Táim ag lorg úr gcuid túairimí ar chóras litriugh' na Gaedhilge mar atá, agus mar ba chóir do a bheith, dar libhse.

I'm looking for "yeir" opinions on the Irish spelling system as it is and how ye think it should be.

Is there anything ye found daunting when ye first started learning the language?

I've always been in favour of re-instating the ponnc séimhighthe. I much prefer Dineen's spellings because of etymological reasons, the fact that it better represents the 3 main dialects but also because it's more logical in some ways; (the absolute mess of a situation the verbs are in; adding -(e)ann to present tense verbs but not anymore if they end in -igh).

Also, ar bh'fhéidir le héinne innsint dom, conas an ponnc séimhighthe a dh'fhaghail ar an suidheamh seo???
Could anyone tell me how to get the ponnc séimhighthe on this site?

I'll get into more of my suggestions once the discussion has actually got going, although I could sum it up as a revised version of Dineen's spelling, most definitely swapping (ai) in unstressed sylabbles to (ui) since (ui) is always pronounced as /I/.

So, cad iad úr gcuid túairimí agus moltuí?

What would ye change? What would ye have prefered not to have changed?

Inis dom!

To write in seanachló here, use this code (deleting the space after the \:

\ gaelach{Your Text}

For a nicer result use this (deleting the space after the :
\ font{Gadelica, Your Text}

Tá ana-ḃáiḋ agam le sean-ċlóḋ agus le sean-litriuġaḋ na Gaeḋilge. Aontuiġim leat gurb é an sean-litriuġad an litriuġaḋ is cirte, aċt baḋ ċóir dom á adṁáil go ḃfuil a lán daoine ann ná cuireann aon tsuim ann ar a gcuireaḋ sé fearg dá mbaininn-se úsáid de go minic.

Ḃuel, i dtaoḃ an litriġṫe is feárr, déarfainn-se go ḃfuil na foirmeaċa atá le faġḃáil i ḃfoclóir an Duinníniġ ceart, de'n ċuid is mó, ar a laiġead, aċt b'ḟeárr liom roinnt aṫruiġṫe a ḋéanamh ċóṁ maiṫ: baḋ ċóir sc- do sgríoḃaḋ le sg- (mar ṡampla: sgríoḃaim); nuair a ḃfuil ai ann, aċt fuaimniġṫear mar i iad, do sgríoḃfainn-se le ui iad (borb, buirbe) nó le oi (clann, cloinne) de réir usáide traidisiúnta; aċt ní ḃeaḋ sé ceart moltaí do sgríoḃaḋ le uí, toisg guta fada a ḃeiṫ ann. Nuair a ḃfuil consan déadaċ ann, b'ḟeárr liom aí do sgríoḃaḋ le aiḋe (mar ṡampla, madraḋ, madraiḋe, aċt bosga, bosgaí.)

I love the old script and old spelling, and agree entirely that the old spelling is the correct spelling, but I have to recognise that there are many people who are not interested in it and who would be annoyed by seeing it constantly used.

As far as the best spelling is concerned, the forms in Dinneen's dictionary are for the most part right, but I would make some changes: sc- should be written sg- (sgríobhaim); when there is an -ai- that is pronounced i, it should be written ui or oi according to the traditional spelling (borb, buirbe; but clann, cloinne). It would not be right to write moltaí with uí, as this was not the traditional spelling, and in any case it is a long i and not a short i that stands there (the fada on the i shows the pronunciation well enough, so this is not the same situation as with buirbe). When there is a dental consonant in the singular, the aí can be spelled aidhe (madradh, madraidhe - owing to the dh in the spelling - but bosga, bosgaí).

(the absolute mess of a situation the verbs are in; adding -(e)ann to present tense verbs but not anymore if they end in -igh)

Honestly, I don't find this confusing. ighe > í is a pretty straightforward simplification to keep in mind. I don't think of the rule as "add -(e)ann for some verbs and -(a)íonn for others" but as "add -(e)ann to all verbs and then simplify ighe". It's the same when it comes to the genitive of nouns.

If I had to suggest any change it would be making use of more supradialectal spellings. For instance, inniu is a thorn in my side because it's so misleading to a Munster speaker. CO preserves anias and such so why not keep aniugh as well?

Traditional spelling is for me just that - whatever was traditional is right. It would be possible to spell "night" as "nite", but many people would regard that as "dumbing down" - there is simply no need to simplify such things given an adequate education system. Scottish Gaelic manages fine with a more traditional orthography.

So, it is not a question of making things logical. Sg- may be illogical if you're not using sd- and sb-, but it was always insisted on in Munster - and I found in the Cork Gaeltacht, the older native speakers still insist that sc- is wrong. (Well, I found one person of that view at least!) Basically, languages are illogical - and the true glory of French is its orthography. Actually, the same could be said of English too - and Irish.

Dinneen violated the instructions of the Irish Texts Society when he wrote sc- in his dictionary - and they eventually had to accept his fait accompli. But prior to his dictionary, most scholars preferred sg-.

However, you can only go so far in linguistic traditionalism in Irish. Do you write íosfainn or íosainn, given that the f is not pronounced and was not originally there? And if you write íosainn, what do you do in the second person singular íosfá, where the f is pronounced, although this form was once rather íosthá?

What do you do with áirithe? Áirighthe or áirmhithe? It seems nice to get the mh in (see áireamh) but probably spurious too...

Domhnaillín

Well, I teach young children Irish (6 years and up) and when it comes to the verbs in the present tense I write out the table of endings;

-(a)im I'd recommend -(u)im
-(e)ann tú
-(e)ann sé/sí
-(a)imíd I'd recommend -(u)im
-(e)ann sibh
-(e)ann siad/(a)id I'd recommend -(u)id
-t(e)ar

Now obviously they have no problem with single sylabble words, Cuir/Ól/Ith, etc.

Obviously verbs ending in -igh are equally easy to read with -eann after them.

Téigheann, léigheann etc.
I'm in Kerry so obviously we'd pronounce the -igh as -ig in the imperative but I easily overcome that by telling the children that -igh in the middle of words is like a y, and voila! Of course, in Kerry it's not pronounced as a Y where it is the North.

Unfortunately the standardised form has to go one more un-necessary step further and change Téigheann to Téann.
Now, téann does not represent the Southern or Northern pronunciation since in the South if we were to read that we'd say "tiann" because é /e:/ before broad consonants is pronounced as í /i:/. In the north, they pronounce téann as the pre-standardised spelling would suggest, as téyeann /te:j@n/.

So then, obviously, the spelling of the verb in this case makes it more complicated to teach. More importantly, the traditional spelling which represented ALL THREE living dialects was reduced to a form which only represents one. Now, I totally agree with you in trying to use traditional supra-dialectical forms, but if you favour aniugh, then why not téigheann and léigheann?

And by extention, -ighe being reduced to í does not represent the Northern pronunciation where the schwa is actually pronounced.

Anloingseach,

what do you think of Laoire for Laoghaire? Aoi is /i:/ in Munster, but Laoghaire is with /e:/, because there was no "aoi" cluster in the original spelling - so Laoire is misleading. Also ar fuaid an tsaoil - tsaoil is /e:/ because the original spelling was tsaoghail. There are quite a few words where similar considerations obtain!

Are you in a Gaelscoil or a National School where English is the main language? Are you near the Gaeltacht?

quote:

Traditional spelling is for me just that - whatever was traditional is right. It would be possible to spell "night" as "nite", but many people would regard that as "dumbing down" - there is simply no need to simplify such things given an adequate education system.

One may ask the reason to even spell something "traditionally" if there is a adequate education system. Night > nite or nait is quite logical, since English DID undergo a wide vowel shift which has not been reflected in spelling. For practical reasons, a reform isn't happening, but it is needed to restore a greater consistancy to the spelling. Overall that would be a boon to the learner, but again it won't happen now.

As for Irish spelling, the need was there. Surely people can point out reforms that are problematic, but I don't think there is cause to go back completely to spelling circa 1930, except perhaps personal fancy.

I am beginning to see a strain in some of these posts which reminds me of the kinds of conversations I'd have with conlang enthusiasts. It may be interesting but I don't expect results, especially in the field of Irish fluency.

http://www.rickharrison.com/language/farewell.html

quote:

Now, téann does not represent the Southern or Northern pronunciation since in the South if we were to read that we'd say "tiann" because é /e:/ before broad consonants is pronounced as í /i:/.

I thought it was [ia]. Or is that sort of breaking of the vowel specific to Muskerry?

In any case, there are exceptions to this rule even under the old spelling, e.g. léann, dinnéar. [Again, speaking from the standpoint of Cork Irish; the case may be different in Kerry.] If you have to learn them already, adding one more to the pile isn't much of a burden.

The point about ighe being pronounced differently in Northern dialects is well taken, however. It's just rather annoying to have four letters where, for my purposes, one would do. I'm not really wild about returning to forms like neamhthaidhbhseach.

Yes, but Domhnaillín, you must have searched long and hard to find a word like neamhthaidhbhseach. To be quite honest, the mh and th remain - you are only talking about the dh being deleted here. Well, if the spelling had to be reformed, I prefer Shán Ó Cuív's Leitriu shimplí to anything else.

Put it in seanchló, and it doesn't seem too bad (and remembering that neamh- was hyphened in the old script):

neaṁ-ṫaiḋḃseaċ

There was a post on GAEILGE B once ca. 2007, where an Irish family posted about their grandfather dying. I think he was on Tory island, or at least the Donegal Gaeltacht, and he never accepted the new script, the new spelling or the CO, and they wanted help in putting his grave inscription into the Irish he would have recognised. I can't find that message now. I've done countless wordsearches, but can't find the actual post.

Thanks David, I'll give it a go, hope the Gaelic font works.

Well I think we have to admit that traditional spelling had it's faults aswell. We have to settle on a regular pronunciation for vowels.

(ai) is the biggest problem.
It has 4 (at least) different pronunciations, 3 of which are regular depending on context;
1. (ai) is pronounced as in mAn after D N T L S R, eg raic, tais, etc
2. (ai) is pronounced as in whAt when following any letter except DNTLSR but also before a slender l.
baile, cailín, etc
3. (ai) is pronounced as in skY /ai/ before a sonorant "nn, ng, m, ll" but also before a "y" sound /j/, in first sylabbles, except when followed by a vowel.
caill, faill, aimsiú, etc.

Now however, presently, (ai) is pronounced /I/ in unstressed sylabbles. Now I'd recommend respelling this (ai) as (ui) so Samhain would be Samhuin, taobh an bhóthair would be taobh an bhóthuir, ceannaigheann would be ceannuigheann}.

Now you may ask why bother.
Well, it's an underlying rule in Irish which applies to nearly all words except for dialectal mono-sylabbic words at times.
The plural of ball is now spelt baill which if pronounced as written would be /bail'/. It should rhyme with caill, faill, etc. Dineen spells it "buill" and it is pronounced as such. Also, "laige" is pronounced "luige". I could give a thousand more examples given the time. On a purely orthographical basis, the rule which is happening and which I propose to represent in the spelling is when "I" is inserted after "A", "AI" changes to "UI". This would also help the vast majority of foreign learners whose first language isn't English since the digraph (ai) is pronounced as /ai/ as in skY.

Now, we are all also English speakers so unfortunately we aren't horrified when a word is pronounced differently then the actual spelling would suggest. However, we should allow this to occur in Irish. Baill, should rhyme with "caill, faill, etc", yet illogically it doesn't. "Laige" should have the same vowel sound as "raic" yet illogically it doesn't. The ai>ui rule, is a logical improvement.

This rule extends to aí/uí aswell. I'm trying to teach my Spanish friend Irish so I became quite aware of the problems of Irish spelling since Spanish spelling is so regular although at the cost of etymological loss.

Aí would suggest the pronunciation /ai/ as in Spanish and many other languages. Madraí if spelt as I suggest, madruí, the word would have a nearly identical pronunciation to the very regular Spanish pronunciation.


So, to lay down a set pronunciation of the following digraphs but also as their short forms (ai,ei,i,oi,ui) before tense sonorants (nn,ng,mm,ll) and "y" sounds /j/;
- aí, always pronounced as /ai/ as in caighdeán

Useful for loan words which don't etymologically have a -gh/dh. Staíre, instead of staighre mar shampla.

- eí, as in eísteacht /ai/ in Cork Irish

This is also beneficial to Kerry speakers when writing dialectally since there a few words in the CO that are spelt with an é but we pronounced it as eí. Éirighe as eírighe , mar shampla.

-í, no change here.

- oí

Unfortunately because short "oi" has strictly two (but actually three) pronunciations as "ei", "o" but also frequently "ui", this digraph isn't very accurate in describing pronunciation. "Oí" should represent aí /ai/ and uí /i:/.

uí, as í /i:/ after a broad consonant.

Apply those strictly and spelling becomes alot more regular.

So moltaí should indeed be spelt moltuí, hahahaha.

OK! I'll leave you to your system. I can't really help someone devise their own private spelling system. All I can say is, "Enjoy your hobby!"

quote:

Sg- may be illogical if you're not using sd- and sb-, but it was always insisted on in Munster - and I found in the Cork Gaeltacht, the older native speakers still insist that sc- is wrong.

Maybe, but in Old and Middle Irish, people would write "sc-" and not "sg-"... so if we follow your "the more old the better", sg- is wrong...

quote:

(Well, I found one person of that view at least!) Basically, languages are illogical - and the true glory of French is its orthography.

its glory... for some French people. However, most French people (I mean, even native speakers) make many mistakes in spelling, even educated people (even school teachers sometimes!). And it's the cause of many psychological complexes (paradoxically, French people tend to think that you're not educated nor even clever, sometimes, if you make spelling mistakes!).
Maybe written French wouldn't look nice if its spelling were more phonetic, but it would simplify many things in people's life.
The Irish spelling, though, is logical once you've learnt how it works. The CO spelling, as I often say here, has many inconsistencies and some words or forms should be spelt in another way (the old spelling of these words or forms would be ok most of the time).

Sorry, lads do ye just have msn? This is getting very complicated, hahahaha.

SeanW, I don't mean to sound agressive but that's a completely defeatist attitude. The amount of languages that go through spelling reforms, even in the last century is testament to how possible and achievable they are. You may be aware that they're currently re-assessing the caighdeán so a spelling change, beag nó mo, is coming.

Domhnaillín or is that Domhnuillín...
Jaysus, this is confusing, hahaha.
Léann (as in learning is it?). Well again, the transition from Latin was
legendum > legend > léghend > léigheand >léigheann > (and now) léann so you see léann doesn't break the rule, it's just the CO doesn't represent it's historic spelling. So yeah, léann is no exception.

Nor is dinnéar...
I didn't want to get into too much detail before but yeah;
In Kerry, at least, é /e:/ before a broad consonant in the FIRST SYLLABLE ONLY of a word is pronounced as í /i:/. This rule doesn't apply after a word which begins with R.

David
I still can't get the Gaelic font, could you explain it to me please, hahahaha. Also I'd like to discuss Shan Ó Cuív's spellings, although I don't agree with most of it.

Cách!!!

It would be better to discuss the amount we have so far on MSN before we discuss anymore I think...

Contact me at

It'll be easier besides the four of us talking crossways to each other.

I don't know how many of you are actually from or living in Ireland but anyway, you may or not be aware that the Caighdeán Oifigeamhuil is currently under review and they're looking to people to send suggestions so it is quite apt that we're discussing spelling reform.

David
Obviously Séamus Daltún's was more successful with his "private spelling system" than I could hope to be since his "private spelling system" was accepted as the official spelling that we now know.

Ard-fhear dob eadh é!

Anloingseach, Would you happen to have the contact information where we can send suggestions?

As for changes, I think there will be a greater review of the grammatical portion than the spelling portion. I imagine the CO will come out in a new edition with wider acceptability of dialectical forms of high frequency/core words and grammatical structures. There will probably be some statements also reaffirming that the regional forms are not incorrect. This will be followed by a new edition of the Christian Brothers grammar I am sure as well. I am also sure that the debate and complaints will continue. At this point, since the big reform changes starting in the 30s, you're going to see trends following use instead following a veritable fiat as was necessary to get everyone over to the new spelling and "on the same page".

Anloingseach,
I would share your criticisms of the C.O. spelling, more or less.
The "standard" found in Dinneen's dictionary, while not faultless, is undoubtedly superior to the current C.O. and the only real aternative to everyone who rejects the C.O. orthography devising their own personal spelling systems.

quote:

Is there anything ye found daunting when ye first started learning the language?

In the early stages of learning Irish I had some difficulty getting to grips with the various forms of 2nd dec. verbs ending in "-igh".
Very soon after getting my first copy of Dinnen's masterpiece I wrote the traditional forms out on a sheet of paper and for the first time it really made sense to me, it "clicked".
There's beauty in the order and simple logic of the traditional system too which the C.O. spelling reforms broke up.

E.g.
Tosnuigh
Tosnuigheann
Tosnuighim
Tosnuighir etc.
Tosnóchaidh or perhaps Tosnóghaidh (analogous with "codólaidh" etc.(older 2nd declension forms))
Thosnuigheas
Thosnóchadh
Tosnuighthe


I would alter the traditional system in two ways:

(1)"Tosnugh" as the verbal noun instead of the admittedly cumbersome "tosnughadh" (analogous with "cuir" > "cur" etc.)

(2)Instead of the traditional "th" in 2nd person plural and autonamous conditional forms I would use "f" which (a) is analogous with the other declensions (b represents pronunciation in Munster, and (c) does not conflict with the pronunciation in Connacht and Ulster ("f" = /h/ in verbs is familiar to all). So:
Thosnóchfá
Thosnóchfaí

James, sorry for delay in replying

Great minds think alike,
I agree with you totally.
But I'd have Tósnóghuidh, etc, instead of tósnóghAidh...and I'd place a comma after verbals nouns ending in -ugh, to represent the unwritten -adh.

Ní thuigim an tarna poinnte atá agut , ámhthách. Nách litrightear le "f" na laethanta so é ach go háirighthe?

James_murphy & (Unregistered Guest)

This issue of the old, older, and oldest spellings has been around since 1893 when the Revival of Irish became a mass movement. The few scholars who survived the disastrous destruction of the old Gaelic order in the 17th Century (Battle of Kinsale, 1603, to the Battle of the Boyne, 1690, and all between 1641, 1649, etc) who cherished the inherited knowledge from the Bardic Schools probably lamented the passing of their "Latin" i.e. the formal Irish they had used to distinguish themselves from the lower classes and thus maintain their lofty noble status, as ordinary everyday speech came to be used in Church sermons, the only public place where Irish was used formally. (I know of An Dámhscoil and Na Cúirteanna Filíochta)

Those who actually use Irish nowadays have decided on the modern spellings. Who? Every teacher in every classroom; every Civil Servant responding to a letter from Seán & Síle Citizen. Every Gaeltacht youngster applying for a job. Everyone hoping to sell a school textbook in Irish. Of those who use Irish every day - i.e. those who actually write in Irish - only people of my age and older are tempted to write in the "old" script and the "older" spelling. Please note that I am not referring to dialect variations which are most welcome in informal writing and literature, representation of traditional Gaeltacht speech especially: canathaobh instead of cad ina thaobh; tuige instead of cad chuige; chúns instead of "a chomhfhad is a"; scríte instead of scríofa; ar fháirnis pint etc etc.

The collective decision on how we should write Irish was taken almost a hundred years ago. There is no going back.

Placenames perhaps. I'd prefer Daingean Uí Chúis to An Daingean (whoever Ó Cúis was?) and Cuan Bhanbha instead of Cuan Bhanú. That's going too far and unnecessarily so.

Surnames can be a matter of choice if English is your dominant working language and Irish is only a hobby. Ó Flatharta could be written Ó Flaithbheartaigh I suppose if you wanted to reveal the meaning but think how long it would take you to write the names of the under-tens hurling team for a GAA match.

Suppose we resisted the changes that are taking place in English at present: American versus Irish/English spellings & abbreviated textese. How easy it will be for a future generation to get rid of ~ough and replace it with today's pronunciation: altho, trof, ruf, laf, etc Already those of us who write "colour" in real life write "color" for the computer.

By all means explain the grammatical changes by reference to the earlier spelling but don't suggest that they should be used again in ordinary correspondence. Showing how "an bhaintreach" becomes "páistí na baintrí" by reference to the older spelling "baintrighe" is helpful to those who are learning Irish with their eyes. Those of us who learnt with our ears do not require such explanations unless to confirm what we already know.

quote:

Yes, but Domhnaillín, you must have searched long and hard to find a word like neamhthaidhbhseach. To be quite honest, the mh and th remain - you are only talking about the dh being deleted here.

Actually, to be quite honest they don't:
neamhthaidhbhseach -> neafaiseach

Taidhgín
aointaím leat. Níl fadhb ar bith agam leis an nua-litriú - b'fheidir mar tá sé agam ar feadh 60 bliain.
B'fheidir go bhfuil sé nios deachra do daoine atá ag foghlaim ó leabhair?

Ní bainim úsáid as an Cló Gaelach (litriú?) ach ag scríobh le peann - ní maith liom na "fonts" a fheicim ar an Bórd seo (le litreacha mor le séimhiú - tá siad deachar le léamh domsa)

eadaoin

A Thaidhgín,
Preference for some, not all, features of the traditional orthography has nothing (for me anyway) to do with the fact that it's simply older than the current standard.
Dismissing argument against the C.O. orthography as being based on nothing more than that is an unfair misrepresentation.

You mention the "ordinary, everyday speech". Here are some examples of living Gaedhealtacht speech and their written representations in the "traditional" and C.O. standards:

/tra:j/, /tra:g'/ - Tráigh : Trá
/N'i:ə/ - Nighe : Ní
/dl'i:uw/ - Dligheadh : Dlí
/L'è:uw/ - Leaghadh : Leá
/Nu:i:əxt/ - Nuaidheacht : Nuacht

Which system is closer?


On top of this is the regularity and simplicity of the traditional system in comparison with the C.O. with, amongst other defects, it's range of disappearing and re-appearing letters and diacritics.

You also mention proper nouns. I vehemently believe that these should never have been touched. Of course, if an individual wishes to use a form like Ó Flatharta for himself that's his choice.
I find it especially absurd when modern writers take it upon themselves to "caighdeánise" the names of people now dead, e.g. "Aogán" Ó Rathaile & "Toirealach Ó Cearúlláin".
As for placenames, pathetic fragments of ancient names like "An Lú" and "An Mhí" speak for themselves!

quote:

Those who actually use Irish nowadays have decided on the modern spellings. Who? Every teacher in every classroom; every Civil Servant responding to a letter from Seán & Síle Citizen. Every Gaeltacht youngster applying for a job. Everyone hoping to sell a school textbook in Irish.

Of course people will generally make use of the prescribed orthography - particularly in situations like those you describe (I make use of it myself where necessary).
That obviously couldn't be taken as meaning that they're aware of, and have spent time comparing, the different systems and came to the conclusion that the C.O. one is superior. Many, if not most, people today are probably unaware of the spelling reform - certainly of the details of the changes which were made.

quote:

The collective decision on how we should write Irish was taken almost a hundred years ago. There is no going back.

It was?! That's news to me!

(Message edited by James Murphy on May 10, 2010)

quote:

I find it especially absurd when modern writers take it upon themselves to "caighdeánise" the names of people now dead, e.g. "Aogán" Ó Rathaile & "Toirealach Ó Cearúlláin".

It depends what your primary purposes of using Irish are: communication, hobby, torture ...