Lowena wrote:I'm on chapter 9, just about to finish the translation of exercise 9.2 into English. It's taken me 2 or 3 hours, partly because I'm watching someone play Ni no Kuni at the same time.
Lowena wrote:They seem complex, but not difficult. Definitely not impossible.
Luke wrote:Lowena wrote:I'm on chapter 9, just about to finish the translation of exercise 9.2 into English. It's taken me 2 or 3 hours, partly because I'm watching someone play Ni no Kuni at the same time.
You're already there?
linguoboy wrote:Lowena wrote:They seem complex, but not difficult. Definitely not impossible.
No one said they were impossible, just complex and highly irregular. Definitely one of the very toughest conjugational systems Indo-European has to offer.
sa wulfs wrote:A chride ind éin ittig (“Oh, heart of a fluttering bird”)
[a ˈχriðʲe ind eːnʲ ˈitʲəɣʲ]?
sa wulfs wrote:Úir aineóil tarut (“Foreign soil over you”)
[uːrʲ ˈanʲoːlʲ ˈtarud]
sa wulfs wrote:Mac mallachtan (“Son of a curse”)
Note that there is no lenition after Mac and Ó, even though in Modern Irish a personal name in
the genitive is always lenited (mála Phádraig); in medieval Irish, when patronymics started to be
used as surnames, personal names were lenited after a feminine noun, but not a masculine noun,
hence lenition after Ní and Nic (exept, for phonological reasons, after Nic + Gr: Nic Grianna),
but no lenition after Ó and Mac.
sa wulfs wrote:Bás fort béolu (“Death upon your lips”)
[baːs ford ˈbʲeːlu]
sa wulfs wrote:Cacc brén (“Stinking turd”)
sa wulfs wrote:Tréithḟer (“Coward, weakling”)
Also, the <nd> in <ind> was pronounced as /nd/ in Early Old Irish, but had become /n/ by Late Old Irish, so pick whichever you like. The rest seems right to me, so I'd say [a ˈχʲrʲiðʲe in(d) eːnʲ ˈitʲəɣʲ].
Hmm, would the <u> in <tarut> not be a schwa, given that it's not in a stressed syllable?
Unless in absolute final position (...), all short unstressed vowels (including shortened long vowels) except /u/ (e.g. lé(i)ciud 'leaving' /le:g´uð/, tomus 'measurement' /toṽus/) had fallen together as an 'obscure' mid-central phoneme /ə/ or 'schwa'
From what little research I've just done, I would say no lenition of the <m>
I have no idea about the <rt> in <fort> being /rd/ (Stifter says there's no rule for <t> following <r, l, n> word internally or in auslaut; sometimes it's /rd/ sometimes it's /rt/). You could be right, I just don't know.
when the final <n> is palatalised after /e:/, isn't it usually spelt <éin>?
sa wulfs wrote:Thanks! I'm also going to try emailing a professor or two, so if I get a reply I'll share it here.
sa wulfs wrote:I could have saved you some work just by paying more attention (as in the palatalization of chr- in chride ).
sa wulfs wrote:I prefer to use /ʲ/ for the palatalization because this won't be used by Irish scholars or students, and so I'd rather keep the transcription as 'international' as possible.
sa wulfs wrote:I'm not using /ˠ/ so as to not make things look too cluttered.
sa wulfs wrote:The idea was to use /ɴ/ and /ʟ/ alongside /n/ and /l/, although if I got all the lenis consonants right (except for /r/~/ɾ/) that was sheer luck.
sa wulfs wrote:Hmm, would the <u> in <tarut> not be a schwa, given that it's not in a stressed syllable?
My source is Kim McCone's A First Old Irish Grammar and Reader, which says:Unless in absolute final position (...), all short unstressed vowels (including shortened long vowels) except /u/ (e.g. lé(i)ciud 'leaving' /le:g´uð/, tomus 'measurement' /toṽus/) had fallen together as an 'obscure' mid-central phoneme /ə/ or 'schwa'
sa wulfs wrote:I have no idea about the <rt> in <fort> being /rd/ (Stifter says there's no rule for <t> following <r, l, n> word internally or in auslaut; sometimes it's /rd/ sometimes it's /rt/). You could be right, I just don't know.
I honestly have no idea where I got the /d/ from (same for tarut above). Since Modern Irish has /t/ here, I'd say /rt/ is way more likely.
sa wulfs wrote:when the final <n> is palatalised after /e:/, isn't it usually spelt <éin>?
I assumed it would be palatalized by default after /e:/ whether or not the spelling noted it, but Modern Irish has béan so that's clearly not the case.
sa wulfs wrote:Thanks, you were very helpful! I suppose you wouldn't feel like recording them, right? Haha, it's ok, I had to ask.
There's also the issue that there's no consensus on whether or not OI actually had velarisation. According to Stifter, Thurneysen posited three consonantal qualities: Palatalised, neutral (non-palatalised) and velarised, but Stifter just has palatalised and non-palatalised (and seems to be saying that that is the more widely accepted system nowadays).
When they are between vowel or in auslaut they are pronounced lenis, as well as when in anlaut if lenited by a word causing lenition.
Well, Stifter (who, as you can see, is basically my only source here ) says that after /r/ <t> can be either /t/ or /d/, depending on the word (i.e. the fact that they're spelt the same way is just an orthographic thing). He give some examples of pairs of homographs that are pronounced differently with different meanings: <altae> - /altʲe/ - "she was reared" vs <altae> - /aldʲe/ - "they who rear" or <derc> - /dʲerk/ - "hole" vs <derc>/<derg> - /dʲerg> - "red".
Also, the <t> at the end of <tarut> should be /d/ because it's at the end of a word following a vowel.
I'm a bit sketchy on the rule with this one, but I've seen many words in Stifter's textbook that had <en> where the <e> only palatalises the preceding consonant, not the <n>, and I can only recall the <n> being palatalised where it was <ein> (or <éin>). Though, now that I'm trying to find examples I'm coming up short .
There are a few consonants that I'm not really sure how to pronounce. For example, in Modern Irish (the way I speak it anyway) a "broad" /r/ is a tap and a "slender" /r/ is a voiced alveolar fricative, but I don't know if that was the case in OI. Also, I have no idea what a slender trilled (fortis) /r/ would sound like. But I could give it a go (you just need to realise that I suck at Old Irish, though I'm pretty good at pronouncing stuff in general if I know what sound I'm supposed to be pronouncing).
eien wrote:To clarify on OI orthography w/r/t palatization:
With consonant anlaut, following <i>. <e>, <í>, <é> palatize. Digraphs <iV> <eV> can stand for non-front vowels with preceding palatized consonants at least in syllable consonant anlaut (not sure sure about absolute consonant anlaut).
With consonant inlaut, mostly same as anlaut. Following unstressed <i> may or may not palatize, if not then interchangeable with digraph <ai> (see vowel auslaut). Commonly if palatized the preceding vowel, if not /i/ /i:/, will be written as a digraph with <i> as second part. Preceding diphthongs of the sort /Vi̯/ are written <V́e> (that's the initial vowel bearing an acute accent) for non-patalized consonants and <Ví> for palatized consonants.
With consonant auslaut, if preceded by <i> <i> (either representing the vowel or as the second part of a digraph/diphthong as above indicating palatization), it's typically palatalized. In one syllable words may or may not be.
WIth vowel auslaut, for the preceding consonant same rules as inlaut consonant, but a digraph of <a> + <e> <é> <i> <í> is used for non-palatizing front vowels. Digraphs <ea> <eo> represent palatized consonant followed by /a/ /o/, <iu> palatized consonant followed by /u/.
So to correct a previous example of Ciarán's, <altae> - /alte/or /alde/
And this is all normalized orthography. In actual paleography, God help you.
Ciarán wrote:I will try to make some recordings tomorrow.
Ciarán wrote:Can I ask, sa wulfs, what game is it for? The only game I've ever played with anything like this in it was AOE 2, which had the Celts speaking something approximating Irish, or it might have been Old Irish.
A chride ind éin ittig
[a ˈχʲrʲiðʲe in eːnʲ ˈitʲəɣʲ]
(I think the actual source has eoin, but I couldn't for the life of me figure out how to pronounce that, so I standardized it as éin)
Better: [a ˈχʲrʲiðʲə in eːonʲ ˈitʲəɣʲ]
Úir aineóil tarut
[uːrʲ ˈanʲeːolʲ ˈtarət]
If used as an insult should be in the voc.: a maic mallachtan
[ə vikʲ ˈvaʟəχtən]
Bás fort béolu
[baːs fort ˈbʲeːlu]
[baːs fort ˈvʲeːolu]
Probably should also be vocative if intended as an insult: a chacc bréoin
[a χak vʲrʲeːonʲ]
I’m not sure if this can really be counted as a curse.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest