zompist bboard

_________________
Nokinen poika

Ok, I clearly didn't explain very well. I do that a lot!

As for why the "?" and "ag" merge - that's just a quirk of the language.


As I'm off to bed now, I'll just give the answers here; I'll reply more tomorrow:

1. T? m? ? l?amh. (No change on l?amh, it can't lenite.)
2. T? m? ? buaileadh. (No change on buaileadh because S?le is FEM.)
3. T? m? ? chanadh. (S?imhi?, because amhr?n is MASC)
4. T? m? ? n-ithe. (ur?, because sceall?ga is PLURAL)
5. T? m? ? ph?inte?il.
6. T? m? ? mar?.
7. T? m? ? scr?obh
8. T? m? ? n-oscailt.


It will help if you remember that the "ag X" forms are really nouns. "Buaileadh" is a noun from the verb "buail". They're called verbal nouns.

(More tomorrow)


EDIT:
It isn't Dative; it's accusative. The deleted nouns, replaced with pronouns, were all Direct Objects of the verb.

Oh! A literal translation of "T? m? ? mar?", for example, would be:
"I am at_her killing".
Does that make sense? Becuase it is "her" killing (i.e. the killing belongs to her), you mark the noun (this time it's a verbal noun, but that's still a noun) as you would any other possession.




[Caveat: I've realised that my teaching skills suck; apologies]

Yes. I understand alot that you say. You don't have to explain all those things to me... Just that I hadn't gotten very well that "ag+pronoun = ?".

Are there other prepositions whihc merge like that? Like ar?

The nouns are in genitive though? Because if a noun takes lenition and is masculine, then it's genitive, no?

T? s? ? foghlaim - he's learning it (it=fem)
T? s? ? dh?anamh - he's making it (it=masc)

Wouldn't it?
And also plural take ?r?, but I don't know if that is anything genitive (it seems to right in nominative.)

But now I understand!

T? m? ? bhfoghlaim, na rialacha seo!

(By the way, how would it be if I wanted to say "na rialacha "damned" seo"?)

_________________
Nokinen poika

I'm really confused too. I learned (in the Donagle gaeltacht) that ag + ? = aici. Acoording to the Christian borthers, it's from do + a, though ag + a makes more sense. But ag + ? > ? makes no sense to me at all.... unless it got normalized.

N?l m? ag r? nach bhfuil t? go m?cheart...

Isn't there one negation too many here?

Shouldn't it be: N?l m? ag r? nach bhfuil ceart agat.

_________________
Nokinen poika

Thank you thank you thank you linguoboy! Silly me, it's "ag + a", and then the "a" triggers the mutation. Thank you! It's hard to know how various morphosyntactical things work when you've learnt them passively, although I know that that's no excuse. And for all you Irish learners, this mistake is really common, the use of "T? m? ag foghlaim ?" as opposed to "T? m? ? fhoghlaim".

Again: thank you linguoboy!

I don't have my copy of the book with me ATM, could you give me an example? And the dialect he's teaching is Cois Fharraige, which is in Conemara (Galway/Mayo).

_________________
"Great men are almost always bad men."
~Lord John Dalberg Acton

_________________
Blog:

But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!

_________________
Blog:

But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!

_________________
Nokinen poika

_________________
Nokinen poika