![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I have some questions about what is written in this article. Because what I read here doesn't correspond to what I hear when native speakers are speaking... For me, as I said above, the broad consonants are velarised when they are not labial (t̪ˠ, d̪ˠ, n̪ˠ, kˠ, gˠ, etc. You mentioned the sound ɰ, I'm not sure it's right, for me they are simply velarised), and bilabialised (followed by a [ʷ] glide) when they are labial (so: pʷ, bʷ, ɸʷ, mʷ, plus βʷ in Munster). For me, the broad r’s are not velarised (ɾ, and in some dialects r). For me, the slender single r's are not simply palatalised, they are pronounced [ɼ]. For me, the Irish slender s is [ʃ], not [ɕ]. For me, the Irish broad ch is uvular, not velar. I heard the velar sound [x] in Slavic languages, and I've never heard that sound in Irish so far. I guess scholars say it's a velar sound because it must have been velar in Old Irish (since it derives from older k), but now, the sound I hear is not velar. What do pʲ, mʲ, bʲ, ɸʲ sound like, for you? For me, slender labial consonants are pronounced with the lips stretched on the 2 sides (as when you smile), the tongue doesn't touch the palate so they are not palatalised. In the article, you seem to generalise rules from a dialect to the Irish language in general, and it isn't always right. For example, the l of díol is not dental in Ulster, nor in Munster, I think. Normally, the broad dental l's are written ll or single l at the beginning of words when they are not lenited. The single slender n is pronounced [ɲ] between vowels in Donegal, while it's written [nˠ] (if I remember well) in the table. For example, duine is pronounced [ˈd̪ˠɪɲɪ] in Donegal. And for ng, I saw a confusion between the symbols [ɲ] and [ŋˠ] in the table. Other question: why haven't you used the standard phonologic symbols for Irish: /b', b, k, k',.../ etc? Lughaidh 13:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
About Quiggin's [ɲ], if he uses this symbol for /ŋ'/, can you tell me what symbol he uses for /N'/ ?
Now, explain me why in ALL the books that deal with Irish phonology, the authors use 2 different symbols for the phonemes /N'/ and /ŋ'/ if they represent the same sound? Just some examples from Ó SIADHAIL, M. (1989), Modern Irish, Grammatical Structure and Dialectal Variation, Cambridge University Press. (And remember Ó Siadhail is a native speaker from Cois Fhairrge, Connemara, and his wife is a native speaker from Gweedore, Co. Donegal). Page 95, he explains the following evolution /N'/ > /ŋ'/ in Muskerry, Co. Cork: oibhní /ev'əN'iː/ > /ejN'iː/ > /əiN'iː/ > /əiˈŋ'iː/ (Mk) 'rivers' goibhní /gev'N'iː/ > /gəjN'iː/ > /gəiN'iː/ > /gəiˈŋ'iː/ (Mk) 'smiths' Suibhne /siv'N'ə/ > /sivN'ə/ > /siːN'ə/ > /siːˈŋ'ə/ (Mk) a surname How would that be possible if /N'/ and /ŋ'/ were the same sound??? And there are plenty of examples like that (in several dialects) in the chapter on consonants.
Other examples, in Mc CONE, K. (dir.) et alii, (1994), Stair na Gaeilge, Maynooth: Roinn na Sean-Ghaeilge. Page 621 (in the chapter about Ulster Irish, written by Art Hughes, from Ulster University) (I translate for you, 'cause it's in Irish):
Nasal consonants:
bilabial: m, m'
dental: N
alveolar: n
palato-alveolar: n', N'
palato-velar: ŋ'
velar: ŋ
These are references, ok? And they show that, as I said, /ŋ'/ is further back than /N'/.
Furthermore, have a look at this, about Scottish Gaelic consonant system (which is very close to the Irish one, unfortunately, there's no website like that on the web, except those I made): http://www.akerbeltz.org/beagangaidhlig/gramar/treoraiche.pdf ; http://www.akerbeltz.org/beagangaidhlig/gramar/grammar_imitatedpron.htm . Don't you feel cheeky to uphold I'm wrong, while you don't even speak Irish? I've begun to learn Irish more than 10 years ago, I've learnt it from native speakers from Donegal, I'm fluent in Irish, and I've got a diploma in the Irish language with commendation in the University of Ulster at Coleraine in 2002. I'm not telling that to boast, but just to show you I know what I'm talking about. Tchífidh mé thú.
Ó Sé only deals with Munster Irish. Cúig is an exception. Anyway, people say [kˠwɪc], at least in Donegal (I almost never heard [kˠuːɪɟ] so far). I don't know other words with úi where you would hear an i-glide after the ú in Donegal Irish. See: súile, dúil, dúinn, etc. There are other back vowels that would not be followed by a glide: baile, móine, óil, etc. Other problem (I already mentioned): in phonetics, you write that broad labial consonants are velarised: [bˠwiː], for example. I don't think it's possible an Irish speaker pronounces [bˠ]... In your table about sonorants, some corrections: Rʲ is not ɾˠ in Donegal (and are there velarised r's in Irish? I don't think so), not anywhere else, I think. You wrote: Old Irish nʲ = n̠ʲ between vowels, nˠ elsewhere (Ó Siadhail 1989:94). Wrong (I've Ó Siadhail’s book under my eyes now), it can be n (which you write [nʲ]) or ɲ (which you write [n̪ʲ]). Normally, slender nn (except word initially) is [ŋʲ] in Muskerry (see Ó Siadhail, same page).
Now, generalisations, there are too many, so I'll just give you one example this time: scuabfaidh /ˈsˠkuəpˠəɟ/. That pronunciation is typical of Munster Irish, and you didn't write it. So readers will wonder why this time -aidh is /-əɟ/ and in other times /-ə/ or /-i/. And the article is full of things like that. Tchífidh mé amárach thú, b’fhéidir. Oíche mhaith. Lughaidh 23:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Angr, I admire your calmness! Lughaidh, you said that you don't bring up your educational background in order to boast, but all you have been doing in this unnecessary argument is to boast and boast and try to show everyone that you know and the other is an ignorant, where probably the reverse is true. Angr's writing is based on published descriptions. We all know that these descriptions are not perfect. We are all aware that pronunciation has changed since the descriptions were made. However, until you show otherwise that you are an authority on phonetic transcription, which, from your writing, you are clearly not, then you are definitely not any better than O'Cuív, Mhac an Fhailligh, Quiggin and their friends. Most of these guys had the best impressionistic phonetic training one could get in the old days. And, man, read their dialect descriptions, no-one could be more thorough than them. At the absence of any other published scientific work, Angr did exactly what a scholar writing in Wikipedia should do. Perhaps he could have mentioned that these phonetic descriptions (a) might not be valid anymore, and (b) are based on impressionistic transcriptions. In any case, the silly argument about the alveo-palatal vs. palatal/palato-velar nasals demonstrated the difference between you too: Angr was SOOOOOO consistent, so careful, and so not trying to show off, while you, Lughaidh, simply weren't listening. From the very beginning Angr wrote that the two consonants are distinct. His transcription for slender 'nn' was transparently a post-alveolar palatalized nasal, which is a sound very similar to what we find in Romance languages (other than Portuguese, where it is usually a palatal). His transcription for slender 'ng' was clearly different from that, and was transparently a palatal nasal. Anyone who knows phonetics well enough knows that the use of the 'palatal nasal' for those sounds in Romance (except Portuguese) is a mistake, and is like the slender 'ng' in Irish (which, truly, can be post-palatal, as Angr did mention). Same holds for the argument about velarization. Man, claiming that broad labials are labialized rather than velarized in Donegal is anything but knowledgeable. Read Ní Chasaide's work in this regard. That retracted onglide you hear in 'maos', for example, is as such due to velarization. You hear it falsely as a labialization effect simply because you hear it with your 'English speaking' ears, and you fail to notice velarization without lip-rounding. Acoustic research I conducted, in collaboration with my former MA supervisor, Máire Ní Chiosáin, with Éamon O'Domhnaill as the speaker, clearly indicates that broad labials are velarized. The best evidence is the difference in the acoustic quality of the long high rounded vowel when following a broad labial vs. broad coronal or broad velar, e.g. bú vs. tú/cú. In the former, the second spectral formant is substantially lower than in the latter ones - we are talking about a 300Hz difference (ca. 900Hz vs. 1200Hz). This cannot be due to labialization since the vowel is already rounded in all cases. This difference can only result from excessive dorsum retraction, exerted by the preceding consonant. Unfortunately, our work with Eamon O'Domhnaill has never been published. I could show many other cases where it's clear that Angr has it, while you, Lughaidh, don't. But I see no point. Angr, I think you did a tremendous job in this article. It is probably impossible to write it any better in Wikipedia.
Roy. Linguistics PhD student at UCLA, specializing in phonetics. MLitt in linguistics (phonetics and phonology of Irish) from UCD.
I was in Donegal when I heard [ku:i̯ɟ],
And I was in Donegal when I heard [kwɪc].
and Sommerfelt was in Donegal when he heard [d̪ˠuːi̯n̠ʲ] for dúinn.
And I was in Donegal when I heard [d̪ˠuːɲ] a thousand times.
Broad labials are indeed velarized in Irish; the back of the tongue is raised to the position of [ʊ] or [u] while the labial is being articulated.
The only velarisation just result from the following [w] glide. [w] is labio-velar by itself, so you don't need a velarisation symbol before it. When you write [bˠw] you write it twice.
The lip rounding, when there is any at all (there isn't always), doesn't start until after the release
Ask Micheál Ó Murchú, from Coleraine University, about his opinion on that. He's probably one of the people who best know Irish on earth. I've learnt Irish pronunciation with him among others (he has learnt Donegal Irish mainly in Rannafast, from people like John Ghráinne Ó Duibheannaigh... don't say that kind of speaker is not reliable...).
Broad r is also velarized in Irish,
You don't hear it, so you need not to write it.
where it is spelled rr (e.g. cairr "car (genitive) has a broad r),
When have you found that? Looks like you've never heard a native speaker pronouncing bairr or cairr. I have.
The statement "Old Irish nʲ = n̠ʲ between vowels, nˠ elsewhere"
Where have you read that?
Finally, scuabfaidh /ˈsˠkuəpˠəɟ/ isn't a generalization, it's an example.
Then why don't you say where it comes from? Readers will believe it's the pronunciation for whole Ireland!
Connacht and Ulster as well,
Finally, in an English sentence, please use the English form "Connaught" or the Irish form "Connachta". "Connacht" is the genitive form of Connachta, so you can't use it in the middle of an English sentence. Tchífidh mé amárach thú. Lughaidh 02:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I have some questions about what is written in this article. Because what I read here doesn't correspond to what I hear when native speakers are speaking... For me, as I said above, the broad consonants are velarised when they are not labial (t̪ˠ, d̪ˠ, n̪ˠ, kˠ, gˠ, etc. You mentioned the sound ɰ, I'm not sure it's right, for me they are simply velarised), and bilabialised (followed by a [ʷ] glide) when they are labial (so: pʷ, bʷ, ɸʷ, mʷ, plus βʷ in Munster). For me, the broad r’s are not velarised (ɾ, and in some dialects r). For me, the slender single r's are not simply palatalised, they are pronounced [ɼ]. For me, the Irish slender s is [ʃ], not [ɕ]. For me, the Irish broad ch is uvular, not velar. I heard the velar sound [x] in Slavic languages, and I've never heard that sound in Irish so far. I guess scholars say it's a velar sound because it must have been velar in Old Irish (since it derives from older k), but now, the sound I hear is not velar. What do pʲ, mʲ, bʲ, ɸʲ sound like, for you? For me, slender labial consonants are pronounced with the lips stretched on the 2 sides (as when you smile), the tongue doesn't touch the palate so they are not palatalised. In the article, you seem to generalise rules from a dialect to the Irish language in general, and it isn't always right. For example, the l of díol is not dental in Ulster, nor in Munster, I think. Normally, the broad dental l's are written ll or single l at the beginning of words when they are not lenited. The single slender n is pronounced [ɲ] between vowels in Donegal, while it's written [nˠ] (if I remember well) in the table. For example, duine is pronounced [ˈd̪ˠɪɲɪ] in Donegal. And for ng, I saw a confusion between the symbols [ɲ] and [ŋˠ] in the table. Other question: why haven't you used the standard phonologic symbols for Irish: /b', b, k, k',.../ etc? Lughaidh 13:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
About Quiggin's [ɲ], if he uses this symbol for /ŋ'/, can you tell me what symbol he uses for /N'/ ?
Now, explain me why in ALL the books that deal with Irish phonology, the authors use 2 different symbols for the phonemes /N'/ and /ŋ'/ if they represent the same sound? Just some examples from Ó SIADHAIL, M. (1989), Modern Irish, Grammatical Structure and Dialectal Variation, Cambridge University Press. (And remember Ó Siadhail is a native speaker from Cois Fhairrge, Connemara, and his wife is a native speaker from Gweedore, Co. Donegal). Page 95, he explains the following evolution /N'/ > /ŋ'/ in Muskerry, Co. Cork: oibhní /ev'əN'iː/ > /ejN'iː/ > /əiN'iː/ > /əiˈŋ'iː/ (Mk) 'rivers' goibhní /gev'N'iː/ > /gəjN'iː/ > /gəiN'iː/ > /gəiˈŋ'iː/ (Mk) 'smiths' Suibhne /siv'N'ə/ > /sivN'ə/ > /siːN'ə/ > /siːˈŋ'ə/ (Mk) a surname How would that be possible if /N'/ and /ŋ'/ were the same sound??? And there are plenty of examples like that (in several dialects) in the chapter on consonants.
Other examples, in Mc CONE, K. (dir.) et alii, (1994), Stair na Gaeilge, Maynooth: Roinn na Sean-Ghaeilge. Page 621 (in the chapter about Ulster Irish, written by Art Hughes, from Ulster University) (I translate for you, 'cause it's in Irish):
Nasal consonants:
bilabial: m, m'
dental: N
alveolar: n
palato-alveolar: n', N'
palato-velar: ŋ'
velar: ŋ
These are references, ok? And they show that, as I said, /ŋ'/ is further back than /N'/.
Furthermore, have a look at this, about Scottish Gaelic consonant system (which is very close to the Irish one, unfortunately, there's no website like that on the web, except those I made): http://www.akerbeltz.org/beagangaidhlig/gramar/treoraiche.pdf ; http://www.akerbeltz.org/beagangaidhlig/gramar/grammar_imitatedpron.htm . Don't you feel cheeky to uphold I'm wrong, while you don't even speak Irish? I've begun to learn Irish more than 10 years ago, I've learnt it from native speakers from Donegal, I'm fluent in Irish, and I've got a diploma in the Irish language with commendation in the University of Ulster at Coleraine in 2002. I'm not telling that to boast, but just to show you I know what I'm talking about. Tchífidh mé thú.
Ó Sé only deals with Munster Irish. Cúig is an exception. Anyway, people say [kˠwɪc], at least in Donegal (I almost never heard [kˠuːɪɟ] so far). I don't know other words with úi where you would hear an i-glide after the ú in Donegal Irish. See: súile, dúil, dúinn, etc. There are other back vowels that would not be followed by a glide: baile, móine, óil, etc. Other problem (I already mentioned): in phonetics, you write that broad labial consonants are velarised: [bˠwiː], for example. I don't think it's possible an Irish speaker pronounces [bˠ]... In your table about sonorants, some corrections: Rʲ is not ɾˠ in Donegal (and are there velarised r's in Irish? I don't think so), not anywhere else, I think. You wrote: Old Irish nʲ = n̠ʲ between vowels, nˠ elsewhere (Ó Siadhail 1989:94). Wrong (I've Ó Siadhail’s book under my eyes now), it can be n (which you write [nʲ]) or ɲ (which you write [n̪ʲ]). Normally, slender nn (except word initially) is [ŋʲ] in Muskerry (see Ó Siadhail, same page).
Now, generalisations, there are too many, so I'll just give you one example this time: scuabfaidh /ˈsˠkuəpˠəɟ/. That pronunciation is typical of Munster Irish, and you didn't write it. So readers will wonder why this time -aidh is /-əɟ/ and in other times /-ə/ or /-i/. And the article is full of things like that. Tchífidh mé amárach thú, b’fhéidir. Oíche mhaith. Lughaidh 23:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Angr, I admire your calmness! Lughaidh, you said that you don't bring up your educational background in order to boast, but all you have been doing in this unnecessary argument is to boast and boast and try to show everyone that you know and the other is an ignorant, where probably the reverse is true. Angr's writing is based on published descriptions. We all know that these descriptions are not perfect. We are all aware that pronunciation has changed since the descriptions were made. However, until you show otherwise that you are an authority on phonetic transcription, which, from your writing, you are clearly not, then you are definitely not any better than O'Cuív, Mhac an Fhailligh, Quiggin and their friends. Most of these guys had the best impressionistic phonetic training one could get in the old days. And, man, read their dialect descriptions, no-one could be more thorough than them. At the absence of any other published scientific work, Angr did exactly what a scholar writing in Wikipedia should do. Perhaps he could have mentioned that these phonetic descriptions (a) might not be valid anymore, and (b) are based on impressionistic transcriptions. In any case, the silly argument about the alveo-palatal vs. palatal/palato-velar nasals demonstrated the difference between you too: Angr was SOOOOOO consistent, so careful, and so not trying to show off, while you, Lughaidh, simply weren't listening. From the very beginning Angr wrote that the two consonants are distinct. His transcription for slender 'nn' was transparently a post-alveolar palatalized nasal, which is a sound very similar to what we find in Romance languages (other than Portuguese, where it is usually a palatal). His transcription for slender 'ng' was clearly different from that, and was transparently a palatal nasal. Anyone who knows phonetics well enough knows that the use of the 'palatal nasal' for those sounds in Romance (except Portuguese) is a mistake, and is like the slender 'ng' in Irish (which, truly, can be post-palatal, as Angr did mention). Same holds for the argument about velarization. Man, claiming that broad labials are labialized rather than velarized in Donegal is anything but knowledgeable. Read Ní Chasaide's work in this regard. That retracted onglide you hear in 'maos', for example, is as such due to velarization. You hear it falsely as a labialization effect simply because you hear it with your 'English speaking' ears, and you fail to notice velarization without lip-rounding. Acoustic research I conducted, in collaboration with my former MA supervisor, Máire Ní Chiosáin, with Éamon O'Domhnaill as the speaker, clearly indicates that broad labials are velarized. The best evidence is the difference in the acoustic quality of the long high rounded vowel when following a broad labial vs. broad coronal or broad velar, e.g. bú vs. tú/cú. In the former, the second spectral formant is substantially lower than in the latter ones - we are talking about a 300Hz difference (ca. 900Hz vs. 1200Hz). This cannot be due to labialization since the vowel is already rounded in all cases. This difference can only result from excessive dorsum retraction, exerted by the preceding consonant. Unfortunately, our work with Eamon O'Domhnaill has never been published. I could show many other cases where it's clear that Angr has it, while you, Lughaidh, don't. But I see no point. Angr, I think you did a tremendous job in this article. It is probably impossible to write it any better in Wikipedia.
Roy. Linguistics PhD student at UCLA, specializing in phonetics. MLitt in linguistics (phonetics and phonology of Irish) from UCD.
I was in Donegal when I heard [ku:i̯ɟ],
And I was in Donegal when I heard [kwɪc].
and Sommerfelt was in Donegal when he heard [d̪ˠuːi̯n̠ʲ] for dúinn.
And I was in Donegal when I heard [d̪ˠuːɲ] a thousand times.
Broad labials are indeed velarized in Irish; the back of the tongue is raised to the position of [ʊ] or [u] while the labial is being articulated.
The only velarisation just result from the following [w] glide. [w] is labio-velar by itself, so you don't need a velarisation symbol before it. When you write [bˠw] you write it twice.
The lip rounding, when there is any at all (there isn't always), doesn't start until after the release
Ask Micheál Ó Murchú, from Coleraine University, about his opinion on that. He's probably one of the people who best know Irish on earth. I've learnt Irish pronunciation with him among others (he has learnt Donegal Irish mainly in Rannafast, from people like John Ghráinne Ó Duibheannaigh... don't say that kind of speaker is not reliable...).
Broad r is also velarized in Irish,
You don't hear it, so you need not to write it.
where it is spelled rr (e.g. cairr "car (genitive) has a broad r),
When have you found that? Looks like you've never heard a native speaker pronouncing bairr or cairr. I have.
The statement "Old Irish nʲ = n̠ʲ between vowels, nˠ elsewhere"
Where have you read that?
Finally, scuabfaidh /ˈsˠkuəpˠəɟ/ isn't a generalization, it's an example.
Then why don't you say where it comes from? Readers will believe it's the pronunciation for whole Ireland!
Connacht and Ulster as well,
Finally, in an English sentence, please use the English form "Connaught" or the Irish form "Connachta". "Connacht" is the genitive form of Connachta, so you can't use it in the middle of an English sentence. Tchífidh mé amárach thú. Lughaidh 02:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)