Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

A Gaeltacht in Dublin?

1246710

Comments

  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,780 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Personally I would read that as "The main aim of the organization is the restoration of Irish as an ordinary/everyday language of Ireland".
    That strikes me as a creative misreading. If you look at the phrase "ghnáththeanga na hÉireann" in isolation, I think the most accurate translation would be "the normal language of Ireland". The fact that definite articles are often omitted in Irish allows for your interpretation, but I think - objectively - mine is more accurate.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    RichardAnd wrote: »
    Well, Google translate does have an option of providing feedback. If you think it falls short, tell them.
    How well Google translate works is directly proportional to how much is on the web in the languages being translated. It works by comparing how words are used and with smaller languages such as Irish it isn't the best, also since those at Google know how it works, I won't bother.
    It is pretty much common knowledge that GT isn't accurate enough for definitive translations and is best used to give the gist of what is written (especially in the lesser used languages).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That strikes me as a creative misreading. If you look at the phrase "ghnáththeanga na hÉireann" in isolation, I think the most accurate translation would be "the normal language of Ireland". The fact that definite articles are often omitted in Irish allows for your interpretation, but I think - objectively - mine is more accurate.
    It's the use of the word "Gnáth" that gives me the the feeling of the sentence, not really the use or absence of "an", though that does strengthen it.
    Gnáththeanga just means, "an ordinary everyday language", with no sense of primacy about it.

    Just a wee question (not just to you oscarB), So what if there is an organisation that would like to reinstate Irish as the príomhtheanga here, are some people scared they might actually succeed?
    Don't be worrying, they won't. Though it could become a ghnáththeanga in places where it hasn't been for a while, is that scary too? Would the sound of it hurt your ears?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,910 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    How would a Gaeltacht region (even equal status) in a cosmopolitian city like Dublin be achieved? I can understand the traditional Gaeltacht regions suffering due the recession and efforts being made to establish Gaeltachts less prone to economic uncertainties. How do Irish language groups plan to get Irish from being primarily a book language and persuade people like me who a conversational level of Irish to actually use it.

    My own view that in the short term the goal is impossible due to the jobs situation. Most jobs at the moment are in the export and or Multinational sector. Area's where english is a nessessity and knowledge Irish unfortuneately is pointless far better a foriegn language which would help a person get a job. I'd agree that from a cultural point of view knowledge of Irish is important but as a day to day I don't see what it does. That should be put in the context that that I don't use it and on a day to day basis the language for me is dead. I can understand and would expect someone who does us it regularly to hold a different opinion.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Gnáththeanga just means, "an ordinary everyday language", with no sense of primacy about it.
    You're falling into the trap of making a literal word-for-word translation. It's necessary to look at the overall sense of the phrase, let's look at some neglected parts of the sentence:
    an Ghaeilge a athréimniú mar ghnáththeanga na hÉireann'.
    The first important word is 'athréimniú' which is translated as 'restore' or 'reinstate', this means go back a past situation. No mention of bilingualism and co-residing with English-speakers. The second is 'na hÉireann'' which implies exclusivity.

    Now let's look at some official-speak and try to translate it:
    The Bill has two primary objectives, namely, to provide for a new definition for the Gaeltacht and to make amendments to the role and functions of Údarás na Gaeltachta.
    What does this mean: 'virtual Gaeltachts' in peoples heads, perhaps?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 459 ✭✭Focalbhach


    opti0nal wrote: »
    You're falling into the trap of making a literal word-for-word translation.

    Translating the words actually used? Shocking behaviour.

    Gnáththeanga = ordinary/commonly-used language.
    Príomhtheanga = main language. A word was available if that's the meaning meant to be conveyed.
    opti0nal wrote: »
    The first important word is 'athréimniú' which is translated as 'restore' or 'reinstate', this means go back a past situation.

    A past situation, such as the one where Irish was more commonly used?


    Regardless of this bizarre-but-unsurprising offroad excursion, CnaG's constitution is nothing to do with the possible development of non-traditional Gaeltacht areas.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Focalbhach wrote: »
    Translating the words actually used? Shocking behaviour.
    You don't know much about translation. The intention and sense is important.

    You've ignored the use of 'na h'Eireann'? If they meant 'a' language, they would have said 'in Eireann'.

    You've also ignored their official translation:
    Is main aim is to reinstate the Irish language as the common tongue of Ireland.
    What happened there, a Freudian slip perhaps?
    Focalbhach wrote: »
    Regardless of this bizarre-but-unsurprising offroad excursion, CnaG's constitution is nothing to do with the possible development of non-traditional Gaeltacht areas.
    It helps to understand the motives of those concerned. The 'Main Aim' has not gone away, you know.

    As for 'non-traditional Gaeltacht' - expect a slap from Cu Gaobach.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    opti0nal wrote: »
    You're falling into the trap of making a literal word-for-word translation. It's necessary to look at the overall sense of the phrase, let's look at some neglected parts of the sentence:

    The main point is that if the meaning that you are suggesting was intended, then the use of the word 'Gnáth' makes no sense, the meaning convayed in the term 'Common Language' in English is not contained in the term 'Gnáththeanga' in Irish, to convey the meaning of 'Common Language' you would need to use 'Príomhtheanga'.
    The first important word is 'athréimniú' which is translated as 'restore' or 'reinstate', this means go back a past situation. No mention of bilingualism and co-residing with English-speakers. The second is 'na hÉireann'' which implies exclusivity.


    The use of na hÉireann does not in itself imply exclusivity, it functions as 'Of Ireland' in the sentence, if the phrase was 'Príomhtheanga na hÉireann', that would mean what you are saying, but the use of the word 'Gnáth', which has no connection with exclusivity of primacy in Irish means that this can not be the meaning of the sentence.
    Now let's look at some official-speak and try to translate it:
    What does this mean: 'virtual Gaeltachts' in peoples heads, perhaps?


    No, Its a reference to the change from Geographical to Linguistic criteria for what is a Gaeltacht.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    opti0nal wrote: »
    You don't know much about translation. The intention and sense is important.

    You've ignored the use of 'na h'Eireann'? If they meant 'a' language, they would have said 'in Eireann'.

    Thats not true, 'Na hÉireann' translates as 'Of Ireland' and is appropriate whichever meaning is intended, 'in Éireann' means 'In Ireland' and would not be used either way.

    Indeed the intention and sense are important, and in no sense can Gnáththeanga be made to intend Primary Language.


  • Registered Users Posts: 459 ✭✭Focalbhach


    opti0nal wrote: »
    It helps to understand the motives of those concerned. The 'Main Aim' has not gone away, you know.

    As has been pointed out to you innumerable times by multiple people, your fixation with CnaG ignores the fact that they haven't written the proposed legislation which is (supposedly) under discussion. Your continuing references to a 'main aim' that seems to primarily exist in your head don't do anything to support your case.
    opti0nal wrote: »
    As for 'non-traditional Gaeltacht' - expect a slap from Cu Gaobach.

    I think it's safe to say that Clondalkin is not a traditional Gaeltacht - i.e., Irish-speaking area. If Cú Giobach wants to correct me on that, I'm open to it.

    If, on the other hand, you're referring to the slap you got for your nonsense about some sort of 'traditional' lifestyle that you never explained, but that you think people want to re-create, then I'm happy to clarify that the idea - your idea - was nonsense. We're talking about a language, not a lifestyle. I'll quote Cú Giobach here since you're so taken with his/her thoughts:
    ...the only difference between people in any Irish speaking households and their English speaking neighbours that I have ever come across is the language they speak.

    The traditional early-21st-century Irish lifestyle will remain the early-21st-century Irish lifestyle, whether conducted through Irish, English, French, Polish, or any combination thereof.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Thats not true, 'Na hÉireann' translates as 'Of Ireland' and is appropriate whichever meaning is intended, 'in Éireann' means 'In Ireland' and would not be used either way.
    OK, so the most accurate translation would be 'as common tongue of Ireland? This would be close to the official translation.
    Indeed the intention and sense are important, and in no sense can Gnáththeanga be made to intend Primary Language.
    I think the reason they did not say 'primary language' is that they did not intend there would be secondary languages, remember, the whole concept is to 'restore' or 'reinstate' a previous condition. If they merely meant 'promote more Irish-speaking' they would have declared that as their Main Aim
    No, Its a reference to the change from Geographical to Linguistic criteria for what is a Gaeltacht.
    But isn't 'Gaeltacht' a geographical or physical term?

    The idea of a non-geographic Gaeltacht sounds like a sham.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    PeadarCo wrote: »
    How would a Gaeltacht region (even equal status) in a cosmopolitian city like Dublin be achieved? I can understand the traditional Gaeltacht regions suffering due the recession and efforts being made to establish Gaeltachts less prone to economic uncertainties. How do Irish language groups plan to get Irish from being primarily a book language and persuade people like me who a conversational level of Irish to actually use it.


    An organisation in Galway called Gaillimh le Gaeilge conducted an Exploratory Study into Bilingualism in Galway city.

    Dátheangachas i
    gCathair na Gaillimhe


    It gives a good insight into what a Bilingual City in an Irish Context might look like, though it is taken from a City Planing and Policy view point, rather than looking at spreading Bilingualism on the ground.

    Another example worth looking at is the Gaeltacht Quarter in Belfast, centered around Cultúrlann McAdam Ó Fiaich on the Falls Road.



    When it comes to building a population in an area able to use both languages, then Irish Medium Education is by far the most important factor, and with it, social outlets outside of school where kids can use Irish such as sports clubs run through Irish (Like Na Gaeil Óga in Dublin) and Youth Organisations such as Ógras.
    Later on, Children being raised through/with Irish in the home becomes important, that is where organisations like Comhluadar come in.

    As far as getting people to buy into the concept of a Gaeltacht area in a City, services being made available in Irish, iniatially by the state, and later by Private business is necessary, and a focal point for the language community, such as An Cultúrlann in Belfast or Áras Chrónáin in Clondalkin are important.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    opti0nal wrote: »
    OK, so the most accurate translation would be 'as common tongue of Ireland? This would be close to the official translation.

    If you take 'Common Language' to mean a language that is commonly used/understood by some or most of the people then yes, though in English the term 'Common Language' can have the implication of dominant/primary language, this meaning however is not convayed in the term 'Gnáththeanga'.




    But isn't 'Gaeltacht' a geographical or physical term?

    The idea of a non-geographic Gaeltacht sounds like a sham.

    It means that the criteria by which areas become a Gaeltacht will be Linguistic, up till now, an area was a Gaeltacht because of where it was, from now on an area will be a Gaeltach based on how much Irish is spoken there.
    This makes sense I think you will agree.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    If you take 'Common Language' to mean a language that is commonly used/understood by some or most of the people then yes, though in English the term 'Common Language' can have the implication of dominant/primary language, this meaning however is not convayed in the term 'Gnáththeanga'.
    In this case, it does not mean 'communal', it means 'usual, in regular, ongoing, everyday use'. This of course is true for English, but not for Irish. It is clear that the intent, taking account the phrasing used and of the official translation, is to go back to an Ireland where Irish and not English was the language in regular, everyday use. It's quite a radical, fundamentalist policy, liked by some.
    It means that the criteria by which areas become a Gaeltacht will be Linguistic, up till now, an area was a Gaeltacht because of where it was, from now on an area will be a Gaeltach based on how much Irish is spoken there. This makes sense I think you will agree.
    It depends on how it is measured.

    But what are the 'benefits' that are mentioned? Will people be paid to speak Irish?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,910 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    An organisation in Galway called Gaillimh le Gaeilge conducted an Exploratory Study into Bilingualism in Galway city.

    Dátheangachas i
    gCathair na Gaillimhe


    It gives a good insight into what a Bilingual City in an Irish Context might look like, though it is taken from a City Planing and Policy view point, rather than looking at spreading Bilingualism on the ground.

    Another example worth looking at is the Gaeltacht Quarter in Belfast, centered around Cultúrlann McAdam Ó Fiaich on the Falls Road.



    When it comes to building a population in an area able to use both languages, then Irish Medium Education is by far the most important factor, and with it, social outlets outside of school where kids can use Irish such as sports clubs run through Irish (Like Na Gaeil Óga in Dublin) and Youth Organisations such as Ógras.
    Later on, Children being raised through/with Irish in the home becomes important, that is where organisations like Comhluadar come in.

    As far as getting people to buy into the concept of a Gaeltacht area in a City, services being made available in Irish, iniatially by the state, and later by Private business is necessary, and a focal point for the language community, such as An Cultúrlann in Belfast or Áras Chrónáin in Clondalkin are important.

    Thanks for the Report

    Question. Would it not be better to start with Galway rather than Dublin? I say that because there are Gaeltachts located relatively close and Galway is the only major city near a Gaeltacht and the services and opportunities that come with that. It would also offer greater incentives for busineses. The report shows that there would some potenial of success in Galway but It sounds like ur putting the cart before the horse with the idea of Dublin. It would also be a good idea to conduct a similar study on different areas in Dublin. Give the size and location differences I wouldn't see the study as being directly relevant to Dublin even though its better than nothing.

    To be honest I don't think the state can do a whole lot and has a history of failure, even that report indicates that people aren't overly enthusiastic about state involvement.

    I would take issue with the report comparing the situation of German Italian to Irish English. German and Italian are not comparable with Irish in terms of numbers speaking on a daily basis. Both are major European languages in terms of use Irish isn't.

    The other point is I don't think the Irish language should be the focal point of a community it should be like english just a language that people use in day to day use. I have other things I'm interested in doing. If Irish is a more convinient language for communication I'll use it but its not my focal point.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    PeadarCo wrote: »
    Thanks for the Report

    Question. Would it not be better to start with Galway rather than Dublin? I say that because there are Gaeltachts located relatively close and Galway is the only major city near a Gaeltacht and the services and opportunities that come with that. It would also offer greater incentives for busineses. The report shows that there would some potenial of success in Galway but It sounds like ur putting the cart before the horse with the idea of Dublin. It would also be a good idea to conduct a similar study on different areas in Dublin. Give the size and location differences I wouldn't see the study as being directly relevant to Dublin even though its better than nothing.

    To be honest I don't think the state can do a whole lot and has a history of failure, even that report indicates that people aren't overly enthusiastic about state involvement.

    I would take issue with the report comparing the situation of German Italian to Irish English. German and Italian are not comparable with Irish in terms of numbers speaking on a daily basis. Both are major European languages in terms of use Irish isn't.

    The other point is I don't think the Irish language should be the focal point of a community it should be like english just a language that people use in day to day use. I have other things I'm interested in doing. If Irish is a more convinient language for communication I'll use it but its not my focal point.



    As far as I am aware, its not really a question of starting with any given area, if an area wants to become a Gaeltacht, the criteria they will have to meet will be set down, if they can meet them, then they can get Gaeltacht status, if not, they don't, It will be up to the areas themselves to fulfil the criteria rather than the government targeting an area and trying to make it a gaeltacht.


    The case study on Bolzano/Bozen was just to show how an Existing Bilingual city actually functions, not to suggest that the situation in Ireland is similar to that in Italy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    MOD NOTE:

    Please note that this thread is about the development of a Gaeltacht in Dublin (or potentially in your area). The tit for tat over the translation of a sentence in one organization's constitution is both off-topic and mind-numbing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,910 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    As far as I am aware, its not really a question of starting with any given area, if an area wants to become a Gaeltacht, the criteria they will have to meet will be set down, if they can meet them, then they can get Gaeltacht status, if not, they don't, It will be up to the areas themselves to fulfil the criteria rather than the government targeting an area and trying to make it a gaeltacht.


    The case study on Bolzano/Bozen was just to show how an Existing Bilingual city actually functions, not to suggest that the situation in Ireland is similar to that in Italy.

    Thats fair enough I only a breezed through it. Also I think a better title to the thread would be "a Gaeltacht in your area?". Looking at your op again and your reponses to my questions which have been very helpful, it would make more sense. I wouldn't oppose it as long as it reflected the reality on the ground. If you give me a reason to use it in every day life I will use it but if not as currently as is I won't.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    It will be up to the areas themselves to fulfil the criteria rather than the government targeting an area and trying to make it a gaeltacht.
    Will the areas self-regulate Irish-language compliance once they've received government approval? A language enforcement corps perhaps? Neighbourhood committees? Screening of new residents? Boycotts of English-speaking businesses? How will the boundaries be marked?

    I guess they'll be pretty keen to hang on to the 'benefits', whatever they may be.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    opti0nal wrote: »
    Will the areas self-regulate Irish-language compliance once they've received government approval? A language enforcement corps perhaps? Neighbourhood committees? Screening of new residents? Boycotts of English-speaking businesses? How will the boundaries be marked?

    I guess they'll be pretty keen to hang on to the 'benefits', whatever they may be.


    Of course, and green watch towers and Irish speaking gaurd dogs too. And anyone found not to speak Enough Irish will have to go to Summer 'Camps' to be re-educated.

    Why, what were you expecting?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Why, what were you expecting?
    Do be serious.

    Perhaps something like a Jewish 'eruv'? You must admit these virtual Gaeltacts have some practical details that need to be addressed, and we still don't know what are the 'benefits' that will be lavished on the lucky Irish speakers that qualify, nor how they will preserve their status and thus the 'benefits of Gaeltacht status'.


  • Registered Users Posts: 520 ✭✭✭dpe


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    It could be argued that the cultural identity in this country today has not "emerged organically from people's natural interests and proclivities", but rather has been shaped by hundreds of years of British rule. This is not an anti-British, 'up the Ra' type, remark, merely pointing out that many aspects of Irish life today have had external influences and did not emerge organically. Indeed, the decline in the language was imposed by an authoritarian government, that in London. I personally have no issue with present day governments of this country redressing the balance, so it speak, by promoting aspects of Irish culture (ie. those emerged "organically from people's natural interests and proclivities" before a foreign power tried to eradicate them) such as the language. Again, this is not an Irish v British thing, but instead recognising that political circumstance has had a major influence on the success of the Irish language (or lack thereof) so the state washing it hands of it now is not "letting the language evolve (or die) organically".

    Sorry but you can make that argument about just about everywhere. French has only been ubiquitous in France for a century (before that it was regional dialects incomprehensible to each other), ditto Italy, and indeed the UK, although in the UK's case you have to go back further to see the widespread sweeping away of old language and culture. Its just history, not a uniquely Irish experience. Look at it the other way around; if Ireland had never been occupied by Britain, I have absolutely no doubt there would be a "standard" version of Irish across the country and people from various regions moaning about their loss of cultural identity.

    I've said it before and I'll say it again, the lack of traction Irish has achieved since independence has nothing to do with Britain (case in point, the success of Welsh), and everything to do with the way its taught, and I'm beginning to think, the way it was (and is) imposed on the population. Bloody mindedness is a national trait; the usual response to authority is to ignore it, subvert it and find a way to extract money from it; why should compulsory Irish be any different?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    FYP


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭Grudaire


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    We could do a whole lot if we put our mind to things - instead the majority decide to argue hypothetical arguments facelessly online - alas it is addictive.

    Either way if you think we can't change any part of our reality you are not positive enough. Look at what has happened with the Hebrew language. even closer with the other Celtic languages. It's not reversing to a save point, but another rung on the progression of language.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Not the famine, not the Penal laws, not the crazy conservation policies enacted by our government over the years - it was the choice that got us...

    You're both wrong. It was a combination of all the above, and more besides. However claiming that English rule had little or nothing to do with the spread of English in Ireland should be laughed out of here.

    I wouldn't mind seeing any actually published article back the statement up.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Cliste wrote: »
    We could do a whole lot if we put our mind to things -
    Either way if you think we can't change any part of our reality you are not positive enough. Look at what has happened with the Hebrew language. even closer with the other Celtic languages. It's not reversing to a save point, but another rung on the progression of language
    You appear to be passing a judgement on our current linguistic state. What do you find unsatisfactory about the language spoken by the majority of citizens here and what parts of the Zionist approach would you apply to achieve the 'progression' you desire? In what way are Hebrew and Irish comparable?

    I can think of better ways to change our reality than to reinstate Irish as common language of Ireland.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.



    There are no crediable figures on language useage from before the famine, your argument is baseless.

    Have a look at the figures you provided, they simply don't add up. The Famine affected the Irish speaking population more than the English speaking population of Ireland due to their relative wealth and backgrounds, yet you would have us believe that there were 1.5 million people in the country before the famine with the ability to speak Irish, and 1.52 million people after the famine able to speak Irish?
    Either no Irish speakers were killed during the course of the Famine, or for some reason enough English only speakers from before the famine learnt Irish not only to replace every Irish speaker who died in the famine but to add an extra 20,000 Irish speakers to the total. Do you think those figures represent reality now?


    Who are these historians and linguists who have said that Irish was replaced as the majority language before 1800, any links?

    The replacement of the Irish Language with English was a long process, and was anything but natural, it was the Policy of the English Monarchy and later the British Government to effect Language shift in Ireland, there is abundant evidence of this.
    English was made the language of education and profession, the position of Irish as being the language of the peseant was very much an imposed situation.

    Saying that people chose to abandon Irish, after the destruction of the Irish speaking Educated Class, the imposition of English as the language of the state and a several campaigns of wholesale destruction and deportation which predomentally affected the Irish speaking population as well as the plantation of several thousand, if not several hundred thousand English speakers into areas of Ireland thus destroying Irish as the comunity language in those areas, is akin to saying that a patient chooses to abandon a gangreenous limb, not much choice involved really.

    You might think that the above is just a case of Perfidious Albion, but its all there in the historical record.

    Have you ever asked yourself what effect the wholesale deportation of the native population under 'To hell or to Connacht' Cromwell might have had on the linguistic fabric of the areas people were transported from? Or what effect planting English Speakers with no ability to speak Irish and orders from the Government never to learn to speak Irish into an area might have had?

    The idea that everyone in Ireland had Irish bet out of them has no doubt been mytholigised, but the idea that it was a willing choice by the majority of the population is an absoulute fantisy.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Cliste wrote: »
    Look at what has happened with the Hebrew language.
    I can never fathom why Hebrew is brought up as an example in this debate. It's re-emergence/re-invention was and is a very different beast with very different reasons and drivers behind it. They were building a new country with peoples from the four corners of the earth, all with different languages and cultures. They needed a lingua franca and modern Hebrew fit the bill. We already have a common language.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


Advertisement