"I leave in the morning with the boy and I return with the girl."
Translation:Imím ar maidin leis an mbuachaill agus fillim leis an gcailín.
It’s not a stupid question; it’s never stupid to seek an answer to a question.
You seem to have understood the sentence’s syntax perfectly well; ar maidin is indeed a time descriptor, and given the lack of a pronomial direct object in its independent clause, should be placed at the end of its clause. Report this as an error when opportunity allows for you.
Would the placement of ar maidin potentially change the meaning of the sentence? "I leave with the boy [now? tonight?] and return with the girl in the morning": it would in English. If ar maidin technically should be put at the end of the sentence, what does that do to meaning? What are the possibilities for the translation of that sentence? GRMA
There are two clauses (Imím ar maidin leis an mbuachaill, fillim leis an gcailín) joined with a conjunction (agus) in this sentence. You can recognize the clauses, because they each have a verb and a subject and an object.
Scilling said that ar maidin
should be placed at the end of its clause
not at the end of the sentence.
I think that they, like I, went to school back when grammar was taught. The transition occurred later some places then other. On the other hand, I didn't REALLY learn English grammar until I studied another language (Spanish in my case). I do love the distinction between transitive and intransitive verbs which seems to be maintained in Irish, though not in English, where "Enjoy!", originally a transitive verb was adopted for intransitive use--originally by the restaurant industry, I suspect.