Is this used in both north and south and is it generally the way you would always say you have something?
In the south we tend to say āmae gyda fiā or just āmae 'da fiā.
in the sense of possess somethingā¦
Yes, like āIāve got soup for dinnerā. Is āMae gyda fi cawl i ginioā right?
Iād use cael for that. Fiān cael cawl i ginio - Iām having cawl for lunch.
I suppose you could say Mae 'da fi gawl, ac bydda iān ei gael i ginio - Iāve got soup and Iāll be having it for lunch.
I 'm having cawl for lunch is a lot easier to remember
Another question about āmae gen iā a very usefull form, and about which there is something very surprising (for me, at least !) in challenge 4 (north)
At, time 5 : 50, Aran says āIthe cymraeg for Iāve got, which is of course very different from Iāve got to, is mae gen iā.
I of course agree that both forms " Iāve got" and " 've got to" are very different in their meaning
There is iindeed a difference of meaning between āIāvve got a bookā and ā;Iāve got to read a bookā :
the first form (verb + object of the action which is not a verb) indicates a sort of āownershipā, possession (or absence of possession).
The second form (verb + object of the action whih is a verb) indicates a sort of duty, of obligation.
So, beeing anounced the form"Iāve got" (and beeign insisted on the fact that it is very different from āIāve got toā ) I was expecting practising sentences as āIāve got breadā , āIāve got a bookā, , etc, (indicating the āpossessionā) but, surprise : all sentences are using the ā;got toā meaning (duty) :" Iāve got to learn welsh now" ," Iāve got something to say", etc.
Well, maybe both āIāve gotā are both āmae gen iā in welsh ? But in challenge 4 the fact of beeing said that both forms are āvery differentā (and they are, indeed) , makes that you are surprised to be anounced one form (Iāve got"), and to be used the other one. (Iāve got to)
Or maybe Aran was joking ?. In this cas Iām asking a ridiculous question . By chance, ridicule would not kill. Well, not sure ! But not this kind of ridicule )
Without listening to the Challenges. I think as you say, āIve got toā is an informal way of saying āI mustā, so āMae rhaid i miā. Or possibly āI need toā: āDwiān angenā.
I donāt think that Aran was joking, although maybe you could argue that he overstated the difference: I think that itās a construction that English-speaking learners of Welsh often tend to get wrong, so he wanted to emphasise it. [Edited to add: short version ā I think thereās a difference in French between Jāai Ć chanter une chanson and Jāai une chanson Ć chanter, basically. There certainly is in English between āI have to sing a songā and āI have a song to sing.ā]
Iāve just had a listen to the section in question, and what I think is happening is this:
Youāve got a series of examples of (Mae) rhaid i mi ā such as Rhaid i mi ddweud rhywbeth (āI need to say somethingā) ā or you could, for example, have Rhaid i mi ddarllen llyfr (āI need to read a bookā). We could think of this as Je dois dire quelque chose or Il faut que je dise qqch.
Youāre then told that āIāve gotā (āI haveā, Jāai) is quite different, and is Mae gen i, but a lot of the examples arenāt just Mae gen i lyfr (āIāve got a bookā, Jāai un livre), theyāre much more like Mae gen i rywbeth iāw ddweud (āIāve got something to sayā, Jāai qqch Ć dire).
So I think the thing in English ā and also, I think, in French, which is why I keep giving you French examples even though I know you can read the English ones ā is that the position of the ābookā or the āsomethingā in the sentence makes a big difference to the meaning, which is what Aran wants to get across.
To my mind āIāve got to do somethingā could be a vague, helpless statement ā I feel trapped in this difficult situation, I need to do something about it, but I just donāt know what: Il faut que je fasse quelque chose (mais je ne sais pas quoi faire) ā and I think that would work in Welsh as Rhaid i mi wneud rhywbeth (ond dwiām yn gwybod beth).
On the other hand, āIāve got something to doā means I shouldnāt be sitting down reading the forum when thereās washing-up to do; āIāve got something to sayā means I have a specific point I want to make. Jāai quelque chose Ć dire feels to me as though it implies something a bit more specific than Il faut que je dise quelque chose (mais je ne sais pas quoi dire). Am I right in thinking that Jāai quelque chose Ć dire, mais je ne sais pas quoi dire would sound a bit odd in French?
Similarly, Il faut que je lise un livre (āIāve got to read a bookā) feels less specific, less concrete (Est-ce que vous pouvez māen recommender un de bon? ā āCan you recommend a good one?ā) than Jāai un livre Ć lire (āIāve got a book to readā, Je lāai dĆ©jĆ ou il y en a un en particulier quāil me faut). So, Mae gen i lyfr iāw ddarllen as opposed to just Rhaid i mi ddarllen llyfr.
Interestingly (well, to me ) the future tense in Romance languages comes from the same sort of construction in Vulgar Latin: je chanterai is basically jāai Ć chanter, je dois chanter (et donc je vais le faire) ā which is why the singular endings all look exactly like avoir ā -ai, -as, -a etc.
Please do tell me if Iāve misunderstood the question, or got my French badly/unhelpfully wrong; and Iām sure others will step in if Iāve got my Welsh wrong!
Il faut que je fasse quelque chose
Excellent use of the subjunctive
I remember saying to a French friend that it was hard to use sarcasm in a second language, because people werenāt expecting me to say something that I didnāt mean, and she offered me the useful phrase Ils ne sāattendaient pas a ce que je tentasse māexprimer ainsi, but I think she said that if I attempted to actually use the past subjunctive in spoken French Iād sound beyond pretentiousā¦
Itās impossible using sarcasm speaking to other English speakers sometimes. Americans just donāt get it for example.
Americans just donāt get it for example.
Iād be doubtful about that generalisation but Big Bangās Sheldon certainly seems to struggle with it.
Yes, what Richard saidā¦
Funny discussion, from a very serious and troubled post ! When U wrote it, I put some example in french, thinking "maybe Richard will come here ans answer with an as long answer than my qusetions, but so much precise !!!
But I took off my french examples : too long message !!!
Well, Iām happy to see that my sense of humour is not dead, if I could notice that MAYBE Aran was joking !
Richard, very very very interesting, I could argue a lot around those nuances xometimes very very thin, given vy just the place of the words . (I really love !) And what about f the unsing of the comma, which may change a whole sense of a sentence.
Itās true that ājāai un livre Ć lireā is not the same that ājāai Ć lire un livreā. But youāll now hardly hear people ssaying ājāai Ć lire un livreā, it would sound āold fashionedā (as my english). āJāai Ć lire un livreā would be now said āil faut que je lise un livreā or "ce "livre if you have to read a special book.
Anyway, youāll find this old way of saying in a still very alive expression which is : ājāai Ć faireā and also ājāai mieux Ć faireā
True alos that āIāve something to sayā sounds different from āIāve to say somethingā, but concerning my question, I was refeering to the form of sentences without any verb (except āIāve gotā), because thatās what Aran seemed to suggest in his introduction.Sentences as āIāve got breadā, āIāve got newsā.
Which does not impeeed that I find very very very interesting your whole post. Great ! Are you a philolog ? Do you know Jorn Albrecht in Germany ?
Oooooops, Iām late to go to work !!! Hurry up, MC !!!
But not without saying that : true, le plus que parfait du subjonctif, or even this poor simple imparfait du subjonctif, are now a joking use.
Iāvve GOT TO go now !!! I donāt read again, Iām agraid of the errors Iāll let !
5comoing back) : Richard, of course you ARE a philolog, in the etimological sense of the term, but what I was asking is : you were working with languages as a professional.
Well, yes ā thatās why the comparison between jāai Ć chanter une chanson and jāai une chanson Ć chanter didnāt occur to me until the very end, because jāai Ć ā¦ is osmething I just wouldnāt say.
But yes, effectively:
Mae gen i lyfr = Jāai un livre
Mae gen i lyfr iāw ddarllen = Jāai un livre Ć lire
Rhaid i mi ddarllen llyfr = Il faut que je lise un livre
The thing is that the jāai Ć = āIāve got toā construction is very, very common in English, so English-speaking learners tend to mix these up; and then then thereās another word cael, which means various things including puis-je or puis-je avoir that gets mixed in there as well. Speaking French and Breton, itās not that you wonāt make mistakes, itās just that theyāll be different mistakes
And in answer to your question: I love languages, but I mostly teach maths; I studied Old English, but my parents have lived in the Languedoc for about 30 years and have just got French nationality. Iām a serious amateur philologueā¦
Richard wrote :
" But yes, effectively:
Mae gen i lyfr = Jāai un livre
Mae gen i lyfr iāw ddarllen = Jāai un livre Ć lire"
So Richard : Iāld better have ignored Aran caution, and we would not have had this discussion. I created problems (to myself) for no reason.
Welcome to your parents, but In fact, they are just coming back, if you think of the english (and surely a bit welsh, in the army) past of the region
ā¦ And this leads me to speak about a famous Bordeaux wine (itās not Languedoc, I know, but youāll understand) : whose name is Calon Segur.
The castle in itself was built during the english Aquitaine epoca.
Locally they say that the name comes from a small traditional boat (but I canāt find the very well hidden name ! ) there was on the Gironde.
But, when you notice that above the old main door of the castle, there are 2 harts (from this time old) ācalonā in welsh as in breton, with a K for our part) you canāt avoid thinking that this place could maybe have been property of a Welsh man in the english army at that time (there maybe were I suppose ?)
Afterwards, you imagine a beautiful love story, leading to those 2 harts he put on his castle main doorā¦
Well, it seems to me much more credible than the boat storyā¦ No ?
The two harts are even on the bottles, they are their logo.
I wrote to the people there, just to speak about this hipothesis (maybe totally wrong) but the castle (and the wine) is chinese now, they donāt care at all of historyā¦
See to what kind of discussion the āIāve gotā leads !
Wales could intent a trial to recover the wine property !
(post edited because of probllems with the āquote blockā)
Fiān caelā¦ definitely sounds more user friendly and less cumbersome if youāre saying something like Iām having soup for dinner. Would you use tiān, mae hiān etc in a similar way for that type of statement?
yes, you would - see how the method is building extra pathways already?!