I said, Sadly, Manx was written down with an English orthography, versus Irish which used Latin orthography. Had both been transcribed in Latin, then it would be so much easier to find the common cognates, and that would’ve enriched the early history of both languages/dialects enormously. Can you please copy a few pages and post them here?
And then Celtic languages administrator, Lùthais MacGriogair said, Mo Hurley Manx spelling isn't really "English-based". If you read most words as if they were English, you don't get the Manx pronunciation of the words. The letters and groups of letters don't always have the same phonetic value in English and in Manx. Concerning the "Latin orthography" of Irish, what do you mean?
I said, Lùthais MacGriogair When Old Irish was transcribed into writing, monks used Latin orthography as their model. Since Archaic Irish probably predated Latin, I’m sure there were compromises, and a fair bit of shoehorning to make Irish fit the Latinate grammatical structure.
Manx, first written down in modern times, is much closer to English pronunciation than to Irish! The first transcribing of Manx was by English/Welsh speaker, Bishop Phillips in the 16th century.
“When, however, about the seventeenth century it became so, a system of spelling was adopted which, based upon English with a dash of Welsh, aimed at being phonetic, instead of, like Irish and Scotch, preserving the etymology of words. As a matter of fact it succeeded very well in not preserving the etymology; but unless the pronunciation has materially altered, its other object was not such a success. “
I cited a paper, MANX LANGUAGE ITS GRAMMAR, LITERATURE, AND PRESENT STATE
Lùthais MacGriogair said, "When Old Irish was transcribed into writing, monks used Latin orthography as the model."
Latin orthography with the letters' values they would use when reading Latin with their Irish pronunciation, ie. intervocalic d as [ð], intervocalic g as [ɣ] etc, plus all the innovations needed to transcribe sounds that don't exist in ("hiberno") Latin : χ, θ... and many diphthongs, etc. But nowadays when talking about the Modern Irish spelling, one can't say it's based on Latin because its spelling has become completely different.
I tried to clarify my point: "Manx, first written down in modern times, is much closer to English pronunciation than to Irish! The first transcribing of Manx was by English/Welsh speaker, Bishop Phillips in the 16th century."
Still Lùthais MacGriogair wouldn’t concede the point, he said, If you know the pronunciation of Manx words compared to their spelling you know well that the Manx orthography isn't simply English... Knowing English barely helps to learn how to pronounce Manx words...
I said, exasperated, Lùthais MacGriogair, did I say Manx orthography was simply English? No. I said Manx was transcribed into modern English, not unlike Old Irish into Latin. So, yes, English (with a Welsh sensibility because the bishop was a native Welsh speaker) informs pronunciation.
I explained, Manx was not a written language. It was a spoken language. Somebody had to physically write it down. This happened relatively recently, in the 17th c., unlike Old Irish, which was written down in Latin orthography in the 7th-12th cs. Before that, Archaic Irish was sometimes written using Ogham. But we really don’t have any way of guessing what it sounded like—using Latin as a guideline is about as good as it gets.
And then Celtic languages administrator, Lùthais MacGriogair said, Mo Hurley Manx spelling isn't really "English-based". If you read most words as if they were English, you don't get the Manx pronunciation of the words. The letters and groups of letters don't always have the same phonetic value in English and in Manx. Concerning the "Latin orthography" of Irish, what do you mean?
I said, Lùthais MacGriogair When Old Irish was transcribed into writing, monks used Latin orthography as their model. Since Archaic Irish probably predated Latin, I’m sure there were compromises, and a fair bit of shoehorning to make Irish fit the Latinate grammatical structure.
Manx, first written down in modern times, is much closer to English pronunciation than to Irish! The first transcribing of Manx was by English/Welsh speaker, Bishop Phillips in the 16th century.
“When, however, about the seventeenth century it became so, a system of spelling was adopted which, based upon English with a dash of Welsh, aimed at being phonetic, instead of, like Irish and Scotch, preserving the etymology of words. As a matter of fact it succeeded very well in not preserving the etymology; but unless the pronunciation has materially altered, its other object was not such a success. “
I cited a paper, MANX LANGUAGE ITS GRAMMAR, LITERATURE, AND PRESENT STATE
Lùthais MacGriogair said, "When Old Irish was transcribed into writing, monks used Latin orthography as the model."
Latin orthography with the letters' values they would use when reading Latin with their Irish pronunciation, ie. intervocalic d as [ð], intervocalic g as [ɣ] etc, plus all the innovations needed to transcribe sounds that don't exist in ("hiberno") Latin : χ, θ... and many diphthongs, etc. But nowadays when talking about the Modern Irish spelling, one can't say it's based on Latin because its spelling has become completely different.
I tried to clarify my point: "Manx, first written down in modern times, is much closer to English pronunciation than to Irish! The first transcribing of Manx was by English/Welsh speaker, Bishop Phillips in the 16th century."
Still Lùthais MacGriogair wouldn’t concede the point, he said, If you know the pronunciation of Manx words compared to their spelling you know well that the Manx orthography isn't simply English... Knowing English barely helps to learn how to pronounce Manx words...
I said, exasperated, Lùthais MacGriogair, did I say Manx orthography was simply English? No. I said Manx was transcribed into modern English, not unlike Old Irish into Latin. So, yes, English (with a Welsh sensibility because the bishop was a native Welsh speaker) informs pronunciation.
I explained, Manx was not a written language. It was a spoken language. Somebody had to physically write it down. This happened relatively recently, in the 17th c., unlike Old Irish, which was written down in Latin orthography in the 7th-12th cs. Before that, Archaic Irish was sometimes written using Ogham. But we really don’t have any way of guessing what it sounded like—using Latin as a guideline is about as good as it gets.
When a language is transcribed, you have to keep in mind the foster language alphabet pronunciation guide. A good example of this going awry is when Americans try to pronounce a Native American word transposed into English via the Spanish. And they fail miserably. Matilija poppy, a Chumash word, transcribed by the Spanish comes out very different in English pronunciation.
Still he kept at it, refusing to acknowledge my point, I sold him, Lùthais MacGriogair you’re nitpicking. If the same orthographic system that was used to transcribe Old Irish was used on transcribing Manx, we would know significantly more about most languages, because, root words.
Have you studied Archaic, or Old Irish? It is different than modern Irish, but there are many words that are spelled similarly—then Modern Irish decided to modernize and reform spelling which created confusion.
Lùthais MacGriogair said, You wrote "Sadly, Manx was written down with an English orthography, and it's just wrong.” Also Old Irish uses a very modified form of "Latin-based" orthography. If you know Latin and try to read Old Irish aloud, your pronunciation will be very, very far from the Old Irish pronunciation.
I said, Lùthais MacGriogair You are still missing the point. If both languages had been recorded with the same orthographic system, we would have far more preserved embedded archaic information about the history and the development of the language itself. As it stands now, it’s a rough translation between the two languages because two different orthographies were used. Old Irish is actually more direct than modern Irish in terms of pronunciation and spelling because modern Irish has changed significantly. Ditto that with Scots Gaelic.
Today I found this: The Manx phonetic system is the worst, being based upon English principles of spelling (if such there be).
Today I was looking for examples of “faoi reim” and look what I found, dated 1901. Page 6. Someone in a Celtic linguistics group reamed me a new one for suggesting that Manx was written in phonetic English
I cited Celtia, a Pan-Celtic Monthly Magazine, 1901, as a reference.
And still he wouldn’t let it go, and followed me to another post. Manx uses certain digraphs borrowed from English but it doesn't mean they have to be pronounced as in English. Actually if you know English and read Manx words as if they were English words, most of the time you won't get the Manx pronunciation.
I said, I never said that you pronounced Manx words as English, I said Manx was written down using English orthography, and that by saying the words aloud in English—it informed me. I was able to grasp an understanding of what was written, that I otherwise had no access to, as there were no Manx speakers available. Irish was written down using Latin orthography, so there are different pronunciation rules.
Now I’m waiting to see if I’ll be kicked out of the group for talking back.
Still he kept at it, refusing to acknowledge my point, I sold him, Lùthais MacGriogair you’re nitpicking. If the same orthographic system that was used to transcribe Old Irish was used on transcribing Manx, we would know significantly more about most languages, because, root words.
Have you studied Archaic, or Old Irish? It is different than modern Irish, but there are many words that are spelled similarly—then Modern Irish decided to modernize and reform spelling which created confusion.
Lùthais MacGriogair said, You wrote "Sadly, Manx was written down with an English orthography, and it's just wrong.” Also Old Irish uses a very modified form of "Latin-based" orthography. If you know Latin and try to read Old Irish aloud, your pronunciation will be very, very far from the Old Irish pronunciation.
I said, Lùthais MacGriogair You are still missing the point. If both languages had been recorded with the same orthographic system, we would have far more preserved embedded archaic information about the history and the development of the language itself. As it stands now, it’s a rough translation between the two languages because two different orthographies were used. Old Irish is actually more direct than modern Irish in terms of pronunciation and spelling because modern Irish has changed significantly. Ditto that with Scots Gaelic.
Today I found this: The Manx phonetic system is the worst, being based upon English principles of spelling (if such there be).
Today I was looking for examples of “faoi reim” and look what I found, dated 1901. Page 6. Someone in a Celtic linguistics group reamed me a new one for suggesting that Manx was written in phonetic English
I cited Celtia, a Pan-Celtic Monthly Magazine, 1901, as a reference.
And still he wouldn’t let it go, and followed me to another post. Manx uses certain digraphs borrowed from English but it doesn't mean they have to be pronounced as in English. Actually if you know English and read Manx words as if they were English words, most of the time you won't get the Manx pronunciation.
I said, I never said that you pronounced Manx words as English, I said Manx was written down using English orthography, and that by saying the words aloud in English—it informed me. I was able to grasp an understanding of what was written, that I otherwise had no access to, as there were no Manx speakers available. Irish was written down using Latin orthography, so there are different pronunciation rules.
Now I’m waiting to see if I’ll be kicked out of the group for talking back.
