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


The Daltaí Boards » Archive: 2005- » 2008 (March- April) » Archive through April 05, 2008 » "T-" prefix or no "t-" prefix - this is my grammar question « Previous Next »

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

Domhnall_Ó_h_aireachtaigh
Member
Username: Domhnall_Ó_h_aireachtaigh

Post Number: 389
Registered: 09-2006


Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 08:44 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Dhá abairt seo as gaeilge, direach as Buntús Cainte:

an t-im ar an mbord. (Ceacht 12)

agus

Cá mhéad atá ar an im inniu? (Ceacht 21)

Cén fáth "t-" ina chéad abairt ach ní ina dara abairt?

In case I was not clear, I'm curious why there's a t- prefixing "im" in the first sentence but not in the second? What is the rule of grammar at work here?

Thanks!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Domhnall
Member
Username: Domhnall

Post Number: 1374
Registered: 06-2005


Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 08:56 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

Welcome to the cases of grammar we have inherited from the Celts!

I know someone else can do a better job at explaining it but here i go....

(i) All you are saying is "the butter" because of the gender of the word butter, it takes a t-

(ii) You are saying "ON the butter" and all these little words like ag, ar, as, chuig, de, faoi, go, i, le etc etc will either put on a séimhiú or urú.

The only comparison i can think of is this.

In english we say "With whom" not "With who"... Who takes an M because of the little word in front of it...

Anywho, that's my 2cents. If it makes no sense it's 1am over here so that's my excuse ;) Slán!

A people without a language of its own is only half a nation.A nation should guard its language more than its territories, 'tis a surer barrier and a more important frontier than mountain or river

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bearn
Member
Username: Bearn

Post Number: 454
Registered: 06-2007


Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 09:16 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

an t- can be thought of as actually ant or a(-)t -it is really a definite article (from an historical perspective)

le díol

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Antaine
Member
Username: Antaine

Post Number: 1207
Registered: 10-2004


Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 10:42 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

but the definite article is present in both.

I'm not sure about the preposition+ explanation

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bearn
Member
Username: Bearn

Post Number: 455
Registered: 06-2007


Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 11:36 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

No I mean the t comes from the definite article having a d/t in history and it been left on certain nouns in present time

le díol

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lars
Member
Username: Lars

Post Number: 217
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 11:47 pm:   Small TextLarge TextEdit Post Print Post

The answer is etymology:

im is masculine.
The masculine article in nominative once (even before Old Irish) was sindos.
The -s of sindos had been lenited between vowels, so it became a h-sound, something like "sindoh" That h-sound devoiced the -d after the -o- had faded away. So we got sint. The initial s- faded earlier or later. So we got int, today an t-.
That's why it is an t-im

There were some other cases called "dative" and "accusative".
Both were used after prepositions like "ar"
The masculine article in dative was sindu.
"ar" and dative indicated position (on).
The masculine article in accusative was sindon.
"ar" and accusative indicated motion (onto).

In both cases there's no h-sound. So -d of article wasn't devoiced. So no form like sint as in nominative case could develop in these cases. That's why there's no t-prefix today following prepositions and article.
Both case endings (-u and -on) got lost (except for lenition (< -u) or eclipsis (< -on) of following initial consonants caused by them).
The differentiation of position/motion after prepositions by case disappeared, too.
(lenition or eclipsis is used now generally, according to dialect)
-nd further developed to -n.
That's why it is ar an im.

BTW: Accusative used in other circumstances as after prepositions (especially as a direct object of a sentence) merged with nominative case. That's why there's a t-prefix in "an t-im" today, no matter if it is subject or object of the sentence.

That's all.
Lars



©Daltaí na Gaeilge