Hello.
I'm beginner of Irish language.
I have a question.
In Irish type, "h" used for mutations is represented dot above, I learned.
Therefore there is no letter "h" in Irish type.
So, how can I represent H-prothesis like "a haon", "go hÉirinn".
In the first place, does H-prothesis exist in the time Irish type is used?

Hi Yuki,

"h" does exist in what some call "Gaelic script". See the Wikipedia article that follows:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaelic_type

Also, have a look at this as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_orthography

Here are the examples you gave above:a haon
go hÉirinn

Good luck,

Tim

Those are, authentically, a h-aon ....go h-Éirinn in the Gaelic script. Before the Roman script was imposed, hyphens were used in such phrases.

Bullshit. Both practices existed for a long time. See eg. this page from Irisleabhar na Gaedhilge, right-bottom corner, le haġaiḋ na soċraide: https://wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Irisle ... 6.djvu/178, or eg. this page in Táin Bó Cuailnge ’na dhráma with Ní haon ċeataiġe ḋúinn: https://wikisource.org/wiki/Page:T%C3%A ... re.pdf/29; or go hoban on this page from some 19th c. Bible (though I’m not sure which exact edition): https://twitter.com/ansiopaleabhar/stat ... 08/photo/1 (also nice use of a ligature for ui, macron for marking double/fortis consonants eg. in bean̄aċd, and a special ę-like glyph for ea where manuscripts sometimes used the “tall e”)

Go raibh maith agat. Táim ró-tuirseach . . .

Canon Ua Laoghaire did not personally typeset his books. I have images of the whole of his Old Testament manuscripts, minus the Deuterocanonical/Apocryphal books - and you can see on every page how he hyphenated the h-. In my file of the transcriptions done by the RIA 'of Ua Laoghaire's works, a 2073 page file, with 849,000 words, I found "haghaidh" once, and "h-aghaidh" 35 times and "haon" 40 times and "h-aon" 380 times. There were different typesetters probably, and they may also, in the days before word processing, have had to use some spelling spellings to make lines fit.

Sr. Mary Vincent, a fan of Ua Laoghaire, who wrote under the name Maol Muire and wrote a whole book about Ua Laoghaire's works did not ever hyphenate things like "haghaidh". Her orthography wasn't exactly the same as Ua Laoghaire's. You can also look at Patrick S. Dinneen's novel, Cormac Ua Conaill, the first published novel in Irish (Séadna came before in serialised form, but after in full-book form). That was entitled: Cormac Ua Conaill sgéal ḃaineas le h-Éirġe amaċ agus díṫ-ċeannaḋ Iarla na Deasṁuṁan (A.D. 1579-1583).

My comment stands: haghaidh is inauthentic in the Gaelic script. It is a spelling mistake - or, to put it another way, a form of spelling that educated native speakers such as Dinneen and O'Leary regarded as a mistake. There is no Irish word "haghaidh". This does not mean the number of people trying to update the spelling even in Irisleabhar na G. was zero even in the 19th century. I wonder if they were all L2 speakers in the Galltacht who have, as O'Leary pointed out, been the bane of the Irish language from the start of the Gaelic Revival? Learners with a taste for domineering, as O'Leary called them.

ró-thuirseach - or "tá tuirse orm".

Do you have any proof they considered it a mistake, apart from just your pictures of his works? I've found examples of it in several of the Gaelic script works I have from Connemara, written (or compiled) by native speakers. It seems it was just a choice by certain authors and both were acceptable. These include works by Mac Giollarnáth (Annála Beaga ó Iorrus Aithneach), Báiréád ( An Geall a Briseadh) and Ó Cadhain himself, arguably a better writer than PUL ever was (An Braon Broghach)

OK. Do you have any proof it was considered orthographically correct in the pre-Standardisation period. I note that Ó Cadhain died in 1970 and partly belongs to the post-Standardisation period. Yes, I do have some proof that it was considered incorrect not to hyphenate: dictionaries are drawn up in order to codify a standard - and h- is used in Dinneen's dicitonary. h with no hyphen is used in FGB. Those who did not hyphenate in the period before FGB came out were doing so in the face of dictionary advice. Just as people today can write "cozy" in their emails, whether or not the dictionary says "cosy".

You're the one making the claims that it was not "correct", the burden of proof is on you. And, I mean, I just gave you three examples of books pre-Standard, still in the Gaelic type, that use it. Including perhaps the single best author of Irish-language literature of the modern period. If that's not enough to convince you, you don't want to be convinced.