along with." Is there another word I should be using? I wish there were a way to look up words in reverse in Foclóir Gaeilge-Béarla so that I could find a first-definition word that means "get along with." This way, when I'm in the company of uni-definitional folks, I could avoid offending them by using the appropriate word for "get along with."

Verbs often change meaning when used transitively vs. intransitively, or when used with different prepositions. Off the top of my head I can't think of a sentence in which intransitive "réitigh...le" would mean anything other than "get along with."

Réitím go maith leis.
I get along well with him.

Réitím go maith é.
I fix him good.

Not so much Basic English...

I like diversity as much as the next person, but there are cases that require attention. For instance, according to the Oxford Dictionary website there are 380 synonyms for the word "good" in English. Do we really need 380 ways to say the same thing?

While I am willing to agree that eliminating words from a language's vocabulary would take away from the richness of the language...I don't know if that would happen with Irish.

Given that Irish doesn't have a large number of speakers, I am not sure if anything we did to the language will be drastically noticed? And since there are so few numbers, can Irish afford to be separated by diversity? Perhaps it would be better if Irish was stripped down to a "Bunghaeilge?" Maybe that would bring a more standardized and uniform base from which a stronger language could be built?

Again, I am not suggesting anything...more like thinking out loud.

quote:

Do we really need 380 ways to say the same thing?

That's awesome! I wish there were more! One of my former colleagues, a native Garden Stater who loved to study the English language, would often say "there's no such thing as a true synonym." And I'm tempted to think he's right. Of the 380 ways to say "good," I would wager that all or virtually all of them contain some nuances that separate them from each other. The fact that a word can have multiple definitions is what I think gives the richness to a language, as already pointed out by Abigail. That richness aspect may be the singular reason why I support omni-definitionalism (acceptance of all definitions).

Conas deirtear omni-definitionalism as Gaeilge?

FRC-GRMA

Mac Léinn Sainmhínithe

Remember that "good" is pretty extreme...for any language.

And while I like things to be rich...like most things, there is such as thing as too rich ;0)

For instance, lets take a dialect situation...

This should be easy for the more advanced but here is an interesting simple sentence, if you know what it says good for you, but if you do not, look it up...see how easy it is to translate:

Tá an chandáil mhór anseo.

Now under the protection of "omni-definitionalism" this is just as valid as its standard counterpart. However, should the majority be allowed to be confused because of a word used by a smaller dialect preference?

What I find interesting is that it tends to be verbs and ajectives that come into question. Nouns are usually OK...

(Message edited by do_chinniúint on May 25, 2007)

quote:

However, should the majority be allowed to be confused because of a word used by a smaller dialect preference?

Yes. Anything else is majoritarianism.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/majoritarianism

http://www.quotedb.com/quotes/3022

quote:

"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment." -- Jim Horning

If you don't make mistakes, you will never learn. If all languages are stripped of nuances in order to prevent "the majority" getting confused, then there will be no learning, no capacity to stretch the bounds of thought.

There is already too much of that impovrishment happening to Irish. And a pernicious influence of the impovrishment of English on Irish; Stock phrases in English whose meaning has been narrowed being imported lock stock and barrel into Irish.

Consider

Mary goes to school like John

Téann Máire ar scoil cosúil le Seán

What the irish actually means is that Mary resembles John in appearance when she goes to school!

Quote: But then, just moments ago, I was shocked and bewildered to find out that in Ó Dónaill's Foclóir Gaeilge-Béarla the definition "get along with" is way, way down the list of definitions for réitigh. It's down at Number 5! So, I'm in a quandary about using réitíonn to mean "get along with." Is there another word I should be using? I wish there were a way to look up words in reverse in Foclóir Gaeilge-Béarla so that I could find a first-definition word that means "get along with." This way, when I'm in the company of uni-definitional folks, I could avoid offending them by using the appropriate word for "get along with."

I don't think these "uni-definitional folks" will get too far with any language to be honest. If I were you, I'd use whatever Irish words I wanted to and if another learner doesn't understand, explain and let them learn a new word or usage from you. Don't judge words on their ranking in a dictionary!

Oh, and for the record, I have no idea what "Tá an chandáil mhór anseo" means. Which dialect is it?

quote:

If I were you, I'd use whatever Irish words I wanted to and if another learner doesn't understand, explain and let them learn a new word or usage from you. Don't judge words on their ranking in a dictionary!

There's not another omni-definitionalist amongst us, is there? Má tá ceann ann, tá sé go hiontach!!!

Ceist, le bhur dtoil: Can ceann be used for people, or should I be using another word?

quote:

Can ceann be used for people, or should I be using another word?

It is more polite and usual to use duine, but as you used it above, I'd say it's ok.

Aonghus Uile-sainmhínitheoir eile!

sainmhíniú [ainm briathartha][ainmfhocal firinscneach]
míniú ar cheartbhrí focail nó abairte.

(Message edited by aonghus on May 25, 2007)

http://orwell.ru/library/novels/1984/english/en_app

Ní maith liom Nuachaint!

Ceann can come accross as being a bit disparaging when used to refer to people, though.

'ceann' as in 'ceann sin' that one?

An aside about newspeak, I find it odd when people take such things as literal (or some people used to) when for me, it is more alegory to suggest the mechanicanist thinking and acting that cultures that go down the centralist beurocracy type arrangements get into.

I would hazard that if people were so low in consciousness as to be entirely manipulated by the gramamr of language they would lack the consciouness to use it in the first place.

Language moulds thought.

It's a complicated symbiosis.

Reading thru it, it looks like some sort of Inuit language (all agglutinating)! Are Eskimos totalitarian?

I'm one the very sceptical end of how language changes thought. My personal bias is that the content of the message is a greater indicator of influence on the person than topographic features in the code itself.

The difficulty is in how to test for this. Bi-lingual Spanish and English sepakers shown two 'story/content identical' passages, on questioning found the English sample more vibrant and dynamic, perhaps due to a more verb centered approch in the english version.

To me, human opinion is highly mediated by grounded conditions (such as ones memories. emotional baises, style of though, obligations to job, other people or morgage) than langauge, but of course communication is as you say symbiotic. I am however, somewhat pragmatic on this -if people think lovely thoughts (environment saving, planting trees, less carbon emmitions, saving indigenous languages etc) but do the very opposite/ nothing about it, what does it matter how their thinking is constructed?

Sorry...

Believe it or not, this noun has one and only one meaning. Now some will argue that it is a spelling issue but I assure you it is not:

candáil = ceant = auction

This is the word used in the Cois Fharraige Irish. Just try telling a speaker from the area that it's "ceant."

And while I would say "Tá candáil mhór anseo," I was told by the the locals to say "Tá an chandáil mhór anseo" to epress that "There is a big action there." Which differes even more from what is taught in Lesson 4 of Learning Irish.

When I first starting work with Learning Irish, this was one of the first of many areas in which the dialect and the standard bumped heads...however, I had the chance to visit the area and I was suprised to learn that the course does the dialect justice. I tried to seek answers to some of the questions that had arisen from the course and that was one of the first...it was a surpising conversation really...at least two pints! Some of them had never heard the word "ceant" before...even though most of them were young enough to have had the standard taught to them in schools.

But they all know the word "candáil" and used it instead. So either, they weren't taught the word, or dialect preferece took over in their eduacation.

And while it shouldn't matter which word is used because they both mean the exact same thing, even and advanced speaker like Aonghus might have trouble understanding the meaning of the sentence.

And that is the danger that comes with diversity. The more diversity of meaning, the more room for misunderstanding due to the diversity of meaning.

Food for thought...

Go raibh maith agaibh a Aonghuis agus a Réitlhín. Nuair a scríobh ceann shíl mé narbh ceart é sin. Úsáidfidh mé duine.

Fáilte Roimh Ceartúcháin, Go Raibh Maith Agaibh

quote:

And that is the danger that comes with diversity. The more diversity of meaning, the more room for misunderstanding due to the diversity of meaning.

It's happening all over the place. My father was in Seattle with my niece and they went to an ice-cream parlour/shop/store/. My niece ordered a strawberry float and was promptly served. My father ordered an ice-cream soda, and the waitress just stood there dumbfounded and told my father she didn't understand him at all. My niece fortunately was able to translate ice-cream soda so that my father could get what he wanted.

Vive la difference!

The funny thing about that...

Is that when I read your story, I didn't see a problem with not understanding the terminology...I saw a problem with a lady working at an Ice Cream Parlour/Shop/Store not knowing a thing about her profession ;0)

Ice-cream sodas are what put the ice cream parlours on the map!!!

It's like that tour guide working for Hershey's Chocolate Cooperation back in the 80's getting fired because she couldn't answer a tourist's question about "what type of cocoa they used?" She claimed to have never heard the word "cocoa" before...and sued the company...only to lose because they proved that information was given in her orientation. She had no idea that chocolate comes from cocoa...and she worked in a chocolate factory!

Actually when I say diversity of meaning...I am talking about implied meanings that are given to words that eventually take over. For instance, the word "bitch" which either comes from the Old English "bicca" or the Old Norse "bikkjuna" has always meant a female dog. Nothing more...it is no different than modern English seperating a mare from a stallion when they are both horses.

But over the centuries we have given this word a negative meaning and now consider it to be vulgar speech. When its meaning hasn't even changed, it still means a female dog!

Now lets put this word into modern day action. When I was in Ireland I heard this word a lot when I was touring the kennels at the races. The both men and women were using it to mean just that, a female dog. But how would a hardcore American feminist react in this situation?

Lets say this person is studying to be an animal trainer and a kennel master from Derry came to the school to lecture about modern kenneling practices...throughout the presentation he uses the term "bitch"...Do you think she would accept this is a word that is being used in the very context for which is was created? Or do you think she is going to find it offensive and react accordingly?

The confusion, and ultimately offense, is coming from the fact that the word "bitch" has an actual meaning that is not offensive by design...and an implied meaning that is.

What is your suggested solution?

I think she ought to be wise enough to pick up the context, unless she is so hard core as to object to differences being drawn between genders at all!

If there is a concept of "omni-definition" then I must be of the "uni-definition" mentality...

I am haunted by a saying from my primary school days, "You cannot mean what you say, if you cannot say what you mean."

If it were up to me, I would go through both Irish, English, and any other language for that matter...and eliminate a good portion of the vocabulary.

Would this eliminate some of the "richness" of the langauge...I don't know. "Richness" is a subjective term and not an objective one, just because one thinks it will harm the language, that doesn't mean the person next to them will agree. In truth, I don't think the average person would even notice or care???

To point out another good to know fact from the Oxford Dictionary website...During one's lifetime, the average English speaker doesn't use 85% of the English vocabulary.

And in truth, before a person is going to convince me that we are hurting the language by cutting out words from our dictionary...they are going to have to first prove to me that they were aware of which words were taken out before they were told which ones were taken out. Because the chances are...if your are using a word, it's not one being talked about.

Would this eliminate some of the diversity of the language...I don't know. "Diversity" is the opposite of the goal of communication, which is to establish a "uniform" understanding between people.

What I do know is that it is one of those things that no one ever talks about...

quote:

"Diversity" is the opposite of the goal of communication, which is to establish a "uniform" understanding between people.

I disagree somewhat.

Obviously, people have to agree on semantics if they are to have a meaningful discussion.

But there is more than words, or even grammar involved: Context counts for a lot in communication.

"Tá an chandáil mhór anseo." meant nothing to me: because it was in isolation. If I had seen or heard it in context, I,m almost certain that I would have understood it straight away.

Similarly for your postulated feminist who would know that bitch was being used as a technical term in a veterinary setting, and unless an extremely foolish person, would not have wasted a thought on it.

In addition, there is more to a "uniform understanding" than language; shared experience is important too.

Ní thuigeann an sách an seang.

No amount of linguistic engineering is going to allow me to get a uniform understanding of, say, a farmers work - any more than he is going to understand the more arcane parts of my work.

Either of us using the language of our trade when discussing subjects outside it would be being foolish and arrogant.

Esperanto was an attempt to provide uniform understanding by being clear and unambiguous - but it doesn't seem to have worked. Instead, an ambiguous and fluid langugae, English, is currently close to being a global lingua franca.

A Do Chinniuint a chara,

You are rather worrying me with your ideas about stripping languages of their diversity. I know that would make them easier for the average person to learn, but is that worth the sacrifice of options in the language which make it diverse and full of rich choices of words? I think not.

Speaking of Esperanto, I wonder what ever happened to Aindreas, the kid from Washington who was horrible about returning e-mails. I sort of miss him.

Beir bua agus beannacht

A Ríona, a chara,

It's good to see you joining in this discussion. Since you're from the West Coast, I'd like to get your input on "ice-cream soda." Is this a term that you would use in your area. Would you use it at all or would you use something else like "float?"

Mac Léinn na Ice-Cream Sodas

A Mhic a chara,

I have never heard the term icecream soda until it was said here. We would say rootbeer float. If someone told me they wanted an icecream soda I'd probably ask "do you mean a rootbeer float?" and go from there.

Beir bua agus beannacht

You can doctor dictionaries as much as you want but people will still use their preferred choice of word...

Actually...my point about the phrase "Tá an chandáil mhór anseo" was that when dealing with a situation were no context was given...one must rely on the word itself to establish meaning. And this is were it gets tricky, because the word you choose will affect the other person's understanding.

And to further complicate the matter, lets give context a chance to clearify itself...

Yes I know I probably butchered these...but I think you can see where I was going with this...which of these two would you use for "she is milking the cow?"

Tá sí ag crú an ba.

Tá sí ag bleán an ba.

While I may not have gotten the sentences correct...I am willing to bet that you went with the verb "crúigh". Which is what I would have chosen also...but technically both mean to milk. In terms of meaning, "crúigh" is no more correct than "bligh." However, we have associated with act of milking a cow with the verb "crúigh." And therefore use it over an equally correct verb. I have been corrected on this in the past???

And I am sure that my make believe feminist would have most likely have put two and two together...however, I am willing to bet that the first few times she heard the word spoken, she didn't associate it as a technical term. In her mind, she probably heard the negative female conotation. I was just remembering a coversation with a Vet student here at the university and he was saying that they are being taught in class to avoid this word at all costs just for that reason!

Please to not get me wrong...I am fully aware of the fact that there is more to communication than words.

But I believe that if there are shared experiences, known or not known, then there is already an established understanding from which the people are drawing their meanings from...I am talking about what happens when there isn't an established understanding and ways to avoid confusion, misunderstanding, or other problems before a relationship forms between communicators.

Sorry...I didn't see the other posts.

Riona, don't worry I am not planning on doing any eliminating any time soon :0) I am just putting thoughts out there..

Also, the original product was an "Ice Cream Soda." A rootbeer float is a type of ice cream soda. It is just putting ice cream in with soda pop. It was very popular in the early 20th century to put the flavored ice cream with the same flavor of soda pop. As time went on...we got more creative.

As for Réilthín's comment:

"You can doctor dictionaries as much as you want but people will still use their preferred choice of word..."

I agree 100%...however, it can be debated that people only use the words they are taught, and are there to use. If they don't know the word right off, they will have to go somewhere and find it ;0)

And even if such a drastic thing happened...there would be a transition period, but eventually there will come a generation that won't have a connection to words they never knew.

It is the same method civilizations have been using to subdue languages for centuries.

That is why phrases where the language is used is so needed so we know the reach a word has

Are you talking about my comment about not knowing the context of a phrase?

I meant that it helps greatly when you have a phrase to contextualise a word. I can rhyme 'níl sochar ach dochar' from my head and run it parallel to 'no profit without loss' . If a dictionary has usage sentances it helps give one an idea how the word is.

Those Gary Bannister books would be nice to fold into a dictionary

Just to skew the data, I would have used "bléan"

http://www.curriculumonline.ie/index.asp?docID=140

Dioscó na mBó

Ó, d’éirigh mé ar maidin is chuaigh mé ag bleán na bó,
Ó, d’éirigh mé ar maidin is chuaigh mé ag bleán na bó, Chuaigh mé ag bleán na bó.

---

If you need to use a dictionary, it is a good idea to look up the word you have found in the other direction to secure meaning.

---

bleán [ainm briathartha][ainmfhocal firinscneach den chéad díochlaonadh]
bainne a bhaint de bhó, de ghabhar agus araile, crú; an bainne a fhaightear amhlaidh.

---

Good dictionaries usually do give examples, but the tend to be large and unwieldy as a result.

http://www.litriocht.com/shop/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=&products_id=249

quote:

A compendium of metaphorical and figurative phrases from Ó Dónaill's Irish- English Dictionary arranged alphabetically under English headwords, with cross references. A valuable aid to a more colourful Irish idiom.