Modern Irish: A Comprehensive Grammar (Routledge Comprehensive Grammars)

By far the best grammar of Irish written in English that I have encountered. The information is extremely well-organized, and the explanations are clear, concise, and accurate. Excellent illustrative examples accompany every point. The formatting is very clean and easy to read (Irish language examples are bolded throughout). Unlike many traditional grammars which mostly limit themselves to a discussion of morphology (word forms), this grammar has an extensive discussion of syntax (sentence structures) as well.The author uses standard modern linguistic terminology to categorize and discuss the material (for example: Determiner, Complement Clause, Sentential Adverb), but the terms are clearly explained throughout, making the book accessible to those with no prior knowledge of linguistics. There is some discussion of dialect variation, but that is not the focus of the book. The author conducted years of fieldwork in Counties Meath and Galway, and most examples are taken from there.

The grammar is not comprehensive despite its title. As a reference grammar, it needs to be. A case in point is the treatment of the verb. Personal endings - used in some dialects like the Munster - are described in Chapter 11 and woefully incomplete tables on pages 98 and 100. Missing in action are Munster present tense 2nd singular active indicative verb forms ending in -ir. While it might be understandable that these forms are not taught to beginners or to those learning dialects that do not include them, it is inexcusable that common verb forms are glossed over in a grammar that bills itself as comprehensive. Even the Wikipedia article on Irish conjugation includes them.Teachers of modern languages are making sweeping editorial decisions about what matter to include in modern grammars and teaching books, and accordingly cripple anyone who then encounters the material that they have unilaterally excluded. This grammar bills itself as comprehensive, and it should therefore include ALL grammatical forms that can be encountered in modern (i.e. from the last three hundred years or so) spoken and written Irish. Of course, emphasis can be on the language as it is encountered in most spoken and written forms today, but excluding grammar needed to understand particular literary or spoken dialect forms does not make for a comprehensive grammar. It just looks to the reader encountering a variety of reference books on the subject like each author is fabricating their own version of the language. This book will benefit from a thorough revision for a second more comprehensive version that does not omit matter that is conspicuous by its absence even to a beginner in the language.The verb "to be" is broken up into Chapter 7 and chapter 10, section 10.8. What about tables of paradigms - not the best way to learn, but surely the best way to present large amounts of information clearly in a reference grammar? Nowhere will you find the forms of to be táim, táir/ taoi tú etc. Really - missing the paradigm of "to be"!The book would benefit from a bulking out of the section on verb nouns with lists of at least a few hundred verb nouns, an index of Irish words referenced, a more comprehensive grammatical index, and a complete account of declension including the dative (prepositional) case (or bill itself as a modern spoken Irish grammar - in which case could we please have a truly comprehensive grammar of spoken Irish that includes all dialects, and not just the latest trends in spoken language or attempts to make Irish easy for grammatically illiterate Anglophone learners).Similarly the section on noun declension is rambling, incoherent, incomplete, and contains errors. The best way to summarize declension of the Irish noun is with the five declensions - that's why the taxonomy of the five declensions was developed in the first place. Unfortunately, plural formation is presented as if there is only one case and with no explanation whatsoever of its relation to declension. Presenting plural formation separately from case makes no sense whatsoever, since nom.-acc. plural is different from genitive plural, which in turn is different from dative plural and vocative plural. Since the plurals are only nom.-acc. and are missing the other three cases and are presented without declension information, all of the patterns present in the five declensions are also missing. Instead, one is left with the impression that there is no logic to plural formation or relationship to the formation of other cases (singular and plural).Under genitive case formation (16.2.2, pp. 148-153), the author actually does lead you through the five declensions (out of order), but she seems almost apologetic in referring to them: the first declension is called "masculine nouns that form their common plural form by making a final consonant slender", second declension feminine nouns are just "feminine nouns", fourth declension nouns are "another fairly large group of nouns, both masculine and feminine [that] does not change form in the genitive" (singular or plural, compared with what?). Then the third declension , which is called "another group of nouns" and the fifth declension ("a few nouns"). The declensions are named only in parentheses. Throughout it is often difficult to know whether the author is referring to genitive singular or genitive plural. The section notes that there is dialect variation, but where are the lists of dialectical variations? I would expect lists of hundreds of nouns with their variations in at least the three main dialect areas in a truly comprehensive grammar.It is exceedingly difficult to produce a comprehensive grammar, but even as a first edition of a reference grammar this is a failure. There's a reason why it is only 304 pages long - it is incomplete. And it is only as long as it is because it contains a lot of explanatory text, through which you will have to plow if you are to obtain the information. I might add that the explanatory text is welcome in a grammar, but it should accompany comprehensive tables showing ALL grammatical forms and long lists of exceptions and dialect forms. In fact, a major issue with this book seems to be that it is as much or more a "teach yourself grammar" book than a comprehensive reference grammar. Omissions simplify a teacher's job and help the beginning student learn, but they are not to be expected in an expensive "comprehensive grammar".

I have learned a lot from this book and will continue to use it for years to come. That being said, I should have searched longer for a better grammar before making this purchase. Having previously purchased Routledge's A New Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish--an extraordinary book--my expectations for this one were way too high. The book is very poorly edited and rather poorly organized. There are several ambiguous or unclear sentences. Sometimes the text says "in the chart above" when the chart is actually below, frequently words that should be bold or italicized are not or vice versa. Sometimes the grammar differs from every explanation of Irish grammar I have previously read; perhaps this one is correct, who knows, but there should be an warning such as "Contrary to what traditional grammars portray..." or something to that effect. Typos are utterly pervasive. Taking into account that there is much less of a demand for Irish language materials than for Spanish, I can accept that the quality bar can be lowered somewhat within reason. However, for $60 there is no excuse for a book to be this problematic. It looks like a teenager typed it last minute at 2:00 AM. It's never a good sign when the body of a book's text is in Times New Roman.