Welsh: Mutation of "bod" after simple verb

Curt Jugg

Senior Member
English - England
Sorry to come up with another query so soon after the other two, but in the Hugo “Welsh in Three Months” on page 168 I found the sentence “Allun i byth fod wedi ennill”. I'm not clear why “bod” has been mutated. Having looked in Thorne's “A Comprehensive Welsh Grammar” I found this (paragraph 70): “When the object of the simple verb is not preceded by the article or any other word but follows immediately after either (a) the verb, or (b) the verb + an auxiliary pronoun, or (c) the subject, it is mutated.” Now “fod” doesn't immediately follow (a), (b) or (c) so the mutation doesn't appear to be in line with that rule. Or am I looking at the wrong rule?

I'd be grateful if either Welsh_Sion or Tegs could help me out on this one.
 
  • Welsh_Sion

    Senior Member
    Welsh - Northern
    Quick response from me.

    In my Hugo version (1994: 168), “Allwn [sic.] i byth bod wedi ennill” (I could never have won), there is no mutation.

    There are errors in the phonemic descriptions, however, on occasion in my Hugo. :(

    O.N. If you put an '@' (e.g. @Curt Jugg) you can effectively 'page' the person whose attention you want ... So, as a call to arms, I invoke, @Tegs.
     

    Curt Jugg

    Senior Member
    English - England
    That's interesting. The misspelling of "Allwn" was my error, I'm afraid, but it's definitely fod in my version (Copyright 1994, 1998). Do you agree it should be "bod"?
     

    Curt Jugg

    Senior Member
    English - England
    A curious thing. I did a Google search on the words "allwn i byth bod wedi" (in inverted commas) and didn't get one hit; I did the same thing with "allwn i byth fod wedi" (the mutated version) and got about half a dozen. What can we make of that?
     
    Last edited by a moderator:

    Curt Jugg

    Senior Member
    English - England
    @Welsh_Sion

    Did a variation on the above Google search: "byth fod wedi" came up with 4,720 hits but "byth bod wedi" only came up with 7. I'm confused!
     

    Curt Jugg

    Senior Member
    English - England
    And that, presumably, is why the 1998 version of Hugo was amended to "fod". Though, of course, that also means that the mutation is not in line with paragraph 70 of Thorne's Grammar.
    On the same page of the Hugo there is also the sentence "Allwn i ddim bod wedi ennill" with no mutation of "bod". I know that mutation of an object doesn't take place when "ddim" is involved, but I don't know if this is because of the special nature of "ddim", so to speak, or because "ddim" is itself the mutated object. Do you see what I mean?
     

    Welsh_Sion

    Senior Member
    Welsh - Northern
    As I recall it, 'ddim' is classified almost like a 'dummy object', so takes the mutation itself and 'blocks' the mutation to what follows.

    Affirmative: Gwelais (i) flodau - I saw (some) flowers, with direct object of short form verb suffering Tr. Meddal.
    Negative: (Ni) welais (i) ddim blodau - I didn't see (any) flowers, dim takes the treiglad, blodau retains the radical.
     

    Tegs

    Mód ar líne
    English (Ireland)
    it's definitely fod in my version (Copyright 1994, 1998). Do you agree it should be "bod"?
    The mutated version sounds fine to me. The non-mutated version sounds completely wrong, so going off what my ear tells me, you should mutate. I don't know the rule behind this though. I speak southern Welsh, in case that makes a difference.
     

    Curt Jugg

    Senior Member
    English - England
    The mutated version sounds fine to me. The non-mutated version sounds completely wrong, so going off what my ear tells me, you should mutate. I don't know the rule behind this though. I speak southern Welsh, in case that makes a difference.
    Mutate it is then.Thanks, Tegs.
     
    Top