Thoughts on bi-lingualism??

Victor · 29-09-2007 10:36am

Gonzo wrote:

I would rather the Irish be dropped altogether, its too cluttered having 2 languages on the signposts,

also many of our main roads only mention a few places nearby and then the final destination of the road, I feel coz of lack of space they could fit more towns/villages along the way if there was only 1 language involved.

How do you explain them being cluttered in the first quote and then you want to add more back in in the second quote?

More towns and villages don't need to be added. People need to spend a fiver a year on maps.

Zoney · 29-09-2007 11:53am

Actually, Victor, in some cases extra destinations do need to be added. The N20 out of Limerick has three final destinations that should be on all signs (but there's anything between 1 and 3 even on roundabouts/slips on the same junctions). Cork N20, Tralee (N21), Killarney (N23). For consistency, all three of these should appear on all signs.

However, at the very least, the destination coming up next should also be shown (Dooradoyle, Raheen, Patrickswell).

Add to that, each junction has other destinations to be shown (e.g. Shannon, Galway for the Raheen one) and you quickly run out of space.

29-09-2007 12:37pm

Driving past Athlone last night, I noticed some bi-lingual diversion signs, the gaeilge was very hard to read as the text was too small (& itallic)/ the english marginally better but still difficult to read. Black on (dark) orange is not easy to see at the best of times.

It was only the fact that most readers just need to see the first & last letters of a word to "read" it that made it possible to read the english part.

Either use a bigger sign or two seperate ones.

monument · 01-10-2007 7:08pm

Cionnfhaolaidh wrote:

Irish people in Ireland: ethnic majority
Breton people in France: ethnic minority

Sorry, but all I can think of is...

Irish language users in Ireland: minority
English language users in Ireland: majority

I personally associate Irish with corruption on a mass scale. From the large area in Mayo that claim to be Irish speaking when there's just a small area if any left, to companies getting grants just because they set up in such areas, to other claiming they are in such areas when they are not.

And other such corruption as getting higher markers just by using Irish in that little more then a memory test that we call the leaving cert.

Anybody wishing to really save the language would be calling for a scraping of all the above, but maybe it has no hope with out such subsidising and inequality.

On other inequalities, and back somewhat on topic, why is it ok for Irish only signs to be in areas that speak such but we have to put up with Irish on our signs? (The them and us way I'm thinking is probably as a result of such mentality in Irish speaking areas)

Navan Junction · 01-10-2007 9:11pm

monument wrote:

I personally associate Irish with corruption on a mass scale.

:eek: :rolleyes:

Chris_533976 · 01-10-2007 9:17pm

"I happen to be a politition who owns lands recently re-zoned by myself near Cape Clear. Lets lobby for a tolled motorway there so we can erm... reduce congestion or something. Oh, and hello Mr. Developer, you and I should talk"

CAN OF WORMS

ucdperson · 01-10-2007 10:52pm

Maybe some day we'll grow up and do the same.

Ah yes, education, culture, valuing our identity, we all think this is great when we are teenagers but abandon it this when when we grow up.

Ireland is officially bilingual and most places are Gaelic in origin. Any difficulties in bilingual signposting in Ireland can be mitigated and are insignificant when compared to badly designed signs, poorly positioned signs, misleading signs and above all signs that aren't there at all! By all means draw from the Scottish example, but leave both languages in place.

Take this as a warning: If I see another post which relates to Irish as a dead or not dead language but which does not address the practical nature of designing signposts for two languages I will lock the thread.

Moderator as serveral recents posts relate to Gaeltacht grants and the like I suggest that you do lock this thread.

monument · 01-10-2007 11:34pm

Education... Irish belongs under 'history'. Culture... Not mine. My country's historical culture maybe. Valuing our identity... Maybe, it's a reminder of my childhood oppression.

ucdperson wrote:

Ireland is officially bilingual and most places are Gaelic in origin.

So, what if it's officially anything, we can change that. In origin? We used to use MPH on road signs, things can be changed. And we can even stop using Irish on signs over time.

ucdperson wrote:

...but leave both languages in place.

Why? Why should we have signposts in two languages?

ucdperson · 02-10-2007 12:00am

Maybe, it's a reminder of my childhood oppression.

So if there is another indigenous language in the country, albeit one spoken by a minority, then it is "oppression" to have to learn this language.

What other minorities oppress you, maybe the disabled deny you a parking space (sure they could use a taxi), or bus users who prevent you using bus lanes (why don't they walk)?

By any reasonable measure it is Irish speakers who are oppressed as they cannot enjoy the basic right of speaking their native language in the country it is native to. Instead we have the colonial inspired inversion of normality where any support for things Irish "oppresses" those who prefer to be British.

monument · 02-10-2007 1:11am

Yes, it is oppression to be forced to do something... it might not be too high up the scales, but somewhere around being stopped from using a language. And I never said a minority oppressed me, I thought it would have been pretty clear that my oppression was State oppression.

By the way, on a lot of Dublin roads with bus lanes the bus users are by far the majority.

My native language is English. Irish might be the historic language of Ireland, but English is now more natural to the vast majority of Irish people. Languages are not native to countries, they're native to people. You trying to say otherwise will weaken the strength of any argument you're trying to make.

As you asked to get back to the topic of signs ect...Could you answer my questions on such?... Why should we have signposts in two languages? How many people would be unable to get around Ireland if the sign posts were only in Irish? What about if they were all just in English?

02-10-2007 9:29am

monument wrote:

As you asked to get back to the topic of signs ect...Could you answer my questions on such?... Why should we have signposts in two languages? How many people would be unable to get around Ireland if the sign posts were only in Irish? What about if they were all just in English?

You could easily have all place names in one language, but which one???
just make sure that all maps publised use the same convention (all as gaeilge or in english)
*ducks*

mackerski · 02-10-2007 10:26am

Cionnfhaolaidh wrote:

I'm within my right as a citizen of Ireland to demand that all State signage is in Irish. Am I not?

I don't think so. As a native English speaker and citizen of Ireland, I don't have a corresponding right to English signage. Why should you enjoy greater rights than I do? Outside the Gaeltachts there are more of "us" than there are of "you". Even in the Gaeltachts, the English-speaking minority is a greater proportion of population than the Gaels in the rest of the country.

I don't advocate immediate abolition of dual signage, precisely because there are many places with two real traditional names where some people (like you) really use the Irish one. However:

* Blanchardstown and places like it should be signed in English-only. Cod-Irish names don't advance any useful cause.

* An English speaker is entitled to be able to find places like Dingle and Maam Cross.

02-10-2007 11:28am

mackerski wrote:

there are many places with two real traditional names where some people (like you) really use the Irish one. However:

* Blanchardstown and places like it should be signed in English-only. Cod-Irish names don't advance any useful cause.

* An English speaker is entitled to be able to find places like Dingle and Maam Cross.

All very valid points, but there is no reason for ALL signs to be bi-lingual.
Foe example you drive from Zeebrugge to Koln (how do you do unlauts?) in germany you will see the language on the signs change several times during the journey, the domimant language of the motorists in the area being in largest text and sometimes a secondary language below.

Navan Junction · 02-10-2007 12:43pm

monument wrote:

My native language is English.

Ah, another English native..

Better off just locking this thread and throwing away the key

mackerski · 02-10-2007 12:51pm

Navan Junction wrote:

Ah, another English native..

Better off just locking this thread and throwing away the key

Have I offended you? I'm struggling to see how, or why you see fit to refer to me as an "English native".

mackerski · 02-10-2007 12:53pm

Deleted User wrote:

All very valid points, but there is no reason for ALL signs to be bi-lingual.

Indeed there isn't - that was my point number 1.

Calina · 02-10-2007 1:04pm

I was busy last night, sorry.

This was supposed to be about the design of bilingual signposts. It has twice descended into a whingefest about the Irish language which is completely irrelevant in this forum. I don't often wander in here and hand out threats to lock threads or ban users, and it might be nice if some of you stayed off your hobby horses about the Irish languages whether you hate it or support its continued existence to the core of your being. It's an argument for somewhere else, but not in commuting and transport.

Thoughts on bi-lingualism??

Comments