Identification sentence - An Biobla Naofa

Errigal · **Joined:** Fri 09 Sep 2011 2:06 pm **Posts:** 715

As we all know

, the correct form in an "identification sentence" is 'Is mé/mise an múinteoir', not 'Is é an múinteoir mé/mise'. Thus in Eoin 3:28 we have 'Ní mise an Críost', but in Eoin 1:20 it's 'Ní hé an Críost mé'.

And on a learning site with otherwise perfect Irish I came across this: 'Is mise Seamas Ó Coinn agus is é bainisteoir na sólainne mé' (From the context it's an identification sentence - 'the leisure-centre manager' - not a classification sentence - 'a leisure-centre manager'.)

According to the rule in GGBC both 'Ní hé an Críost mé' and 'Is é bainisteoir na sólainne mé' are ungrammatical. So what's happening here? Any explanation?

Labhrás · **Joined:** Sat 03 May 2014 4:01 pm **Posts:** 1967

Errigal wrote:

As we all know

, the correct form in an "identification sentence" is 'Is mé/mise an múinteoir', not 'Is é an múinteoir mé/mise'. Thus in Eoin 3:28 we have 'Ní mise an Críost', but in Eoin 1:20 it's 'Ní hé an Críost mé'.

And on a learning site with otherwise perfect Irish I came across this: 'Is mise Seamas Ó Coinn agus is é bainisteoir na sólainne mé' (From the context it's an identification sentence - 'the leisure-centre manager' - not a classification sentence - 'a leisure-centre manager'.)

According to the rule in GGBC both 'Ní hé an Críost mé' and 'Is é bainisteoir na sólainne mé' are ungrammatical. So what's happening here? Any explanation?

Gerald O'Nolan discussed sentences like these in his Studies in Modern Irish

Quote:

Type VIII.
VpPS. The only difference between this and type I lies in
the subject. Here the subject is a pronoun of the 1st or 2nd
person, or a pronoun of the third person strengthened by a
demonstrative. A priori there is no reason why such words
should not be used as subjects, and it is difficult to understand
how the idea arose that they cannot be so used. Because a
posteriori there is abundant proof that they not only may
be so used, but that they must be if it is necessary to express
the meaning ; if there is a strong desire (for any reason whatsoever)
to keep them definitely as subjects in our minds. The
following examples will show that such necessity' or such
desire frequently exists :

O'Nolan abberates from the usual parsing of copula sentences,
In GGBC "mé" is treated as a subject in such sentences as "Is mé / mise an Críost", but "mise" as a predicate.
In O'Nolan's argumentation, both mé and mise is the predicate, an Críost is the subject.
Subjects don't attract emphasis. To put emphasis on "an Críost" it must be made the predicate (in O'Nolan's sense).

Ní mise an Críost. = I am not the Christ. (normal sentence without any special emphasis except on the fact, that it is "not me")
Ní hé an Críost mé. = I am not that (= famous, forecasted) Christ. (with a special emphasis on the noun an Críost)

Errigal · **Joined:** Fri 09 Sep 2011 2:06 pm **Posts:** 715

Thanks, Labhrás. I'll have a look at the book online. I see it dates from 1921, whereas the latest edition of GGBC was in 1992.

(This might well be the first time I've seen the verb "aberrate" used

)

Labhrás · **Joined:** Sat 03 May 2014 4:01 pm **Posts:** 1967

Errigal wrote:

Thanks, Labhrás. I'll have a look at the book online. I see it dates from 1921, whereas the latest edition of GGBC was in 1992.

(This might well be the first time I've seen the verb "aberrate" used

)

My English is still weak. I must use a dictionary most of the time.

O'Nolan wrote another good grammar book, "New Era Irish Grammar" , IIRC. It was published in the 1930s.
I think his thoughts about copula sentences are convincing. They make Irish grammar more straight and easy and that avoids a lot of exceptions, which are otherwise hard to explain.

Cúmhaí · **Posted:** Tue 01 Aug 2017 2:37 am

So thus Is é bainisteoir na sólainne mé could be translated as "The leisure center manager is I," in which it is emphasized that it is I and not any other?
Would Is mise b.n.s. then be "'Tis I who am the l.c.m."?
And only Is mé b.n.s. would be "I am the lcm"?

Is it possible to express "I am a manager of the leisure center" ? Is bainisteoir na sólainne mé seems strange, since I am used to having only indefinite nouns in this position.

Labhrás · **Joined:** Sat 03 May 2014 4:01 pm **Posts:** 1967

Cúmhaí wrote:

So thus Is é bainisteoir na sólainne mé could be translated as "The leisure center manager is I," in which it is emphasized that it is I and not any other?

No, the opposite: "I'm the (well-known, one and only) leisure center manager".

To emphasize that it is you, you use "mise":

Quote:

Would Is mise b.n.s. then be "'Tis I who am the l.c.m."?

Is mise b.n.s. = I (not Tom) am the leisure center manager.
This is the form most often used.

"Is mé ..." being somewhere in between, but already focussing more on the noun:

Quote:

And only Is mé b.n.s. would be "I am the lcm"?

Is mé b.n.s. = I'm the leisure center manager (... and not the teacher or police officer)

Quote:

Is it possible to express "I am a manager of the leisure center" ? Is bainisteoir na sólainne mé seems strange, since I am used to having only indefinite nouns in this position.

Bainisteoir na sólainne is always definite: the manager of the leisure center.
You could use "bainisteoir sólainne" (a leisure center manager) or bainisteoir de chuid na sólainne (a manager of the leisure center).

Cúmhaí · **Posted:** Tue 01 Aug 2017 6:59 pm

Labhrás wrote:

Cúmhaí wrote:

So thus Is é bainisteoir na sólainne mé could be translated as "The leisure center manager is I," in which it is emphasized that it is I and not any other?

No, the opposite: "I'm the (well-known, one and only) leisure center manager".

Okay that is good since it means my previous understanding was correct. What I wonder now is why not:
Bainisteoir na sólainne is ea mé instead of this?

Labhrás wrote:

Cúmhaí wrote:

Is it possible to express "I am a manager of the leisure center" ? Is bainisteoir na sólainne mé seems strange, since I am used to having only indefinite nouns in this position.

Bainisteoir na sólainne is always definite: the manager of the leisure center.
You could use "bainisteoir sólainne" (a leisure center manager) or bainisteoir de chuid na sólainne (a manager of the leisure center).

Okay so effectively no. Only these two options (which I was already familiar with) exist then, no third, stranger option.

Labhrás · **Joined:** Sat 03 May 2014 4:01 pm **Posts:** 1967

Cúmhaí wrote:

Okay that is good since it means my previous understanding was correct. What I wonder now is why not:
Bainisteoir na sólainne is ea mé instead of this?

is ea is used in classification sentences only (i.e. with an indefinite noun)
Bainisteoir (de chuid na sólainne) is ea mé. = I am a manager (of the leisure center). (lit. "A manager (...), I am it.")

The "neuter" pronoun ea ("it") can refer only to an indefinite noun (or to an adverb, an adverbial or something like that)

In identification sentences (two definite items) is é (is í, is iad) could be used, though not often.
Bainisteoir na sólainne is é mé. (lit. "the manager of the leisure centre, I am he."

Cúmhaí · **Posted:** Tue 15 Aug 2017 7:58 pm

Thanks. I believe I now understand completely.

Forum rules

Identification sentence - An Biobla Naofa

Who is online