Can you say “oedd o dan dŵr” for it flooded?
You can, but you’re not really saying ‘it flooded’, you’re saying ‘the whole bloody road was under water’ etc etc.
The catch-all answer for this sort of nuance stuff is: anything goes, and if they don’t understand you, they’ll either let it slide or help you fix it…
Yeah, but don’t forget SM after dan: oedd o dan ddŵr
So if someone says it about their kitchen, it’s pretty catastrophic?
They’re not going to be in a very happy place, that’s for sure…
Reminds me of when, about fifty years ago, a person from the Shoshone tribe was teaching me a few bits of the language and I remember him saying that the Shoshone for “Come here and I’ll help you” in a different context would mean “Come here and I’ll kill you”. Languages eh?!
hmm, this reply seems to be posted out of context somehow😕
That’s because every post is shown in chronological order. But when you post in response to a specific previous post, as you did, readers can click on that to show them what that “context” was.
Conversations on the forum sometimes go very quickly and answers to questions, etc, can appear to be out of place. But if the post is done in response to a specific previous post in the thread, no matter how far back, a reader can see the previous post.
PS. Just to upate on Rheged Centre.
No language related stuff on show in the main area. Although I didnt check out the art gallery or cinema areas.
I also looked up beutu and it says from o + peutu and peutu to me reminded me of French peu. You can go on an etymology trip or two with this one - to Latin words for foot and paw. It sounds like the English etymology for about may very well be different, but as you say the usage could have merged ( a Norman influence or Chaucer?) - there’s probably a word for the meaning of similar sounding things converging I guess.
I found myself in conversation recently insisting Mae na X meaning ‘There is an X’, and then thinking afterwards that I should have been saying Oes X all along. I realise that I would be (and was) understood, which is the main thing, but:
Is Mae na… always wrong?
Is Mae na… OK, but Oes… ‘better’?
Are they both OK, but in different contexts/shades of meaning?
Are they both OK and effectively interchangeable? (Instinct says not…)
You were doing just fine:
Mae na… There is…
Oes na…? Is there…?
Don’t doubt yourself by thinking about it
But isn’t the official answer (as in not just Ie ) to an Oes…? question just Oes/Nac oes?
From my limited knowledge, correct the proper answer to “Oes…?” is Oes/Nac Oes. From what I’ve been told, although, I have no actual experience, saying Ie/Na is just as well accepted.
Yes, so if you ask,
“Is there tea in the pot?” Oes 'na de…?
The answer would be, “Oes, mae 'na de…” or “nac oes, does 'na ddim te…”.
That’s how I use it. The 'na isn’t used in all areas. If you don’t use it, it avoids the mutation!
The answer reflects the question, this is true, but the affirmative doesn’t.
Ydy o’n hwyr? - ydy, mae’n hwyr
Oes gent ti arian? - oes, mae gen i arian
Yes Helen, that’s exactly how I use it too.
No, Mae 'na… for There is (a)… is always RIGHT!
Oes 'na…? then for the question. Oes 'na foronen ar ôl yn yr oergell? Is there a carrot left in the fridge? (I’m always saying this).
Sorry - just having an existential crisis. Better now