| Manx | English | |
|---|---|---|
| Bee fys euish ta er n’yannoo gindeyrys er nyn n’glare dy fondagh, dy daase ee voish yn Ar-Ghaelg, as dy row, keayrt dy row, yn ghlare ainyn as yn ghlare Albinagh yn un red. | Those of you who have browsed upon our language, that it grew from ‘East Gaelic’, and that, once upon a time, our language and the Scottish language were the same thing. | |
| Kegeeish er dy henney, ayns y cholloo shoh, hoilshee mee magh yn chied ring jeh daan Manninagh ass y cheyoo cheead jeig. | A fortnight ago, in this column, I explained the first verse of a Manx song from the sixteenth century. | |
| Chouds ta fys aym, ta shen yn Ghaelg Vanninagh s’moghey foddym dy baghtal scarrey rish yn Ghaelg Albinagh. | As far as I know, that is the earliest Manx Gaelic I can clearly separate from Scottish Gaelic. | |
| Neayr’s yn traa shen, ta bishagh ny glare er daghyrt gyn cummey as gyn lajerys. | Since that time, the increase (progresion?) of the language has happened without form and without strength. | |
| Ayns “Binn as Currymyn yn Chreestiagh” ec Aspick Wilson, 1707, fodmain lhaih Gaelg ta dy baghtal cochianglit rish yn Ghaelg ta ayns Lioar “Dean of Lismore”, as myrgeddin rish yn Ghaelg Albinagh jeianagh. | In Bishop Wilson’s “The Principles and Duties of Christianity”, 1707, we can read Manx that is clearly co-connected to the Gaelic that is in the ‘Book of the Dean of Lismore’, and also to Modern Scottish Gaelic. | |
| Agh, ny yeih, fodmayd neesht fakin mooarane dy Vaarlaghys. | But, nevertheless, we can also see a lot of Anglicisation. | |
| Dy jinnagh studeyr ymmyd jeh lhied yn Vaarlaghys jiu, yinnagh shin deyrey eh myr neuchiart as joarree. reeaht? | If a student were to make use of such Anglicisation today, we would condemn it as incorrect and foreign, right? {??} | |
| Ayns y Vible, fodmain feddyn “Noo Ean”, lesh Gaelg aalin as shenn-ughtaragh, agh ayns “Noo Mian” ta mooarane dy Vaarlaghys as lhag-Ghaelg. | In the Bible, we can find “(The Gospel of) John”, with beautiful and old authoritive Manx, but in “(The Gospel of) Matthew” there are a lot of Anglicisation and slipshod Manx. | |
| Myr ta’n ghlare er n’aase, ta’n grammar er jeet dy ve ny sloo cramp. | As the language has grown, the grammar has become less complex. | |
| Cha nee olk shen, dy ve shickyr; t’eh taghyrt ayns dagh ooilley ghlare ta bio. | That isn’t bad, to be sure; it happens in every language that is alive. | |
| Agh myr ta’n caghlaa er daghyrt, ta mestidyn er n’irree. | But as the change has happened, confusions have arisen. | |
| As shegin daue ve er nyn reaghey my s’mian lhien coyrt er yn ghlare dy ve lajer as sullyr. | And they must be sorted if we wish to make the language to be strong and clear. | |
| Lhig dooin jeeaghyn er daa gholleeid. | Let’s look at two difficulties. | |
| 1. Nee cair dooin jannoo “eclipsis” (stronnaghey) ny “lenition” (boggaghey) ayns ennym-breearoil lurg da “er” ayns y chooish slanjeant chaie? | 1. Is it right for us to make ‘eclipsis’ (nasalisation), or ‘lenition’ (softening) in verbal nouns after ‘er’ in the past perfect tense? | |
| She shickyr ta mish [dy] lhisagh eh ve “eclipsis”. | It is certain, I am that it should be ‘eclipsis’. | |
| Ga dy vel ny neesht cummaghyn[1] ry-akin ayns y Vible, cha nel doot erbee dy re “lenition” neuchiart. | Although both forms are to be seen in the Bible, there is no doubt at all that ‘lenition’ is incorrect. | |
|
[1] ny neesht cummaghyn] seems to mean ‘both forms’ here.
[ny-neesht] ‘both’ — is usually attributive and follows a pronoun, eg.
[ad shoh ny-neesht] ’both of them’. For ‘both forms’ the expected phrase is
[yn daa chummey] ‘the two forms’.
| ||
| Ny yeih, ta un ’ockle er-lhimmey ayn. | Nevertheless, there is one exceptional word. | |
| Ta yn breear “cur” ny share “coyrt”, er jeet voish “ec toyrt”. | The verb ‘cur’, or better ‘coyrt’ has come from ‘ec toyrt’. | |
| As s’leayr dy vel yn breear shoh meereilltagh. | And clearly this verb is irregular. | |
| Er y fa shen, lhisagh eh ve “ta mee er choyrt”. | Therefore, it should be ‘ta mee er choyrt’ (‘I have given’). | |
| Myr shen, s’cair dooin screeu “ta mee er glashtyn” ayns ymmyd jeh “chlashtyn”, as “ta mee er n’goll” ayns ymmyd jeh “gholl”. | So, we ought to write ‘ta mee er glashtyn’ instead of ‘chlashtyn’, and ‘ta mee er n’goll’ instead of ‘gholl’. | |
| 2. Ayns shoh ta mee smooinaghtyn harrish ro-enmyn, as yn chooish jeh ennym. | 2. Here I am thinking over pronouns, and the matter of nouns. | |
| Ayns shenn Ghaelg, va ro-ennym neuchramp er ny eiyrt liorish ennym ayns y chooish “dative”. | In Old Gaelic, simple pronouns followed by a noun were in the ‘dative’ case. | |
| Ta’n chooish shoh bunnys er skellal roish nyn n’glare nish, ga dy vel ee er-mayrn foast ayns Yernish as Albinish. | This case has almost disappeared from our language now, although it still survives in Irish and Scottish Gaelic. | |
| Myr eiyrtys er shoh, ta ro-ennym neuchramp nish er eiyrt liorish ennym, ayns y chooish “nominative” (ennymagh) as my ta’n ennym eiyrt er “yn”. Ta’n chied lettyr surral boggaghey, rere leighyn ny glare. | As a consequence of this, simple pronouns are now followed by a noun, in the ‘nominative’ case’ and if the noun follows ‘yn’ the first letter suffers lenition, according to laws of the language. | |
| gh lurg da ro-ennym cramp, shegin da ymmyd ve er ny yannoo jeh yn chooish “genitive” (shellooagh). | But after compound pronouns, use must be made of the ‘genitive’ (possessive) case. | |
| Ta shoh er yn oyr dy vel ro-ennym cramp goaill stiagh hannah ro-ennym neuchramp as ennym myrgeddin. | This is because compound pronouns already include simple pronouns and a noun also. | |
| Son sampleyr, ta yn ro-ennym “mychione” goaill stiagh “my” as “kione”. | For example, the pronoun ‘mychione includes ‘my’ and ‘kione’. | |
| Myr shen, t’eh kiart dy ghra “mychione ny moaney”, agh neuchuart dy ghra “mychione yn voain”. | So, it is correct to say ‘mychione ny moaney’ (‘about the peat’, but incorrect to say ‘mygeayrt yn voain’ (‘about the peat’). | |
| BRANLAADAGH. | BRANLAADAGH. | |