Re: Anyone conversant in Tagalog here?

On Apr 15, 8:12 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 15 Apr 2007 05:25:26 -0700, <phogl...@xxxxxx> wrote in
<news:1176639926.737220.305950@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
in sci.lang:

On Apr 15, 2:35 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[...]

The _language_ is not more important (except to those
interested in Celtic languages and Indo-European
generally), but a massive authoritative reference
grammar of an insufficiently familiar classical language
is considerably more valuable than the latest larn-
yerself-Irish book.
Your values are not universal, not even in linguistics.
The orthography "larn-yerself-Irish" suggests a racist
attitude towards the Irish by the way.

Don't be silly; it merely suggests a dismissive attitude
towards the old blue and yellow peril and their kin.

As regards pure scholarly interest, "Learning
Irish" (first published sometime in the eighties)

1980.

Yes, that seems to be the publishing year of the editio princeps, now
that I could check it in my own copy. I bought my first copy back in
1987.


is not "the latest fad" in any sense, but in itself a
classical (sic!)

Wrong word: you need 'classic'.

Who cares, it's just English. :)

account of the syntax of a widely-spoken dialect of Irish.

It may be, for all I know, but it's certainly not arranged
as such; the presentation is pretty much traditional
teach-yourself style.

The presentation certainly is, but I have never seen a grammar of
Irish which would take such pains with even relatively obscure
features of Irish syntax.

.

Relevant Pages