I feel like I should know how to use atá and go bhfuil but I am unsure which is used where when it comes in the middle of a sentence.

I know after "go" bhfuil is used

but after "a" you can use bhfuil or join it to tá.

I am just wondering what the difference is.

thanks in advance.

Croga, "atá" vs "bhfuil" is all about "direct" vs "indirect relatives". The difference will be explained in whatever grammar book you're using.

Take the following two examples:

Sin é an fear atá ag obair sa mhonarcha = That is the man who is working in the factory

Sin é an fear a bhfuil a mhac ag obair sa mhonarcha = That is the man whose son is working in the factory

The first has a direct relative clause. It's referring directly to the man and saying what it is he does. There's a direct connection between working in the factory and the man.

The second has an indirect relative clause. It too is referring to the man but indirectly via the reference to his son, who is in fact working in the factory - not the man. In other words, there is an indirect connection between the man and the state of working in the factory.

The easiest way for a native English speaker to get his or her head around all this is by remembering that in Irish, any sentence with "whose", or "by whom", "with whom", "on whom", "of whom", "over whom", "through whom", "under whom", "by whom", "beside whom" or "over which", "in which", "through which" etc will take an indirect relative clause.

Preposition + whom is rarely used in spoken English nowadays, rarely in Ireland at least, and we normally use "who" and then tag on the preposition at the end:

That's the fellow John used to live with

as opposed to more formal English:

That's the fellow with whom John used to live

Either way they mean the exact same thing and if you translate them into Irish you will need an indirect relative clause.

Sin é an fear a/go mbíodh Seán in aontíos leis

Note that in Munster the indirect relative particle "a" becomes "go".

To add to what Carmanach said,

"go bhfuil" is used as a conjunction, for example:
Déir an fear go bhfuil tart ort = The man said that you are thirsty

Carmanach already explained that "atá" is used when what follows is directly related to what came before and "a bhfuil" is used when the relationship is indirect.

"go bhfuil" is not a relative clause like "atá" or "a bhfuil". It's just a conjunction, it doesn't refer to anything that came before it in the previous clause.

In the example above "You are thristy" isn't really providing information on "The man", unlike Carmanach's examples where information is provided about the man (direct) or his son (indirect).

quote:

"go bhfuil" is not a relative clause like "atá" or "a bhfuil". It's just a conjunction

It's both in Munster which is why I pointed it out.

Carmanach, your (otherwise) fine explanation presupposes that native English speakers understand the difference between "whose" and "who's" (and "its"/"it's") - plenty of examples on this site from distinguished contributors who seem not to - or at least can't spell. (Gan dearmad a dheanamh ar "that" vs "who/m").

Hugo, one would presume that most native English speakers would know the difference between "whose" and "who's". "It's" vs "its" less so, perhaps, but that English speakers mightn't have fantastic spelling is largely out of the Irish teacher's hands. One has to assume that people can spell English words correctly.

I believe I've already explained the difference between "that" and "whom" above, Hugo.

quote:

It's both in Munster which is why I pointed it out.

Oh yes, apologies. "go bhfuil" has both the indirect relative and the conjunctive use in Munster. I just wanted to explain the conjunctive use, because it really confused me originally.

Wonderful explaination, gentlemen. GRMA.

quote:

Hugo, one would presume that most native English speakers would know the difference between "whose" and "who's". "It's" vs "its" less so, perhaps, but that English speakers mightn't have fantastic spelling is largely out of the Irish teacher's hands. One has to assume that people can spell English words correctly.

Regrettably, that is not so, at least in America. One of my personal peeves is "there" instead of "their" (let alone the difference between "its" and "it's"). It may be because they sound the same, and an appalling number of people are barely literate here.

Along a similar vein, just the other morning I heard a newscaster say "moderate downpour" which, by definition, is an oxymoron. And this was on TV. But, on the bright side, my son remarked "Mom, did you hear that moron? Pun intended." So I have hope for a part of the future generation...

(Message edited by driftwood814 on January 20, 2011)

(Message edited by driftwood814 on January 20, 2011)

ACK! Explanation*

My English spelling has gone to hell since I started studying Irish....

quote:

One of my personal peeves is "there" instead of "their" ...

The three theres were drilled into me in youth. I still mix them up, not consciously, but just not proof reading my writing. If that's the only mistake in someone's writing, I don't think their level of literacy is bad. This points out to me more a fault in the English system of spelling. People will mix these three up, but they won't misspell a word like satisfaction.

quote:

oxymoron ... "Mom, did you hear that moron? Pun intended."

Or, as a touché, did you know that the correct pronunciation is /ak - SIM - er - ON/!

Perhaps I am simply jaded. The bulk of my job consists reading correspondence from the general public, and reviewing/editing responses to that. The there/their/they're thing is somewhat understandable, likewise the you're/your error (and the extra "c" almost everyone puts in "exercise"!). But a depressingly large proportion of it contains errors that clearly show many people don't even know there is a difference. "Past" instead of "passed" is one example. Actually, perhaps "literate" was not the correct word...

quote:

Or, as a touché, did you know that the correct pronunciation is /ak - SIM - er - ON/!

No, I was not aware of that. I've never heard it pronounced that way and never had occasion to look it up. I will mention that to him and watch him go all OCD trying to verify or refute it! LOL

Don't take it too seriously. Only the pedants pronounce it that way!

quote:

Sin é an fear atá ag obair sa mhonarcha = That is the man who is working in the factory

Sin é an fear a bhfuil a mhac ag obair sa mhonarcha = That is the man whose son is working in the factory

So does the same go for ?:

Sin é an fear a bhí ag obair sa mhonarcha = That is the man who was working in the factory

Sin é an fear a raibh a mhac ag obair sa mhonarcha = That is the man whose son was working in the factory

Sin é an fear a bheith ag obair sa mhonarcha = That is the man who will be working in the factory

....any difference in the verb for direct and indirect object in the future ?

"a bheidh ag obair"
"a mbeidh mac leis ag obair"

quote:

a mbeidh mac leis ag obair

Also a mbeidh a mhac ag obair, right?

In the factory - sa mhonarchain (fifth-declension noun alert!).

Driftwood814, have you noticed how past participles in -ed are often missed out? At least in British English, it is definitely "skimmed milk", and "skim milk" doesn't make any sense to me, but many people do write that. It probably reflects their pronunciation, as the -ed is elided.

Another one I can't stand (and I believe it has US origins) is the use of the conditional for the subjunctive. "If I were there/if I had been there, I would have said something" becomes, in many people's mouths, "if I would have been there" - which doesn't mean anything in English, as far as I know.

Driftwood, I do find silly mistakes creeping in when I am tired. I don't think "literate" it the correct word for people who write "there" for "their"; it's more a case that they couldn't care less (yes - notice that - couldn't care less, not "could care less"), a basic lack of standards.

CorkIrish & Driftwood814

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html

Also try:

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage

Some that you may like, and some you may not. For instance, good as an adverb, as in How are you? I am good, goes back to the 13th century. Also the subjunctive has been dying a slow death quite naturally even among the intellectuals. Skim milk goes back to 1596.

(Message edited by seánw on January 20, 2011)

Seánw, so what? Many mistakes are of long-standing.

I am wondering why we don't say "I am good". Is it for theological reasons? Because only God is good?

I suppose it is because I take a conservative view on language and grammar that I am learning Cork Irish!

Actually, "good" isn't being used as an adverb in "I am good". "To be" is a linking verb so you use adjectives with it rather than adverbs. For example, you wouldn't say "Jim is quickly". Interestingly, you can't really say something like "I am well" unless you mean "I am not ill" (or that general idea) and in this case "well" isn't functioning as an adverb but as an adjective. This is a common misconception, I think, because it's a widespread belief that verbs can only have adverbs and so hypercorrection occurs.

quote:

Also "a mbeidh a mhac ag obair", right?

To me this would imply he has only one son. But it is correct.

quote:

To me this would imply he has only one son. But it is correct.

Good point, Aonghus. You are of course right.

quote:

In the factory - sa mhonarchain (fifth-declension noun alert!).

That's fine for PUL but not in use in any Gaeltacht nowadays I imagine, almost certainly not in Corca Dhuibhne where one would be more likely to hear "thá sé ag obair sa factory"! Ó Sé says that while the dative is used in CD, its usage is restricted and that it cannot be said to be a fully functioning part of the language.

quote:

For instance, good as an adverb, as in How are you? I am good, goes back to the 13th century.

That's interesting. I've read that American English retains a number of features which have died out in Hiberno-English for example. "The fall" instead of "autumn" is one such feature, "autumn" being borrowed from French "automne".

Americans say that food is "good" where we would say "nice" or "lovely". Is that an archaism in American English or a more modern use of the word? Also Americans say "Are you good to go?" whereas we would say "Are you ready to go?", "Are you right?". I'm not sure whether an Englishman would use "right" for "ready" as we do in Ireland.

quote:

Along a similar vein, just the other morning I heard a newscaster say "moderate downpour" which, by definition, is an oxymoron.

Well, if it was just this one person saying "moderate downpour", you could indeed say that such usage is an oxymoron and an "error" on the part of that individual. However, if many people would say it that way, then you would have to ask what exactly these people mean by the word "downpour", apart from its dictionary definition? Is it at all possible that the meaning of "downpour" has shifted slightly from meaning "a heavy fall of rain" to "a fall of rain"? Perhaps the individual is referring to the fact that rainfall varies in intensity? With some heavy falls of rain being considerably heavier than others?

Another apparent oxymoron is "cute fool", who is anything but a fool.

"Military intelligence" and "Microsoft works" are my favourite [apparent] oxymorons.

The Americans/British talking of "foreign fighters" in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not quite an oxymoron, but more an example of hypocracy.

"The Coalition of the Willing" as opposed to, er, the "Coalition of the Unwilling"?

I'll stop now in case I ignite a flame war :o)

quote:

To me this would imply he has only one son. But it is correct.

Yes! I've read that about friends too. Someone would say mo chara and it implies that they only have one friend!

quote:

Actually, "good" isn't being used as an adverb in "I am good".

Yes, I misstated. Sorry. People complain about this use, at least in my neck of the woods. How are you? Good. People will correct you and recommend well. This, however, goes back to the 13th cent at least.

quote:

Seánw, so what? Many mistakes are of long-standing.

Well there is a debate whether they are mistakes at all in the first place, and then there is the debate about when things actually become part of the language. Your enthusiasm for dialect and archaic uses I thought would appreciate so called mistakes which go back centuries.

Carmanach, I wouldn't use right in that sense. I might say right ready once in a while. Definitely ready or good to go. I think it goes back to the dialects which spread to our nations. For example, the south uses reckon, but I would use think or guess. Food is usually good or tasty to me.

jumbo shrimp

quote:

People complain about this use, at least in my neck of the woods. How are you? Good. People will correct you and recommend well.

Eh?? "How are you? Well." I would never think of saying that. "Not too bad", "Fine", "Good", "Grand" is what I'd say.

quote:

I might say right ready once in a while.

I haven't heard that one before.

quote:

For example, the south uses reckon, but I would use think or guess.

I would say "think" or "reckon" but not "guess" - unless I was actually guessing - but I imagine I picked "reckon" up from watching American tv shows.

Another word that is interesting is "pants": in England and also in Dublin, "pants" are underpants but where I come from "pants" are always trousers and never boxer shorts or knickers. And that has nothing to do with watching American television because even the oldest people use "pants" for trousers! Also for me, "college" always means university but in England "college" is some sort of secondary school (high school).

My now deceased aunt lived for many years in Louisiana and she used to say about the food here "Mmmm mmmm. It's soooo gooooood" in her southern U.S. drawl. It was the first time I had heard food being described as "good" and not "nice".

quote:

Driftwood814, have you noticed how past participles in -ed are often missed out? At least in British English, it is definitely "skimmed milk", and "skim milk" doesn't make any sense to me, but many people do write that. It probably reflects their pronunciation, as the -ed is elided.

Yes, I notice things like that. I am not certain it has to do with pronunciation, however. In America, that’s how it’s labeled. Also “lite” beer and “nite” lights, “ketchup,” and a slew of others. The media and advertising have a huge influence, and this is, to some degree, reflected in our nation’s language skills (or lack thereof).

quote:

Driftwood, I do find silly mistakes creeping in when I am tired. I don't think "literate" it the correct word for people who write "there" for "their"; it's more a case that they couldn't care less (yes - notice that - couldn't care less, not "could care less"), a basic lack of standards.

I most definitely noticed you phrased it properly! I used to nail my children on that particular irritant regularly when they were younger. I also make mistakes, which is why I prefer to use a spelling/grammar checker. Not because I am too lazy to look things up (the dictionary is actually my favorite book), but because I frequently don’t see the error when I proofread my own work. I know what I meant to say, so my brain just seems to see what was intended, rather than what is there. Or possibly because I read so rapidly (800 words per minute or so in English) that I don’t really register each individual word? I don’t know. I do notice, however, that I only tend to make such mistakes when I’m typing. Almost never when I hand-write something. Perhaps my fingers are dyslexic?

quote:

I am wondering why we don't say "I am good".

That is a common response in my area. “How are you?” “I’m good, thanks. And yourself?”

quote:

Also Americans say "Are you good to go?" whereas we would say "Are you ready to go?"

While we do say “good to go” we do not really use it in lieu of “ready to go.” I don’t think I’ve ever heard it used with regard to people, at least not in the sense of being ready to depart. “Is your car fixed yet?” “Yeah, it’s good to go.” That one’s hard to explain.

quote:

"Military intelligence" and "Microsoft works" are my favourite [apparent] oxymorons.

LMAO! I had forgotten all about “Microsoft works”! Some disillusioned souls might add “happily married” to the list.

quote:

Well, if it was just this one person saying "moderate downpour", you could indeed say that such usage is an oxymoron and an "error" on the part of that individual. However, if many people would say it that way, then you would have to ask what exactly these people mean by the word "downpour", apart from its dictionary definition? Is it at all possible that the meaning of "downpour" has shifted slightly from meaning "a heavy fall of rain" to "a fall of rain"? Perhaps the individual is referring to the fact that rainfall varies in intensity? With some heavy falls of rain being considerably heavier than others?

That may be, but as far as I know “downpour” doesn’t really have degrees. LOL, as my father used to say “When you’re sitting in s**t , what difference how deep?”

quote:

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html

He said “dialectical”!!! I will definitely be reading more of that tonight! GRMA, SeánW!

“When you’re sitting in s**t , what difference how deep?”


once it gets above your chin, the difference becomes clear...........real soon. lol

quote:

“When you’re sitting in s**t , what difference how deep?”

Nice one! I'll make a note of it. Cheers.

College - Carmanach, this doesn't mean secondary high school in England (we don't say "high school", but that's another question). College is where you go from 16 to 18 before applying to university. Further Education College - I believe they're called Rangers' Colleges in Ireland? Correct me if I got that wrong!

How about free gift with purchase as an oxymoron?