Author |
Message |
Do_chinniúint
Member Username: Do_chinniúint
Post Number: 265 Registered: 01-2007
| Posted on Friday, May 02, 2008 - 07:47 pm: |
|
While playing around with the verb "caith" and its many different meanings: to throw (missile) to wear (shoes, clothes) to wear out to cast (POL. fishing) to spend (money, time) to take (food, MED.) to smoke (cigarettes) to fire (gun, shot) Anyway, I started wondering about other verbs and I have a question if anyone here can answer it... What Irish verb has the most direct meanings? I know "brúigh" is comparable. (Message edited by do_chinniúint on May 02, 2008) |
|
Antaine
Member Username: Antaine
Post Number: 1257 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Friday, May 02, 2008 - 09:12 pm: |
|
Concurrent with the idea that different languages provide not only a new code-system for expressing a fixed set of ideas but a whole new way of experiencing and rationalizing the universe, I have always felt that caith doesn't mean "all those things," but rather means simply a concept that is to expend/wear out/apply wear/consume all rolled into one, to an object. We as modern english speakers simply don't think about those things (throwing, wearing clothes, smoking) in those terms, but that is, in effect what we are doing. I think the fact that we have the one word 'wear' for both wearing out a bearing and wearing a suit of clothes might indicate that once upon a time we did have a common way of looking at it. Our perspective shifted over 1500 years, and - possibly due to such lengthy exposure to english - the native Irish speakers has likely followed suit. I mean, every time we wear a shirt, we are slowly wearing it out...the same with shoes...we are expending them, as we do with tobacco when we smoke, stocks of missile weapons when we throw them in battle (the initial linkage to "throw," also extended to the act of "casting"), and our money when we hit ebay. Don't forget "cur" for words with a plethora of (sometimes conflicting) definitions and usages. |
|
Bearn
Member Username: Bearn
Post Number: 523 Registered: 06-2007
| Posted on Friday, May 02, 2008 - 09:17 pm: |
|
Caithfidh mé mo chathéadaí á caitheamh... le díol
|
|
Do_chinniúint
Member Username: Do_chinniúint
Post Number: 266 Registered: 01-2007
| Posted on Saturday, May 03, 2008 - 01:03 pm: |
|
I find it interesting that it seems to be the verb that we allow to have multiple meanings and not nouns. Not to say a noun can't, but it tends to be more common with verbs. And given the nature of nouns and verbs it's easy to see how people view nouns more concrete and separable, while verbs are harder to describe because there are many different factors that affect a person's experience and therefore, their level of depth of description of the action. But I wonder if it is a hindrance or not to have a lot of verbs with more than two possible meanings in a language? Let us look at just some of the examples out there: ceartaigh- correct/adjust/rectify/redress/chastise caith- throw/wear/cast/spend/smoke bunaigh- establish/found/institute buail- hit/strike/beat/bump brúigh- press/push/bruise/mash/jam aistrigh- change/translate While it looks like Irish has an advantage over English because it can do with six words what takes English 24...I am not so convinced because some of these words do not have the same depth of meaning, and wouldn't this limit Irish's ability to describe these depths with a single word. For instance, say you are a judge and you have to decide if John who is being sued by Dave, is guilty of starting the fight at a party with Dave. There are no police reports, and no witnesses present. Dave is saying John started it, and John is saying that he did not. Both men have a written testimonies from a friend who was with them when the fight broke out. Both are two single sentences followed by their signature and date. If both men say "Bhuail John..." Does that mean John is guilty? Maybe yes and maybe no...these cases come down to what the judge believes, however, if the judge accepts that "buail" at it's basic level means "to hit" then John who accidentally "bumped" into Dave who blew it out of proportion, would be wrongly punished. |
|
Abigail
Member Username: Abigail
Post Number: 758 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Saturday, May 03, 2008 - 02:41 pm: |
|
I think this is just par for the course with any (not too closely related) language pair. You or I would probably notice the multivalency more in Irish because we're native English speakers: we're used to defining Irish words in terms of English ones, not vice versa. Let's play this game the other way though: take - tóg, tabhair, glac, déan, bain think - meas, ceap, síl, smaoinigh, machnaigh spread - oscail, cuimil, scaip, leathnaigh move - gluais, bog, aistrigh, corraigh ask - iarr, impigh, achainigh, fiafraigh, ceistigh (Message edited by Abigail on May 03, 2008) Tá fáilte roimh chuile cheartú!
|
|
Aonghus
Member Username: Aonghus
Post Number: 7051 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Saturday, May 03, 2008 - 02:42 pm: |
|
Do chinnúint, dictionaries are dangerous things, since they do not give usage clearly; the context will clarify. Bhuail John Dave | John struck Dave | Bhuail John in aghaidh Dave | John bumped into Dave | Bhuail John le Dave | John met Dave | Three things matter: Context, context, context. bualadh [ainm briathartha][ainmfhocal firinscneach] buillí a thabhairt do dhuine nó do rud; an gráinne a bhaint de thuí le hinneall buailte; uibheacha no uachtar a ghreadadh go dtagann cúr orthu; preabadh go rialta (croí ag bualadh); múnlú (airgead a bhualadh); seinm (port a bhualadh); leagan (buaileadh breoite é); sroicheadh ar do chúrsa (gur bhuail siad cuan; buail isteach chugainn); troid (bhí bualadh mór ann); bua a fháil (bhuaileamar sa chluiche iad). |
|
Aonghus
Member Username: Aonghus
Post Number: 7052 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Saturday, May 03, 2008 - 02:50 pm: |
|
Ha! I Like Abigail's explanation even better. |
|
|