Kinda been wondering... Grammatically, is there a reason this couldn't possibly read "(Unspecified 3rd Person Subject) eats the tiger"? More specifically, without [verb] sé/sí/siad [noun] or a named subject, would what follows the verb always be taken as the subject, or can it ever contextually be the object (ie 'Unnamed!He eats the tiger')? ...If that makes any sense?
No, what follows is always the subject.
Unless the verb has the subject built into it, via an inflected form.
Okay, thanks! That's exactly what I was wondering, since I remember learning in Latin and Japanese you could sometimes indicate/imply the subject through the verb alone....
You could say "itear an tíogar" or "the tiger is eaten". I recall someone saying that this is the equivalent of "one eats the tiger" but I'm not certain.
Yes, itear is the autonomous form of the verb ith, which would be used for “One eats the tiger.”
In irish, the verb comes before the subject. For example, in this sentence, it goes "eats the tiger" in order in english, but when you translate the sentence as a whole, it translates to "the tiger eats". Basically the sentences arent ordered the same way english ones are.
The spelling is so different, yet hearing the words pronounced, they sound very close to german and/or english. Irish doesn't seem so outlandish anymore, once you get to know it a little bit.
the verb always goes first in am irish sentence and then the person or animal, e.g. 'd'fhag na paisti an scoil ar a tri a chlog' (the children left school at 3 o clock) so it wouldnt be 'eats the tiger' although it looks like it
itheann an tiogar the tiger eats