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


The Daltaí Boards » Archive: 2005- » 2007 (November-December) » Archive through November 29, 2007 » A refreshingly sane letter in Today's Irish Times « Previous Next »

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

Aonghus
Member
Username: Aonghus

Post Number: 6478
Registered: 08-2004


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 06:47 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

http://www.gaelport.com/index.php?page=clippings&id=2580&viewby=date

quote:

Mr O'Shea specifically argues that the irregular verbs of Irish and the tuiseal ginideach (genitive case) should be eliminated. Yet these and other such changes simply cannot be imposed on a language. To convince themselves of this, we invite readers, including our teachtaí dála, to try the following experiment.

Take a single irregular verb in English (of which there are many more than the 11 of Irish) and try to "simplify" it in your speech for the rest of the day.



quote:

Then, the next day, also remove possessive markers from your English. Indicating possession is, of course, one of the main functions of the tuiseal ginideach in Irish. So, instead of 'Daniel's car,' say 'Daniel car', and instead of 'our niece', say 'us niece'.

Ask a friend to point out all your 'mistakes'. If you send us a euro for every time you fail to use the 'simplified grammar' of English, we can retire rich tomorrow.

Our point is that the TD's suggestion, while well-meaning, is doomed to failure. Competent speakers of Irish, including teachers of the language, use the tuiseal ginideach and irregular verbs because these forms are part of the natural patterns of the language.



quote:

We agree that more spraoi needs to be injected into the teaching of Irish and that as educators, parents, and public servants, we need to think creatively.

But the Government also must solicit and then take seriously the advice of linguists about what works (immersion education, for example) and what will not (artificially 'simplifying' the grammar). - Is muidne,

Harald Berthelsen, Nadia Genserovskaya, Ailbhe NÍ Chasaide, Brian Ó Raghallaigh, Pauline Welby, Phonetics and Speech Laboratory Centre for Language and Communication Studies, Trinity College, Dublin 2.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 07:45 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

It was a good letter. But there is one flaw: I bet all these people are quite happy to write in "Standard Irish", and so they are hypocrites. If they don't mind one set of artificial changes, why baulk at the next set?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 07:52 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

By the way, they point out in their letter that native speakers in Gweedore don't know the correct past tense of beirim, and say "bheir" instead of "rug". That implies they would be happy with a CO that chased every simplification and junked historically correct forms in favour of new-fangled simplifications used in just one small part of the Gaeltacht. But: the writers don't seem to realise that is the very justification of the simplifications recommended by the TD: as many native speakers do not use the genitive case consistenly, why not drop it? That is what he is saying. Well, that is exactly the same logic as their support for simplying beirim. These people don't even know how to string a logical argument together. The fact that this list includes at least one well-known figure augurs ill for the Irish language.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abigail
Member
Username: Abigail

Post Number: 612
Registered: 06-2006


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 08:39 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

I bet all these people are quite happy to write in "Standard Irish", and so they are hypocrites. If they don't mind one set of artificial changes, why baulk at the next set?
Not at all - any more than someone who has learned in school to say "I saw" instead of "I seen" is a hypocrite for not advocating "I goed" as well. Accepting, or even advocating, one particular set of changes doesn't imply you'll be happy with an endless parade of them. Conversely, it's perfectly logical to oppose certain changes if you like - the spelling reform, cuir i gcás - without necessarily wanting to go all the way back to Gaeilge an Cheitinnigh.

They've got a point: these things exist in the language, and competent speakers use them as a matter of course. Eradicating them would be ridiculously difficult, harder for most people than learning them in the first place. My own level of spoken Irish isn't that high, and I do tend to drop the genitive in certain situations (a habit I picked up from my first teacher - I rarely do so in writing any more, but in speech it slips out.) But even for me, it would be far less work to bring my genitive usage up to scratch than to drop it altogether.

By the way, when you say that native speakers "do not use the genitive case consistently," I wonder what exactly you mean by that. I realize you might not have had the chance to analyze a lot of native speech yourself yet - but if you did, are you saying that you'd expect to find inconsistent use, or consistent non-use?

Tá fáilte roimh chuile cheartú!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mise_fhéin
Member
Username: Mise_fhéin

Post Number: 350
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 09:00 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

as many native speakers do not use the genitive case consistenly, why not drop it?

An bhfuil aon bhunús leis an seafóid seo ?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 09:38 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Abigail, I was under the impression you were a fluent learner, not a native speaker. You certainly gave that impression earlier in some posts.

However, you attempt to muddy the waters by talking of people who learn "I saw" at school instead of "I seen". I think on reflection you will agree this is not a fair representation of the CO. What you mean is people who say "I saw" but are taught at school to write "I seen" - that would be the CO. Noting that many of the last few genuine native speakers of Irish use forms analogous to "I seen", it has decided to mandate them, and to insist on them.

Finally, O Siadhail's Learning Irish explains that at least in Cois Fhairrge there is generally only one form of the noun in the plural. Apparently they don't distinguish the dative case, and usually not the vocative or the genitive either (in the plural I am talking about). So the book gives just 2 vocative plurals and 7 genitive plurals that have survived as "vestigial" forms.

In retrospect, it is a little odd that the genitive case survived in the CO, given its fixation on Conemara as a source of supposedly "standard" forms. I seen. I done it. I brought it in the shop. I ain't got none. Sumfink or nuffink.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abigail
Member
Username: Abigail

Post Number: 614
Registered: 06-2006


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 09:59 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Abigail, I was under the impression you were a fluent learner, not a native speaker.
You were under the correct impression, except maybe for the "fluent" bit. I'm fully literate and a competent speaker, but I wouldn't say fluent. (I think last time I did an assessment I was B1/B2 in speech, B2/C1 in listening, C1 in writing and C2 in reading.)

I'm a bit at a loss - what have I said above that makes you think otherwise? I wasn't pretending to be a native speaker (in fact, I specifically referred to having bad habits I picked up from my first Irish teacher.)

However, you attempt to muddy the waters by talking of people who learn "I saw" at school instead of "I seen".
No, I don't. It wasn't a reference to any particular component of the Caighdeán - only to the fact that there is a Caighdeán at all. Any standard language will differ from somebody's natural speech. Just because you're willing to accept that, and even modify your own speech to conform to it, doesn't mean that you automatically have to support all further modifications. "The current standard is fine but let's leave it alone" is a logically tenable position and not necessarily hypocritical in the slightest, and that's the point I was making. Whether the C.O. itself is good or bad is an entirely different discussion (and one I won't be getting into on this thread.)

Tá fáilte roimh chuile cheartú!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 10:27 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Yes, Abigail, I know "any standard language will differ from somebody's natural speech", but generally speaking standard languages prescribe a version closer to the historically correct forms (eg "I saw" instead of "I seen"). It is only government intervention that has produced a so-called standard that prescribed historically INCORRECT forms (eg feicim and the like). So I don't accept the so-called Caighdeán is good Irish at all. My point was that the people who wrote the letter above are straining at the gnat after swallowing the camel. If Ailbhe NÍ Chasaide is happy with "feicim" and "sa teach" and even the "is muidne" contained in her letter, then she is a dumber-downer, and has no authority to comment on what should be standard forms, native speaker or not. In fact, by suggesting "bheir" instead of "rug" as the past tense of beirim, she was suggesting her own "son of CO" to rival the TD's. Our Irish ancestors will be spinning in their graves.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aonghus
Member
Username: Aonghus

Post Number: 6481
Registered: 08-2004


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 10:48 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

I see Josh has got carried away by his caighdeánophobia again.

You have the gnat and the camel reversed. There is a big difference between suggesting moderate changes based on a living dialect in a strong gaeltacht (which Gaoth Dobhair is) and suggesting, as Brian O Shea did, that the genitive and the irregular verbs should be abolished by ministerial decree.

Agus ó tharla nach bhful gaeilge ar bith agatsa, mar chéad ná dara teanga, is deacair aon mheas a bheith ar do rachtanna.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lughaidh
Member
Username: Lughaidh

Post Number: 2113
Registered: 01-2005


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 10:49 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

they point out in their letter that native speakers in Gweedore don't know the correct past tense of beirim, and say "bheir" instead of "rug".



I have learnt that Ulster uses "rug" to say "to give birth" and "bheir" with other meanings (bheir mé air = I caught it, for example). But maybe those who've written the letter don't know that...

Why "rug" would be more correct than "bheir" ? If everything non-standard isn't correct, then nobody speaks correct Irish in the Gaeltacht... The very contrary to the truth, given Standard Irish is a constructed dialect.

Learn Irish pronunciation here: www.phouka.com/gaelic/sounds/sounds.htm & http://fsii.gaeilge.org/

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aonghus
Member
Username: Aonghus

Post Number: 6482
Registered: 08-2004


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 10:53 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Ní dúirt siad sin. Sin spin Josh air.

Seo an méid a dúirt siad:
quote:

To be sure, languages change, and Irish is changing. Some irregular verbs are likely to become more regular. For example, while the past tense of the verb beir (rug) is irregular in most dialects, it is regular in Gaoth Dobhair (bheir). And one day, Irish may well lose the tuiseal ginideach. This happened to the English language: over time, the case system (including the tuiseal ginideach) of Old English was almost completely lost and replaced by the current system, in which word order plays a crucial role in signalling relationships between words. But these changes are organic; they cannot be imposed artificially.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Antaine
Member
Username: Antaine

Post Number: 1138
Registered: 10-2004


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 11:07 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Josh, you are using english's version of the CO in all the words you spell. As a matter of fact, most english speakers today find *not* having a standardized spelling beyond the realm of acceptability. The result is that the spellings and conventions of some dialects are acceptable when written in certain places, and others are not.

That was the purpose of the CO - spelling and grammatical convention for the government and textbooks for people who don't have a native dialect anyway.

You wouldn't put "y'all" or "all a'y'all" in a scientific paper, even if you were from Texas.

You wouldn't spell Boston "Bastin" in a newspaper article for a local Boston paper even though that's how the city pronounces its own name and such a thing would have been perfectly acceptable in Chaucer's day.

Likewise, if you're from Munster, "déan" remains a regular verb in your daily speech and writing, but when you write your proposal for the Dáil you'll use "rinne" in the past tense.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 11:46 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Lughaidh wrote: "f everything non-standard isn't correct, then nobody speaks correct Irish in the Gaeltacht... The very contrary to the truth, given Standard Irish is a constructed dialect."

Lughaidh, I am not comparing the Gaeltacht Irishes with the CO. I am comparing them with the historically correct forms. So, even if the people in Gweedore say bheir, I would regard that in the same light as people saying "brought" instead of "bought" in English. Not because it is contrary to the CO, but because it is incorrect on historical grounds.

Similarly with "do dheineas" vs. "do rinneas" in Munster... well, do rinneas is the historically correct form, so although I am trying to learn Munster (only because it is the most conservative dialect), I am only doing so as a pathway to the correct forms, and so where Munster is innovative, I do not intend to copy the innovations. So: do rinneas it is. You could say, I am a one-man CO.... but i think of it as early 20th century standard Irish.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abigail
Member
Username: Abigail

Post Number: 615
Registered: 06-2006


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 12:01 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Well, a one-man C maybe.

But why early 20th-century only? Why not late 18th-century? Why not go back to Classical Irish, the Irish of Keating's day, Irish before there were all these pesky innovative dialects?

Tá fáilte roimh chuile cheartú!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Seosamh
Member
Username: Seosamh

Post Number: 103
Registered: 10-2007
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 12:17 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Josh: ... I am not comparing the Gaeltacht Irishes with the CO. I am comparing them with the historically correct forms. So, even if the people in Gweedore say bheir, I would regard that in the same light as people saying "brought" instead of "bought" in English. Not because it is contrary to the CO, but because it is incorrect on historical grounds.


Is é 'bheir' an Aimsir Láithreach cheart stairiúil, so it is entirely 'correct on historical grounds'.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 01:53 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Abigail and Seosamh: I am comparing to the standard language that did exist in the 1st half of the 20th century, which was artificially retired by the government. Actually I am using the 1900 edition of the Christian Brother's Grammar as my arbiter with an eye on Dinneen's dictionary too. I could have said Peadar O Laoghaire but he blots his copybook by using tigh as a nominative... Anyway, there must be room in the Irish-learning community for me!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Antaine
Member
Username: Antaine

Post Number: 1139
Registered: 10-2004


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 04:38 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

But...but...but...

prior to the CO, there was no standard. Many spellings and conventions were fairly well/uniformly accepted, CBG, Dineen's et al did not constitute a standard regardless of how esteemed they may have been.

A "standard" implies authority. The CO is a "standard" because of the authority of the gov't and academia where it was created, used, accepted and promulgated. The old CBG, Dineen's and anything else that came before the CO were merely digests of either single dialects or what was perceived as majority usage.

Even Dineen's gives alternate spellings.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rg_cuan
Member
Username: Rg_cuan

Post Number: 133
Registered: 04-2007
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 04:42 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Ní fiú faic an comhrá seo.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aonghus
Member
Username: Aonghus

Post Number: 6486
Registered: 08-2004


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 04:47 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Faraor, tá sé hijackáilte ag clamhsán faoin gCO, nach raibh i gceist beag ná mór san litir úd.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rg_cuan
Member
Username: Rg_cuan

Post Number: 136
Registered: 04-2007
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 04:57 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Ceart agat a Aonghuis.

Shíl mé gur litir iontach a bhí ann, go háirithe na pointí sin faoi spraoi, cur chuige cruthaitheach agus comhairle na saineolaithe.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dennis
Member
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 3311
Registered: 02-2005


Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 05:19 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Ní thuigim cén fáth a mbíonn sibh ag éisteacht leis an gclampróir seo. Píobaire an aon phoirt é leis na blianta anois, nach bhfuil aon Ghaeilge aige dáiríre. Ná cothaigh é.

"An seanchas gearr,
an seanchas is fearr."


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2007 - 02:36 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

"But...but...but...

prior to the CO, there was no standard. Many spellings and conventions were fairly well/uniformly accepted, CBG, Dineen's et al did not constitute a standard regardless of how esteemed they may have been.

A "standard" implies authority. The CO is a "standard" because of the authority of the gov't and academia where it was created, used, accepted and promulgated. The old CBG, Dineen's and anything else that came before the CO were merely digests of either single dialects or what was perceived as majority usage.

Even Dineen's gives alternate spellings."

Well, a standard language does not derive its authority from the government. You said Dineen's and CBG were "esteemed" - that is the source of real authority. The CO was created by a civil service committee - it had a few Gaeltacht people on it - but it was an inhouse, private affair. No public submissions were sought or allowed, and a parliamentary attempt to argue that the people who used the language should be consulted was haughtily rejected. It wasn't created in academia. Someone on Daltaí, someone talks of the reaction to it of a professor who was horrified! On the GAEILGE-B list someone recently asked a question about how to put a funeral inscription into the correct spellings - apparently someone around 100 had died, and he never accepted the government spellings, and his family was doing him the honour of using the Irish he would have recognized on his tombstone. The point is: such people are frequently stated not to exist. People have said hundreds of times on Daltaí that all native speakers were happy with the CO.

The CBG and Dinneen's, whatever you think of them, were NOT digests of a single dialect or a collage of majority usage (those descriptions reflect the CO better, due to its Conemara fixation). They reflected the historically correct Irish as once existed over the whole of Ireland. So in the CGB, you will find that the nominative of teach is teach, regardless of what the Munster usage is. These books did not have forms like "sa teach" and "feicim", not because they were teaching a certain dialect, but because they weren't recommending all the latest innovations. Take the letter above's use of the horrible "muidne". CBG specifically says on some page that the use of "muid" should not be imitated by the learner, precisely because it is a corruption from a verbal ending. Antaine, there were competing plurals, but the Dineen's/CBG Irish was in fact a highly standardized language.

As for schools' willingness to promote the CO: this reflects the decline in the number of genuine native speakers. With no Irish speaking middle class to uphold standards, no one really gave a damn any more. I fort so! I done it! I seen! I brung it! Sumfink or nuffink!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lughaidh
Member
Username: Lughaidh

Post Number: 2115
Registered: 01-2005


Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2007 - 03:32 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Josh > every language is distorted in regard to how it was centuries before: Modern Irish is distorted Classical Irish, Classical Irish is distorted Middle Irish, Middle Irish is distorted Old Irish, Old Irish is distorted Pre-Historical Irish, and so on.

And it's the same with all languages (including English). If you were talking to an Englishman of the 15th century, he'd think "the English of this guy is really full of mistakes".

And Standard Irish is just a blend of dialects.

Learn Irish pronunciation here: www.phouka.com/gaelic/sounds/sounds.htm & http://fsii.gaeilge.org/

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2007 - 03:57 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Lughaidh, your post is a non sequitur. I know Modern Irish is different from all those versions. What made you think that I wouldn't realize that?

Now, your point (so far as you have one) is that languages change. Is that your whole point? Have I missed anything out? But even though languages change, the educated portion of the population normally adheres to a certain view of what is good language. This is called culture.

So in Old Irish times, the scribes had a view of what was good Irish. And in later times the view of the educated classes also changed. But - and read this carefully - the view of the educated classes as to what constitutes the literary language, the standard language, the elegant use of language, evolves more slowly than that of the man in the street.

In other words, changes are incorporated into the standard language to the extent that the educated classes embrace them. In the 1940s, there was still extant the remnant of an Irish-speaking middle class who were aware that forms like "feicim" and "sa teach" were grammatically wrong. Unless you are arguing that the educated Irish speakers had largely abandoned sa tigh for sa teach by then, you must admit this point. The same for a whole host of other things. I have raised in this thread the example of "feicim". Forms like "chím"/"do-chím"/"at-chím" were still in use in the 1940s, as in fact they still are!!!. In fact, I feel embarrassed having to tell you this, as you should already know this as an expert in Ulster Irish.

It is not that the forms in the old Christian Brothers' Grammar had been abandoned by the educated Irish speakers, and the Irish government merely codified Irish as it was seen by the educated speakers. No. That is not true. Rather: the government intervened to tell educated speakers that the decision had been made in the civil service to drop forms still seen as correct and still in use, in favour of forms favoured in Conemara, an area of the Gaeltacht noted for its poor grammar.

This is why your examples of Old Irish and what-not are irrelevant.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tomás Ó hÉilidhe (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2007 - 08:38 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

I don't say "I seen", but hypothetically speaking, if I did, and if I had kids, I would not tell them to say "I saw" in its place. And also, I'd take issue if teachers were telling them to say "I saw" in its place.

The dialect of a language that a person speaks is a part of their heritage and a part of themselves. Changing it to aspire to a socio-economic group to which they feel inferior is quite cowardly and indignifying.

To take my own speech as an example, I say "If I was to" instead of "If I were to", and "Who were you talking to?" instead of "To whom were you talking?". When I see people try to change the way they speak, I sense there's a deep insecurity in that person, as if they're ashamed of their heritage, and that they feel inferior to another particular group of people. Why else would they feel that Dialect A is superior to their own dialect? This reminds me of the thought that came into my head when I saw a university degree framed on a wall in a friend of mine's house. I walked over to read it... but... it was all in Latin. And I thought to myself, here we are in the country of Ireland, where the English and Irish languages are spoken by the people, yet this parchment is written in Latin on the wall. It conveyed to me that the people who provided the parchment have no pride in who they are, in their heritage, or in their country. Instead, they apsire to be like a socio-economic group to which they feel inferior. And the end result? A parchment on a wall that nobody in the country can read. I'd be equally as disgusted if Poland starting issuing their parchments in English. I can sense that someone's ready to accuse me of paranoia, or that I have some sort of complex -- but answer me this: why was it written in Latin as opposed to Iranian? Because Latin is the language of the educated you say? So why isn't the English or Irish language good enough? Is our education shite?

As for how to speak and write Irish, I have a preference for Munster Irish. Others may think highly of Ulster Irish, or possibly Connacht Irish. I'll admit that my respect for a person wanes a little though when I see them writing in the Caighdeán.

As for "historical correct forms"... I mean who really gives a shit. How many people say "thou shalt" nowadays? If I was to hear someone speak like that then I wouldn't even say Hello to them, I'd ignore them entirely, all because I'd make stereotypes about what kind of person they are. Similarly I wouldn't pay any attention to someone who wears an eyepiece. And also at the total opposite side of the spectrum, I wouldn't pay any attention to anyone who wears a Burberry hat, or who has a gold ring on every finger.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Josh (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2007 - 10:30 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

"How many people say "thou shalt" nowadays?"

Another non sequitur.

God this is boring.

Did you read the thread?

I did not talk about resurrecting forms that no longer exist, but about not artificially abolishing forms that the educated still use.

Isn't it odd how there is no room for someone who wants to learn good Irish? I am the object of abuse from Aonghus, Dennis and others. Where is the tolerance?

But abuse is not an argument.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tomás Ó hÉilidhe (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2007 - 10:54 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

Another non sequitur.

If you're gonna decree my arguments as non-sequiturs, kindly give an explanation.

quote:

God this is boring.

Did you read the thread?

Great social skills I see.

quote:

I did not talk about resurrecting forms that no longer exist, but about not artificially abolishing forms that the educated still use.

Now here you are talking complete bullocks. A baby learns to speak a certain way by imitating the people who speak around them. But when you're a baby, it isn't decided yet whether you're gonna have a PhD or whether you're gonna take an overdose of smack at the age of 12. Therefore, how can there possibly be such a thing as "educated speak" unless people artificially doctor the way in which they speak? Did you sit in your room one day practising when to say "whom", or repeating "cannot" instead of "can't" to yourself thousands of times? When do you realise that you were such a piece of shit that you had to aspire to be like some other person who lives somewhere else and speaks in a different way?

quote:

Isn't it odd how there is no room for someone who wants to learn good Irish? I am the object of abuse from Aonghus, Dennis and others. Where is the tolerance?

The only problem I see is you notion of "good Irish". You're worse than the Caighdeán people telling people what is proper and what's not proper.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aonghus
Member
Username: Aonghus

Post Number: 6488
Registered: 08-2004


Posted on Sunday, November 18, 2007 - 03:54 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Pointing out that you have dominated this thread with your irrelevant (to the letter as written) gripes about the CO which are clearly based on insufficient data, is not abuse.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

James_murphy
Member
Username: James_murphy

Post Number: 107
Registered: 11-2005


Posted on Sunday, November 18, 2007 - 08:20 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

The mere fact that the 'caighdeán' has brought up acrimonious dispute like this between Irish enthusiasts since it's inception is it worst effect.

Séamus Ó Murchadha

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dennis
Member
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 3316
Registered: 02-2005


Posted on Sunday, November 18, 2007 - 08:39 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

Irish enthusiasts

= daoine a bhíonn ag caint i mBéarla faoin nGaeilge

"An seanchas gearr,
an seanchas is fearr."


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tomás Ó hÉilidhe (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Sunday, November 18, 2007 - 09:47 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

Irish enthusiasts = daoine a bhíonn ag caint i mBéarla faoin nGaeilge

An t-aon fháth amháin a bhfuilim ag caint as Béarla seachas as Gaoluinn san argóint seo ná go mba dheacair liom mo phointí a chur in iúl leis an gcuid Gaoluinne atá agam ag an uair. Bheinn ar bís m'argóint a chur in iúl as Gaoluinn dá mbeadh stór focal ní ba láidre agam, agus tá súil agam go mbeidh, lá amháin.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Riona
Member
Username: Riona

Post Number: 1265
Registered: 01-2006


Posted on Monday, November 19, 2007 - 12:31 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

A Thomas a chara,
Just because someone chooses to speak like another group of people to which they don't belong doesn't mean they think ill of themselves, though sometimes it can. I like talking with an Irish accent whenever I can get away with it but I still like being American and I don't think that is bad in any way. So I don't think your speech mimicry hypothesis is completely accurate.

A Josh a chara,
If you think this is boring then why do you continue to argue about something that you will not be able to change? Usually people who do that take enjoyment from it.

Agus a Dennis, ta tu an greannmhar.

Beir bua agus beannacht

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

James_murphy
Member
Username: James_murphy

Post Number: 108
Registered: 11-2005


Posted on Monday, November 19, 2007 - 12:16 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

= daoine a bhíonn ag caint i mBéarla faoin nGaeilge



Gabhaidh mo leithscéal!! Do dhearmadas gur fhógair Dennis agus Aonghus - sealbhóirí na teangan gaedhealaighe - nach ceart d'éinne nach bhfuil an Ghaedhilg acu go cruinn focal a rádh fúithi.

Tá súil agam go maithfear dom as mo bhotún uathbhásach.

Séamus Ó Murchadha

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dennis
Member
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 3317
Registered: 02-2005


Posted on Monday, November 19, 2007 - 01:15 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Feicim gur bhain an ciúta sin Gaeilge bhlasta asaibh beirt, a Thomáis agus a Shéamuis. Mission accomplished.

"An seanchas gearr,
an seanchas is fearr."


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tomás Ó hÉilidhe (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Monday, November 19, 2007 - 02:43 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Más Gaoluinn atá uait, a Dhennis, nach rachfá ag lorg "mission" agus "accomplished" sa bhfoclóir?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dennis
Member
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 3319
Registered: 02-2005


Posted on Monday, November 19, 2007 - 07:35 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Ní rachainn, ó nach bhfaighinn faoi cheachtar acu an nath atá ag teastáil sa chás seo. misean curtha i gcrích ? Ní dóigh liom é. Céard faoi:

Bhain mé mo chuspóir amach. Bhuail mé an sprioc.

Cuspóir bainte amach. Sprioc buailte. ??

"An seanchas gearr,
an seanchas is fearr."


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tomás Ó hÉilidhe (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 04:15 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Táir ag freagairt do cheiste féin! Rud ar bith seachas Béarla a chuirfeadh an aidhm i gcrích! Cheapas go mb'íorónta go mba é an duine a dúirt Gaoluinn a labhairt ná a duine a mheasc téarma Béarla ina chuid Gaoluinne féin. Easpa iarrachta atá i gceist.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abigail
Member
Username: Abigail

Post Number: 620
Registered: 06-2006


Posted on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 05:20 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Cén leagan a mholfá féin mar sin, a Thomáis? Admhaím gur theip orm teacht ar aistriúchán cruinn snasta ach oiread le Dennis.

Má chliseann ar údar nath dúchasach a aimsiú a fhreagróidh don rud atá i gceist aige (nó nath gonta a chumadh dó ach oiread) b'fhearr go mór liom an ráiteas a fheiceáil ina riocht féin, dá ghallda é, ná aistriúchán ciotach Gaeilge. Seans nach dtiocfadh chuile dhuine liom ach sin é mo dhearcadhsa air.


Tá mé ag ceapadh gur chuala mé ráiteas den saghas seo tráth: ba rud é a bhain le gnó lae aonaigh más buan mo chuimhne. (Is léir nach buan áfach, nó bheadh an nath féin agam fós!) D'ainmhí a bheith díolta agat nó a leithéid, b'fhéidir... an bhfuil a leithéid de ráiteas cloiste ag aon duine eile?

Tá fáilte roimh chuile cheartú!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aonghus
Member
Username: Aonghus

Post Number: 6494
Registered: 08-2004


Posted on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 05:55 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Sprioc buailte mo mholadhsa.

Ba a chuir thar abhainn a bhí i gceist ag Abigail, seans?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dennis
Member
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 3322
Registered: 02-2005


Posted on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 09:20 am:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

quote:

Ba a chuir thar abhainn

Is cuimhin liom anois gur phléigh muid an nath seo tamall ó shin, tar éis é a fháil ó Cholleen anseo.

"An seanchas gearr,
an seanchas is fearr."




©Daltaí na Gaeilge