I'm not saying the pattern is to be found in living speech but I am saying that symmetry would lead me to search for such a pattern. Since the pattern on feminine nouns itself may never have expended to include all cases where the examples of it show us it can be used, it's reasonable to use examples from writing and speech to show it has never a) existed or b) been extended to masculine nouns

Translation: I agree but I was curious if there was a mirror pattern in the masculine nouns

_________________
__̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.___

Sorry, this is a bit of a rock and a hard place situation because everyone working with Irish, all time greats and wannabes alike, has had to resort to intuition at some point. These older grammarians did not have the tools at their disposal to look at the volume of material needed to identify and prove a pattern. Instead, what you've got is a carefully chosen set of examples that demonstrate a grammar point that the writer believes existed. There's no guarantee it's any better than anybody else's intuition.

_________________
A language belongs to its native speakers, and when you speak it, you are a guest in their homes.
If you are not a good guest, you have no right to complain about receiving poor hospitality.

What I find interesting is that this is essentially the opposite of the purported pattern in Scottish Gaelic -- air lenites only when it's describing an abstract state, not a literal location.

I'm sure my university lecturer gave a historical explanation for this, but he didn't include it in his notes (I'm looking at them now), so I can't really say what it was. But isn't it possible that the leniting form is the "memory" of a dative article, given that the second sentence is definite anyway, and the bruach would be lenited were it not for "na farraige" and the no-double-definite rule?

The difference between the Irish and Scottish Gaelic lenition patterns could then be explained by comparison of "I have a cold"
Tá slaghdán orm vs Tha an cnatan orm.
ScG is losing the definite article now, due to pressure from English -- as is Lowland Scots, incidentally. I caught the cold many times when I was wee, but it's a cold almost everywhere I hear now.

So it may be that ScG in the recent past saw abstracts as inherently definite, whereas contemporary Irish viewed them as inherently indefinite, and that the lenition patterns with ar/air preserve the ghost of an article accordingly.

_________________
A language belongs to its native speakers, and when you speak it, you are a guest in their homes.
If you are not a good guest, you have no right to complain about receiving poor hospitality.

A Néill Bhig, I don't know the explanation for the observable lenition pattern. As for O'Nolan not having the tools to analyse large amounts of data - he lived at a time when there were monoglots around, and the Gaeltacht much stronger and there were people around to ask detailed questions of. Most of the Irish being published at one time was of a cainnt na ndaoine flavour - unlike today - so he was in a much better position than anyone today.

I haven't resolved my questions on this issue yet, but I see the Coiste Téarmaíochta have an article on it at http://www.acmhainn.ie/tearmai/seimhiu.htm - admitting that the so-called Standard differs from real usage in the Gaeltacht and raising the question of whether a broader standard is needed. The article is infused with the tired-old concept that the learners on the CT like himself know better...

Patrick, I don't think you're going to get closure on this because a) there is not enough corpus data, b) the technology to capture, model and detect target patterns is not there and the numbers of people who would willingly allow their day to day speech to be monitored (even if it were just pattern searching and matching) would be low and since what is on TG4 etc is not always native...

You see my point. Better tech and access to archives and recordings would help on this

_________________
__̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.___

FGB seems only to have déad cailce in it, as you say - maybe déad chailce doesn't exist, as déad is a masculine noun anyway. But it is given at http://breis.focloir.ie/en/eid/déad - just look at the two examples on that page, which says they're from de Bhaldraithe (Thomas Waldron).

Thanks.

This is what made me wonder if there was some sort of similar semantic process going on, or if it were like Niall says above, or some error or slip of speech or gender switch or something.

Can you think of any other masc noun that might show a similar pattern? I'm going to have a look

_________________
__̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.___

gloine eile fíona.

gloine fíona eile.

gloine fhíona eile.


I wonder if adding one of those 'pronominal adjectives' as they're called changes the meaning somewhat, and if it does, does it tell us something?

_________________
__̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.___

Well, you could infer a "de" if some unexpected lenition occurred.

Sé cínn déag bhuaibh = sé cínn déag de bhuaibh - said quickly.

But you cannot just ask people things -- it never works. The observer's paradox: when someone knows you're watching, they act differently.


And on top of that, people just don't know how they themselves speak. By way of demonstration, could you tell me what "broadly" means? What's the difference between "must", "have to" and "have go to"? No googling, now....

_________________
A language belongs to its native speakers, and when you speak it, you are a guest in their homes.
If you are not a good guest, you have no right to complain about receiving poor hospitality.