Plé:Oxford

labhaítear moran Gaeilge anseo (nílim ag magadh fút).

Ocsanphort?

San alt en:Irish exonyms tugtar Ocsanphort mar leagan Gaeilge ar Oxford. An bhfuil fhios ag éinne carbh as an focal sin? --MacTire02 12:17, 14 Lúnasa 2009 (UTC)

Áth na nDamh

De réir Guliolopez (Áth na nDamh) may be the GD name, but commonname in GA and EN is "Oxford". Leaving redirect and ref in place.

Ach tá Áth na nDamh in úsáid cheana anseo!

"Bhronn Ollscoil Áth na nDamh MA honoris causa ar Lhuyd sa mbliain 1701 agus toghadh é mar chomhalta den Chumann Ríoga in 1708. Fuair sé bás den phliúraisí in Áth na nDamh sa mbliain 1709."( Féach: http://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Lhuyd).

" Ba staraí Gearmánach agus bhunaitheoir fhocleolaíocht na dteangacha Ceilteacha é Johann Kaspar ... Würzburg, St. Gallen, Miolán, Londain agus Áth na nDamh. .( Féach: http://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Kaspar_Zeuss).

Tugann Panu Höglund Baile Átha Tarbh ar Oxford san úrscéal 'An Béarlóir Deireannach'; Thug mé aghaidh ar Bhaile Átha Tarbh chun léann mo theangan féin a fhoghlaim. Agus nuair a chonaic mé geafta na hollscoile an chéad uair, b'iad na focla OXFORD UNIVERSITY - UNIVERSITAS OXONIENSIS amháin a léigh mé air, as Laidin is as Béarla, gan Gaeilge ar bith. (féach:http://www.smo.uhi.ac.uk/gaeilge/corpus/Panu/bearloir.html ) Éóg1916 19:05, 24 Meán Fómhair 2010 (UTC)

Surely Áth na nDamh rather than 'Oxford'? There doesn't seem to be any consistency with using local Gaelic names (since Gaidhlig is the local variation of Gaeilge in Breatain). I would argue that a Gaidhlig alternative be used where a Gaeilge one doesn't exist e.g. 'Londain' rather than 'Lunnainn' but 'Dún Déagh' rather than Dundee.

If we use common Béarla names for places in Breatain then the all Gaidhlig placenames in Albain would have to be reverted to their Béarla equivalent to maintain consistency. Chaco 2 Bealtaine 2013

Hi. The convention is that we use the local common/official placename in the local official/native language. Except where a common/official GA name exists. (GA names must pass the Focal.ie/Logainm.ie "test". If it doesn't pass this test it's Original Research. And we don't do OR). So:

• Oxford:
  • Oxford is in England. Where they speak English. The common English name is "Oxford".
  • There is no official GA name. It is sometimes called "Áth na nDamh". But this doesn't pass the OR test[1][2]
  • So the English name "wins". We use it.
  • (We don't use the GD name because it has no official status in England. Or on this project.)
• Aberdeen (for example):
  • Aberdeen is in Scotland. Where GD is an official language[3]. The common/official GD name is Obar Dheathain.
  • So it "wins" .

In short: GD is ONLY a valid fallback for Scottish placenames. Nowhere else. Guliolopez (talk) 11:40, 2 Bealtaine 2013 (UTC)

Hey Guliolopez, a good answer but I’m not quite convinced.

Oxford is in England. England is not an independent country but part of the United Kingdom. Gaidhlig is one of the recognised regional languages of the UK. This meaning it has special support in areas where there is a large concentration of speakers, but is still is eligible for support outside of these areas.

There are Welsh schools in London. There aren’t any Gaelic schools because there has been no demand for them there. But if there was a demand, then there would be some.

GD therefore is an authority for Gaidhlig placenames for the entire United Kingdom and not just Scotland. Unless Scotland becomes independent, then the GD version should be used as the local name for any town or city or feature in the UK – if no Gaeilge one exists.

To claim that we should use Oxford instead of Áth na nDamh because “Oxford is in England. Where they speak English” is anachronistic. Large numbers of people in England do not speak English as their common language. Over 300 languages are spoken in London alone. English is not the official language of England either (the only official language it ever had was Old French).

Logainm.ie and focal.ie don't seem to have any consensus on local GD names. I’m dubious about using it slavishly as an authority on placenames in Britain because they appear to have done the minimum of research on it.

Why should we use Gaidhlig placenames anyway? I assume we do because of the clear connection between it and Gaeilge. They are not completely separate languages. I argue that we use Gaidhlig as placename resource for Britain often as possible or not at all. If you doggedly stick to the arbitrary rule that GD versions should only be used in Scotland, you are going to end up with an absurdities. For example:

• Berwick-upon-Tweed (Northumberland, England) GD version - Bearaig-a-Deas
• North Berwick (East Lothian, Scotland) GD version - Bearaig-a-Tuath

This clearly upsets the Gaelic etymological relationship between the two towns.

Chaco 2 Bealtaine 2013

Hi. I'm sorry, but I don't follow your last point at all. Why did you just create the Bearaig-a-Deas article? To illustrate a point of some kind? You suggest that there is inconsistency in how we name articles. And then point to two examples. Both of which you created. One which you created today? How does this illustrate a point about pervasive confusion among other editors? (And - FYI - I don't agree with the name you just gave that article. Not even the GD project uses the name "Bearaig a Deas"!)

Anyway, my basic point remains: When determining the name for ANY article on ANY Wikipedia project, the rule is to use the commonname in the project language. So long as it doesn't conflict with other meanings. It's a basic principle of the project.

The commonname in Irish for Oxford is "Oxford". This is the Irish project, so that's what we use. Some Irish speakers call it something else. But those uses don't meet commonname tests. This is supported by the Foras na Gaeilge project. We don't "slavishly" use the Foras na Gaeilge project, but it's handy for validating when there is doubt or to ensure we're not engaging in OR.

In terms of placenames in Scotland, many Irish speakers will use the GD name. Because of the linguistic overlaps you describe. That's fine. As it is compatible with commonname guidelines. And isn't considered OR.

Using GD names to fill in "gaps" in any other language or locale is OR however and not consistent with commonname principles.

In short: It is not in keeping with project mores to "invent" Irish translations for placenames, people, etc. Because it is not Wikipedia's ROLE to do this.

Apologies if I am being a bit blunt about this, but this is one of my serious pet-peeves about the project. It is not funny or clever to "Irish-ise" Barack Obama's name (it is OR that is in breach of commonname), it is not useful to "invent" an Irish translation for Wolfe Tone (it is OR as no contemporary or subsequent text uses it), and it is not in keeping with guidelines to unilaterally "translate" placenames in Colorado (or any other place), and it is not relevant/appropriate to "relabel" placenames outside Scotland or far from where GD is spoken with the GD name. It just isn't! </rant over> Guliolopez (talk) 16:54, 2 Bealtaine 2013 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm poking my nose in here, but I have to agree with Guliolopez on this. Apart from anything else, the Scots Gaelic version wasn't even the version being proposed!! It was an Irishised version. The name in the reference is "Àth nan Damh" but the proposal was for "Áth na nDámh". I understand there is a very close relationship between Scots Gaelic and Irish, but they are two different languages, with different, albeit very similar, orthographies, different grammatical structures, etc. If we use "Áth na nDámh", we are creating an Irish language version of a Scottish version of an English placename. If we use the proposed version we are going against WP policy, and we are also suggesting the Scottish version is somehow beneath Irish. This is wrong, morally and according to WP policy. I have been reluctant to state anything before about the placenames in Scotland too, but in my mind the majority of them are also wrong. If we use the Scots Gaelic version then we should use the Scots Gaelic version, complete with Scots Gaelic diacritics, and not some <ahem> basterdised</ahem> Irish version. To do as we have been doing so far goes against what most of us in the Irish speaking community do (use the Scots version unadulterated) and somehow suggests the Scots version is inferior. My rant also over! ^Mac Tíre _Cowag 19:50, 2 Bealtaine 2013 (UTC)

Well my rant isn't over!

Okay, MacTire02 my bad on ‘Áth na nDámh’! I just cut and paste it from the top of this discussion page – I meant ‘Áth nan Damh.’ Anyway, I have no idea how ‘Áth na nDámh’ came about. Another example of someone taking it on themselves to, as was said, to ‘Irish-ise’ a place name. I’m not sure about the diacritic thing. This decision to put Gaidhlig ones the other way to the Gaeilge diacritics was only taken in the 1940s. The mind boggles as to why they bothered.

I agree with you Guilolopez – I can’t stand invented names either. But this is my whole point. While I map out the British Isles, I want the names to be authentic. I put my hand up and admit when I started doing this I created a few duds myself (mainly due to confusion e.g. Stáisiún Sráid Learpholl Are you supposed to translate when there is a Gaeilge word for Liverpool? Who knows). I do my best now to stick as closely with established names as possible.

And this is why I want to use Gaidhlig names. There is a history behind these names and how they came about. To disregard them in favour of better known English versions is just lazy and cuts out huge parts of our cultural history.

MacTire, you seem to regard Gaidhlig as a complete different language to Gaeilge, when it is not. There are bigger differences between dialects of German. Before the nationalist invention of ‘Irish’ and ‘Scottish’ as official names for dialects of the language, a century ago all Gaelic speakers just saw their language as Gaelic.

No one is talking about one form of Gaelic as being inferior or inferior to another. There are just different standards of the same language.

Just because the Gaelic versions of British placenames are obscure and not in common parlance, it doesn’t make them less authentic. I remember watching a program on TG4 about the history of Scotland and I was irked by the way the ‘Irish’ speaking presenter used English names for large Scottish cities. I put this down (without meaning to sound rude) to a widespread cultural ignorance of the Gaelic version place names in Scotland.

It reminds me of a story I read about the Aran Islands. When language researchers first arrived there in the 1890s, they found everyone speaking Gaelic, but counting in English. The islanders were never educated in Irish and it had been long forgotten how to count in that language. Irish numbers were completely unfamiliar to them. This is analogous to Irish speakers and the Gaelic place names of Britain.

To repeat my point, we should use Gaelic place names (whether that be Gaeilge, Gaolainn or Gaidhlig) as much as possible. Yes, I created the article Bearaig-a-Deas to prove a point. No one in the Gaeilge community has ever bothered to map out Scotland. The resources of Gaidhlig place names of Scotland are scanty, to say the least , but that does not mean they should be ignored. And if Gaidhlig toponomy extends to a few towns below artificial borders, then we should take them into consideration too. These names have real history, even if they have faded into obscurity. The only problem I would say, and this includes Bearaig-a-Deas, often there is no authority on the official Gaidhlig name and there can be several different ones co-existing.

Just because Irish speakers were culturally cut off from fellow Gaels in Scotland centuries ago, it doesn’t mean we should only use the better known English versions.

The etymology of ‘an Albain’ should show why jurisdiction of Gaidhlig toponomy should not stop at the English border; ‘Albain’ comes from ‘Albion’, suggesting that ‘Albain’ once described the whole of Britain to Gaelic speakers in ancient times. The idea of modern borders creating a line of authenticity for place names is bizarre.

It seems faintly ludicrous to complain about ancient Gaelic place names of Britain being artificial. Especially when compared to the risible selection of completely artificial words focal.ie throws up. I’m yet to find out why Gaeilge is unique in having a word for ‘The Blitz’ (An Bhleaist). Or exactly how and when the Gaeilge speaking community of the west of Ireland magically conceived an Bhurúin as the name for Burundi.

Comical examples of clearly artificial nouns are endemic in Irish. For a language that completely lost its intelligentsia and was just the language of peasantry in the early 20th century, it has accumulated an enormous amount of scientific and technical terms in the last twenty years. Anyone would think there are people in an office sitting around and just making them up for a laugh....

Chaco 2 Bealtaine 2013

Actually, Chaco, as a speaker of multiple languages and a student of linguistics, I can tell you for a fact that the different dialects of German are closer to each other than Irish and Scots Gaelic are to each other. In the German dialects the primary differences are phonological and a slightly differing vocabulary, but the grammar is between 95 and 100% identical. Even Dutch is closer to German than Irish is to Scots Gaelic. So too are Spanish/Portuguese, Danish/Norwegian/Swedish, and Ukrainian/Russian. As an example, the construction of plurals in Scots Gaelic differs to Irish (Irish has internal vowel mutation, as does Scots; Irish has endings in -(e)anna where Scots has -(e)an; and Irish has -(e)aí while Scots does not have this ending or any variation thereof). Scots Gaelic does not have eclipsis in genitive plurals whereas Irish does. Scots has no imperfective or continuous present tense whereas Irish does (tá/bí vs. tha). There are far fewer tenses/moods in Scots compared to Irish; derivative adjectives in Irish agree in number and gender (compare duine Éireannach vs. daoine Éireannacha) whereas Scots derivative adjectives agree only in gender. We then have many words which exist in Scots but not in Irish, and vice-versa, as well as words which exist in both languages but with different meanings (e.g. we have an article here entitled "Blár na hEaglaise Brice" which simply means "The Field of Falkirk", rather than what is supposed to be conveyed - "The Battle of Falkirk"). Scots uses a dual locative prepositional construction (ann an) where Irish uses a single locative prepositional construction (i/in). There are many more differences besides. This is not to detract from the similarities. Indeed the two languages, in academic circles at least, are described as two groups of similar languages within a language continuum (rather than dialect continuum). It is quite well known amongst linguists, that linguists themselves describe the two as separate but closely related languages, while those who focus more on culture and nationalism tend to view the linguistic perspective with contempt.

You say "No one in the Gaeilge community has ever bothered to map out Scotland". Actually they have. Look to Colmcille and you'll find they have created a map of Scotland, Ireland and the Isle of Man entirely in Gaelic. The local variant is always the variant used, with the correct diacritics. Regarding the use in Scots Gaelic of the grave accent - well that doesn't go back to the 1940s. That goes back hundreds of years. Until the 1940s, both a grave and acute accent were used in Scottish Gaelic.

Leaving the linguistic debate aside, you complain about Irish using newly coined words, such as an Bhurúin. Would you prefer if we used the English word instead? Regarding Àth nan Damh - there is very little evidence for its use outside one Scots dictionary and wikipedia and wikipedia-mirror sites. Was there ever really a Gaelic term or is this also just another newly coined word?

"The etymology of ‘an Albain’ should show why jurisdiction of Gaidhlig toponomy should not stop at the English border; ‘Albain’ comes from ‘Albion’, suggesting that ‘Albain’ once described the whole of Britain to Gaelic speakers in ancient times. The idea of modern borders creating a line of authenticity for place names is bizarre." How to start here...first off, there is no such thing as "an Albain", unless you are leaving out one preposition from the GD dative formation "ann an Albain", or "in Scotland". The correct term is simply "Albain" in Irish, or "Alba" in Scottish. You state that "Albain" comes from "Albion". Actually no, it doesn't. "Albion" comes from proto-Indo-European albʰós* meaning white, of which derivatives can be found topologically from Albania in the Balkans to the Alps in Central Europe, to such English terms as albino. Even using the Gaelic concept, the GD term "Alba", its GA equivalent "Albain" and GV "Nalbin" all stem from middle Irish "albbu" (10th-12th centuries), yet the term *albion in this context predates that by some 2,000 years. Heck, we're not even sure who borrowed that term from whom. Was it the ancient Greeks who borrowed it from the locals (unlikely)? Or was it the locals who borrowed it from the ancient Greeks via Latin (far more probable)?

The fact remains, using poorly attested, probable neocons, in one language for a location that only came into existence long after any Celtic tribe lived in that particular area (never mind Gaelic) as a substitute for a placename in another language, and in the process breaking WP policies, is, in my mind at least, grossly unacceptable. Likewise, we have no official Irish term for places such as Dundee. But, if we are going to use the local Gaelic variant here, then we should use the local Gaelic variant - i.e. we should be using Dùn Dè (official) or Dùn Dèagh (conventional) rather than Dún Déagh (OR). ^Mac Tíre _Cowag 22:29, 2 Bealtaine 2013 (UTC)

With respect MacTire02, you are wrong. German dialects are more distinct from each other than Gaeilge and Gaedhlig. Everything else you say is conjecture. Sorry, but you know it is. Chaco 3 Bealtaine 2013

With respect, Chaco, and I honestly don't mean to insult you here, but your level of knowledge of the Irish language is poor at best. I suspect your level of knowledge of Scots Gaelic is even smaller. I have highlighted some of the major differences between Irish and Scots Gaelic, but you have yet to prove how the German dialects are further apart from each other than the Gaelic languages. All you have done is state that they are. Prove it. I could add many more differences between Irish and Scots Gaelic if you want. (And I'll put it to you this way, I have been to the Celtic Congress on a number of occasions - why is it that when speaking in small groups the native Irish speakers and the native Scots Gaelic speakers revert to English when speaking among themselves - the answer is because they do not understand each other, ipso facto, the two are distinctly separate. Not mutually comprehensible. Different grammars. Different verbal constructions. Different tenses/moods. Different plural constructions. Different histories. Different politics. i.e. different languages). You go on to say everything else I mentioned is pure conjecture??? Wow. First off, the next point was about the map. Go to [www.colmcille.net Colmcille] and you will find it - i.e. not conjecture. As for the grave/acute accent in Scots Gaelic - you should try reading "Accents, Apostrophes, and Hyphens in Scottish Gaelic" by Professor Mackinnon from The Celtic Review (1910). Again not conjecture - you just didn't bother checking. The next point, regarding Àth nan Damh - do a google search and use the restrictions available to remove wikipedia connections and see what you get - answer: very little, so again not conjecture. The next point on "an Albain" - well, first off you were grammatically and linguistically incorrect with that term, so I don't know why you're even challenging me on this particular paragraph, but here goes: the term "Albion" was used in the Massaliote Periplus written in the 6th century BC (nesos Iernon kai Albionon). Old Irish, the predecessor to both Modern Irish and Scots Gaelic, is dated at the extreme to the 4th century AD - that's approximately 600 years between the first attestation of the term Albion used to describe any part of these isles and the birth of a Gaelic tongue. Regarding the use of the term albʰós*, perhaps you may want to check this page out. Regarding the use of "Albbu" as the middle-Irish name for Scotland - well it's a -u stem feminine noun (dative case: drop the -(i)u and add -(a)in(n); genitive case: drop the -(i)u and add -(e)ann), similar to Manu, Éiriu, "abhu", etc. In Irish, with the exception of "Éire", all these words came to use the dative form as the nominative form: Manu became Manainn (genitive Manann), Alb(b)u became Albain (genitive Alban), abhu became abhainn - still abha in some dialects - (genitive abhann), Éiriu remained, albeit rewritten as Éire except in some Munster dialects where it did indeed change to Éirinn, with a dative in Éirinn and genitive in Éireann. Everything I have mentioned can be backed up by references, even by doing a very brief check using Google. Everything you wrote is entirely opinion based, devoid of facts, and in many cases, linguistically wrong. On a final point of note, if you are going to reference Irish and Scots Gaelic by their native languages as you did when you stated "German dialects are more distinct from each other than Gaeilge and Gaedhlig", do so in their native languages - it's Gaeilge and Gàidhlig, not Gaeilge and Gaedhlig (with Gaedhlig simply being another term used for Irish, not Scots Gaelic - remember <ài> is pronounced /aː/ in GD, whereas <ae> is pronounced /eː/. The GD version is pronounced /ˈkaːlɪkʲ/. Your rendering would suppose a pronunciation of /ˈgeːlɪkʲ/). ^Mac Tíre _Cowag 01:19, 3 Bealtaine 2013 (UTC)

Bheadh suim agam an t- ábhar seo a phlé, ach ní i mBéarla!Éóg1916 (talk) 18:24, 4 Bealtaine 2013 (UTC)

B'fhearr díriú ar ábar nua a chruthú, Oxford amháin nó le hÁth na nD aitheanta leis. 86.45.12.130 19:17, 4 Bealtaine 2013 (UTC) EOMurchadha

Mo dheich ceint sa cheist thuasluaite - má tá ainm áirithe eile atá aitheanta go hoifigiúil, ba cheart é a chur in iúl san alt. Fós féin, má tá leaganacha eile a bhaintear feidhm as, sílim féin go gcuireann siad le spéis an ailt. Sin ráite, caithfear foinsí a bheith ann, a chruthaíonn go bhfuil a leithéid d'ainm á úsáid.

Caithfear idirdhealú a dhéanamh idir an t-ainm oifigiúil agus na leaganacha eile a bhfuil feidhm bainte astu i bhfoinsí éagsúla.

Ní rant é sin, is dóigh, ach más féin, tá sé thart. Antóin (talk) 09:47, 5 Bealtaine 2013 (UTC)