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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

A Gaeltacht in Dublin?

Options
1…468910

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Ahh right. Makes sense. :)
    My point being that it was a foreign tongue born on the back of conquest(Dalriada etc) and a religious "invasion" and it's surprising he appears to show no issue with this, nor considers it foreign because of the history behind it. Doubly so as in his writings he mentions more than once of Irish raiders and armies coming over killing and enslaving locals right up to his time.
    He regards English/Saxon similarly(and they were recent invaders, "pagan" and really bloody vicious). It seems to me anyway that he doesn't view language as some sort of a political football to take issue about, just another method of communication.
    Most linguists don't tend to have the attitudes towards language you mention above, Bede was no exception.
    He would hardly have had issues with the language of the English/Saxon since he was one.
    Out of the 5 languages he mentions, 2 were indigenous to Britain, 1 was the language of his people, another the lingua franca of most of Europe, the spread of which could hardly have been called peaceful, so he would have been an odd fellow indeed if he held animosity towards the Gaelic language used only in a small area, far from his home in the West of Scotland.
    Something we might learn from.
    If everybody viewed language as linguists do, we would all be speaking quite a variety of languages, and yourself and myself certainly wouldn't be "meeting" quite so frequently, except maybe to discuss the merits of various languages, with nobody having to defend the teaching, learning or desire to spread one. ;)


  • Options
    #153
    opti0nal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Wibbs wrote: »
    It makes little practical sense, beyond the cultural window dressing of new road signs and place names and they would be new and utterly artificial. ....Forget practical sense it's nonsensical. A daft and futile exercise in cultural fancy.
    I should have realised that it was probably s publicity stunt for Irish language week when I saw one of the proposed benefits as being an 'Irish language checkout' in supermarkets. Given the general lack of any cultural interaction in any language that occurs while goods are scanned and the price is displayed, it's clearly yet more fantasy. That and the concept of 'network Gaeltacht' which is what was suggested for Clondalkin.

    I've no problem with imaginary Gaeltachts as long as they don't cost real money.


  • Options
    #154
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,073 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    Most linguists don't tend to have the attitudes towards language you mention above, Bede was no exception.
    He would hardly have had issues with the language of the English/Saxon since he was one.
    Out of the 5 languages he mentions, 2 were indigenous to Britain, 1 was the language of his people, another the lingua franca of most of Europe, the spread of which could hardly have been called peaceful, so he would have been an odd fellow indeed if he held animosity towards the Gaelic language used only in a small area, far from his home in the West of Scotland.
    You have an enormous facility for missing the point. Plus the language wasn't so detached from his common experience, given the presence of Iona and Lindisfarne and the large amount of traffic of Irish monks in his region. Nor were the raids by Irish warriors far from his home. He would have been well acquainted with it and likely spoke it.

    If everybody viewed language as linguists do, we would all be speaking quite a variety of languages, and yourself and myself certainly wouldn't be "meeting" quite so frequently, except maybe to discuss the merits of various languages, with nobody having to defend the teaching, learning or desire to spread one. ;)
    You can wink to your hearts content, but I have zero issue with the teaching or learning of any language. Quite the opposite. However I do take issue when a small, but incredibly vocal and single minded group seek to impose any language through quasi cultural BS and raid the national coffers to do so. The example of a Gaelthacht in Dublin a classic example. Talk about delusional, never mind impractical, never mind just plain daft. Answer them better to grow the language in an existing Irish environment where people may actually use it.
    opti0nal wrote:
    I should have realised that it was probably s publicity stunt for Irish language week when I saw one of the proposed benefits as being an 'Irish language checkout' in supermarkets.
    Have you an official link for that? That sounds a bit far fetched even for the Irish language lobby.

    Actually stuff like that might prove statistically useful. In the sense it would survey the actual use of the language countrywide and county by county. BOI's ATM's have an Irish language option at the start of the transaction. I wonder does it record which language people choose? That would likely show how many people (with ATM cards anyway) use the language by default. Certainly better than the "surveys" coming from the Irish language lobby usually consisting of 100 people that strangely nearly always prove their point. Ditto for the "surveys" that come from your Kevin Myers types proving the complete opposite. Both are producing something one would step on if one followed a male of the cattle persuasion around.

    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.



  • Options
    #155
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    opti0nal wrote: »
    I've no problem with imaginary Gaeltachts as long as they don't cost real money.

    Well that is the rub with the entire language, is it not?

    Well, that and the addition laws, rules, and paperwork :p


  • Options
    #156
    opti0nal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Have you an official link for that? That sounds a bit far fetched even for the Irish language lobby.
    Sure, it was in The Journal. Given that the Irish lobby have the OLA on their side, nothing is beyond their imagination.
    Even simple ideas around language development could create employment for students when they graduate, according to MacSuibhne.
    "Being designated as a Gaeltacht would encourage more local businesses to use Irish and to take on people who are fluent. An Irish-speaking till at local shops would be just one example.”
    Wibbs wrote: »
    BOI's ATM's have an Irish language option at the start of the transaction. I wonder does it record which language people choose? That would likely show how many people (with ATM cards anyway) use the language by default.
    I find that really irritating. Instead of constantly annoying people with this prompt, they could just record the preference once and display English Or Irish immediately based on this.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    Wibbs wrote: »
    You have an enormous facility for missing the point. Plus the language wasn't so detached from his common experience, given the presence of Iona and Lindisfarne and the large amount of traffic of Irish monks in his region. Nor were the raids by Irish warriors far from his home. He would have been well acquainted with it and likely spoke it.
    I didn't say he never encountered the language, Irish/Gaelic had been encountered throughout Europe by the 8th century.
    There is a very slight difference between encountering a language through learning (ie monasteries and monks) and raids by warriors on your home, a pretty good reason not to have issue with it.
    And yes the raids were a long way from where he was from by 8th century standards.
    I got your point quite clearly, it was the rather silly notion that a man of learning not resenting a language he encountered through other men of learning was somehow special, or something to learn from.
    You can wink to your hearts content, but I have zero issue with the teaching or learning of any language. Quite the opposite. However I do take issue when a small, but incredibly vocal and single minded group seek to impose any language through quasi cultural BS and raid the national coffers to do so. The example of a Gaelthacht in Dublin a classic example. Talk about delusional, never mind impractical, never mind just plain daft. Answer them better to grow the language in an existing Irish environment where people may actually use it.
    In other words you hate people trying to spread the language countrywide.

    You do realise the whole reason for this Dublin Gaeltacht debate is because of a change as to what constitutes a Gaeltacht, areas would only get it if enough people speak the language and there is a good community of Irish speakers in Clondalkin, hence it being spoken about.
    The fact that this is even being discussed and is a possibility, is something that would have been unthinkable 20 years ago. Change is in the air, and I have images of you standing up on your soapbox, ranting away while people pass casually around you chatting as Gaeilge.


  • Options
    #158
    Enkidu
    Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Enkidu


    nuac wrote: »
    Interesting post Enkidu.
    How did Irish stand at that time ( I presume Old Irish ) i.e was it more closely linked to whatever the Picts were speaking?
    The Celtic languages on the British Isles are divided into two families. Those descended from Brythonic and those descended from Goidelic. Irish is in the second family and Welsh is in the first. At the time Brythonic itself would have been spoken in Britain, it hadn't begun to separate into different languages. Goidelic itself is more commonly known as Primitive Irish. Old Irish came into existence around the 600s.

    So Patrick would have met late speakers of Primitive Irish who called him "Qatrikias". In Old Irish he is known as "Cothraige", so you can see the difference.

    The Picts probably spoke two languages at the time. The vast majority spoke Brythonic, probably through cultural interaction with the rest of Britain. A smaller group of Picts spoke a second language, probably the original Pictish language, which is unclassified. (Although it looks somewhat like Finnish)

    Confusingly the Picts wrote both languages in Ogham, which was designed to write Primitive Irish.


  • Options
    #159
    opti0nal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    You do realise the whole reason for this Dublin Gaeltacht debate is because of a change as to what constitutes a Gaeltacht, areas
    Let's be clear here: what is proposed is to apply a new definition of 'Gaeltacht' to Clondalkin, called 'Network Gaeltacht'. This is, in effect, a form of cultural gerrymandering to make a Gaeltacht appear in a location where Irish is not spoken as an everyday, common use, normal, native language.

    Smoke and mirrors.


  • Options
    #160
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    Wibbs wrote: »
    I presume what he calls "english" is the language of the Saxons? No idea what language "british" was though. Interestingly enough he seems to be talking about Britain as the landmass that contains England, Scotland and Wales(though doesn't mention Welsh), not Ireland which he always refers to separately and as separate in his writings. So he considers Irish(a "foreign" language) as a language of "his" country. No enmity involved. Maybe try convincing some of the Northern English towns that they should have a Gaeltacht? :)

    The Language spoken by the Scots at the time was the same as the Irish spoken in Ireland.

    British would be Welsh I would imagine.
    They wouldn't and there's the rub. It makes little practical sense, beyond the cultural window dressing of new road signs and place names and they would be new and utterly artificial. The vast majority would automatically continue to read the english on signs etc. I'd include a goodly chunk of Gaeligoirs in that too. Forget practical sense it's nonsensical. A daft and futile exercise in cultural fancy.


    You sound very certain of that Wibbs, I don't suppose the fact that it is already happening in Belfast will change your mind?


  • Options
    #161
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    opti0nal wrote: »
    I find that really irritating. Instead of constantly annoying people with this prompt, they could just record the preference once and display English Or Irish immediately based on this.


    Why? All you have to do is press a button? I thought you were pro choice when it comes to Irish?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    opti0nal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    deise go deo wrote: »
    Why? All you have to do is press a button? I thought you were pro choice when it comes to Irish?
    Yes, I'm pro-choice, but once I make that choice, I don't want to be asked again every time I want to withdraw money. It's annoying, just like the Irish lobby.


  • Options
    #163
    junder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭junder


    deise go deo wrote: »
    Wibbs wrote: »
    I presume what he calls "english" is the language of the Saxons? No idea what language "british" was though. Interestingly enough he seems to be talking about Britain as the landmass that contains England, Scotland and Wales(though doesn't mention Welsh), not Ireland which he always refers to separately and as separate in his writings. So he considers Irish(a "foreign" language) as a language of "his" country. No enmity involved. Maybe try convincing some of the Northern English towns that they should have a Gaeltacht? :)

    The Language spoken by the Scots at the time was the same as the Irish spoken in Ireland.

    British would be Welsh I would imagine.
    They wouldn't and there's the rub. It makes little practical sense, beyond the cultural window dressing of new road signs and place names and they would be new and utterly artificial. The vast majority would automatically continue to read the english on signs etc. I'd include a goodly chunk of Gaeligoirs in that too. Forget practical sense it's nonsensical. A daft and futile exercise in cultural fancy.


    You sound very certain of that Wibbs, I don't suppose the fact that it is already happening in Belfast will change your mind?

    The whole belfast gealic quarter thing pretty much backs up what optional is getting at, it's meaningless, bilingual road signs and a Irish langauge center with most shops sticking with the English names, have yet to hear anybody actully speaking gealic there though although no doubt you have a friend / relative / girl(boy)friend / collague or some such who lives there and speaks it all the time


  • Options
    #164
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Enkidu wrote: »

    The Picts probably spoke two languages at the time. The vast majority spoke Brythonic, probably through cultural interaction with the rest of Britain. A smaller group of Picts spoke a second language, probably the original Pictish language, which is unclassified. (Although it looks somewhat like Finnish)

    Confusingly the Picts wrote both languages in Ogham, which was designed to write Primitive Irish.


    It was my understanding that there were no Pictish written records (apart from glyphs/art) :confused:


  • Options
    #165
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    deise go deo wrote: »
    British would be Welsh I would imagine.

    British means Welsh ;)


  • Options
    #166
    Enkidu
    Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Enkidu


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    It was my understanding that there were no Pictish written records (apart from glyphs/art) :confused:
    No, there are written records such as the Brandbutt Stone.


  • Options
    #167
    nuac
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,769 Mod ✭✭✭✭nuac


    Enkidu wrote: »
    The Celtic languages on the British Isles are divided into two families. Those descended from Brythonic and those descended from Goidelic. Irish is in the second family and Welsh is in the first. At the time Brythonic itself would have been spoken in Britain, it hadn't begun to separate into different languages. Goidelic itself is more commonly known as Primitive Irish. Old Irish came into existence around the 600s.

    So Patrick would have met late speakers of Primitive Irish who called him "Qatrikias". In Old Irish he is known as "Cothraige", so you can see the difference.

    The Picts probably spoke two languages at the time. The vast majority spoke Brythonic, probably through cultural interaction with the rest of Britain. A smaller group of Picts spoke a second language, probably the original Pictish language, which is unclassified. (Although it looks somewhat like Finnish)

    Thanks Enkidu

    Is the "Q" pronunciation of Patrick part of the "P and Q" interchange of in Old Irish.?

    Is there anything published on the P/Q business?

    I believe it has some relevance to Partraighe the Mayo village?


  • Options
    #168
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    junder wrote: »
    The whole belfast gealic quarter thing pretty much backs up what optional is getting at, it's meaningless, bilingual road signs and a Irish langauge center with most shops sticking with the English names, have yet to hear anybody actully speaking gealic there though although no doubt you have a friend / relative / girl(boy)friend / collague or some such who lives there and speaks it all the time

    Nope, don't know anyone who lives there, though a freind of mine does, I did visit the area though, had no problem speaking Irish when I was there.
    The one thing there is a lack of in the area though is Bilingual Road Signs, thanks to the 'No Surrender' brigade who don't even want to allow people who want them to have them.


  • Options
    #169
    opti0nal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    In other words you hate people trying to spread the language countrywide
    OOOO! Indeed, Wibbs why do you hate freedom Irish?

    Criticising the antics/policies of the Irish lobby is like killing the Easter Bunny and strangling dolphins..how could you?

    On a more serious note @ the Irish lobby who insist on compulory Irish lessons for English speaking children...why do you hate choice?


  • Options
    #170
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    deise go deo wrote: »
    Nope, don't know anyone who lives there, though a freind of mine does, I did visit the area though, had no problem speaking Irish when I was there.
    The one thing there is a lack of in the area though is Bilingual Road Signs, thanks to the 'No Surrender' brigade who don't even want to allow people who want them to have them.
    When we get bilingual road signs in Connemara you can have them in your corner of Belfast.


  • Options
    #171
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    When we get bilingual road signs in Connemara you can have them in your corner of Belfast.


    Do you live in Conamara? And I seriously doubt Bilingual road signs in Conamara would make the slighest impression on the 'No Surrender' crowd un North.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    deise go deo wrote: »
    Do you live in Conamara? And I seriously doubt Bilingual road signs in Conamara would make the slighest impression on the 'No Surrender' crowd un North.
    No and you don't live it Belfast. It wouldn't make them change their mind but it would give your argument moral validity. If not your only a hypocrite arguing for bilingual signs to replace english ones but not irish.


  • Options
    #173
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    No and you don't live it Belfast. It wouldn't make them change their mind but it would give your argument moral validity. If not your only a hypocrite arguing for bilingual signs to replace english ones but not irish.


    The difference is that the people of the area in Belfast have been vocal on the issue for quite some time.
    Try to label me a hypocrite all you want, but at no point have I said that I am against bilingual signage if the people of the area want it.

    You on the other hand have suggested that an area that wants it can only have it if its forced on an area that does not, where the moral validity for that stance comes from is beyond me.


  • Options
    #174
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #175
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    deise go deo wrote: »
    The difference is that the people of the area in Belfast have been vocal on the issue for quite some time.
    Try to label me a hypocrite all you want, but at no point have I said that I am against bilingual signage if the people of the area want it.
    *ahem* Dingle *ahem*
    deise go deo wrote: »
    You on the other hand have suggested that an area that wants it can only have it if its forced on an area that does not, where the moral validity for that stance comes from is beyond me.
    Because you don't seem to care about arguing for bilingual signs in an area with only irish language signage. I doubt you hold too much grá for the plight of the poor people of Dingle. Who aren't allowed to name their own town under the threat of losing their status.


  • Options
    #176
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    MOD NOTE:

    Some of the posts here are getting overly personal and snarky. Please tone it down, thanks.


  • Options
    #177
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    *ahem* Dingle *ahem*


    Because you don't seem to care about arguing for bilingual signs in an area with only irish language signage. I doubt you hold too much grá for the plight of the poor people of Dingle. Who aren't allowed to name their own town under the threat of losing their status.


    *ahem* Dingle is officially recognised as having a Bilingual Place name *ahem*

    I did not say anything about Dingle in this thread, you called me a hypocrite for supposidly being against bilingual signage in Conamara, I am not if the people of the area want it, the same applies to An Daingean, would you like to take back your unfounded accusation now?


  • Options
    #178
    opti0nal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    deise go deo wrote: »
    The difference is that the people of the area in Belfast have been vocal on the issue for quite some time.
    Why on earth would native English speakers decide to switch to a different language language, one which is not spoken by a huge majority of their fellow citizens in the United Kingdom?

    Is it a political thing?


  • Options
    #179
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    opti0nal wrote: »
    Why on earth would native English speakers decide to switch to a different language language, one which is not spoken by a huge majority of their fellow citizens in the United Kingdom?

    Is it a political thing?


    Why on earth would an Irish person not want to speak Irish?

    You would have to ask them why they choose to speak Irish. I suppose most of them identify with the Irish Language, their ancestors being speakers of it, but what difference does it make what their motivation is? If they choose to speak Irish why should they not have Bilingual road signs if the want them?


  • Options
    #180
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    opti0nal wrote: »
    Why on earth would native English speakers decide to switch to a different language language, one which is not spoken by a huge majority of their fellow citizens in the United Kingdom?

    Is it a political thing?
    Of course it's political. They're irish nationalists who want to push away the rest of the UK while promoting their own sense of "Irishness" it's stupid to me but meh different votes for different folks.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Of course it's political. They're irish nationalists who want to push away the rest of the UK while promoting their own sense of "Irishness" it's stupid to me but meh different votes for different folks.

    Ah, Irish does not belong to the nationalists, there are some Unionists who are happy to learn/speak Irish.


Advertisement