The Status Of Irish.

Rebelheart · 29-11-2010 1:48pm

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I've asked you to qualify that several time now.
Please provide evidence for that statement.

Majority of who? Of Native speakers? Of the Irish population?

This 2009 ESRI survey, for starters.

Fine Gael's Brian Hayes is going to have much more difficulty than he imagines with making his views on the Irish language state policy. The dilemma for many erstwhile Fianna Fáil supporters will be how to vote for Labour without in effect voting for the jaundiced Brutonite anti-Irish language/pro fee-paying schools views of Brian Hayes, a potential Minister for Education in any coalition government.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 29-11-2010 1:53pm

Rebelheart wrote:

This 2009 ESRI survey, for starters.

Fine Gael's Brian Hayes is going to have much more difficulty than he imagines with making his views on the Irish language state policy. The dilemma for many erstwhile Fianna Fáil supporters will be how to vote for Labour without in effect voting for the jaundiced Brutonite anti-Irish language/pro fee-paying schools views of Brian Hayes, a potential Minister for Education in any coalition government.

From that article:

He continued: “Over 93 per cent of respondents hold positive aspirations for the language and want to see it either revived or preserved, while only 6.7 per cent want Irish to be ‘disregarded and forgotten’.”

LMFAO. Who would choose the "disregarded and forgotten" option instead of the first ffs. Talk about fishing for the answer you want.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 1:58pm

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

All subjects are victim to the points system.
I dropped German at Junior level and kept on French for the Leaving, primarily due to points. I wanted to do both, but I had to keep Irish.

If you want to fix the points system - fix the points system.
Making Irish compulsory is not the solution, as the limited number of Irish speakers proves.

The points system is a problem, and dose its self need to be reformed, However it is not the only factor. You have simply jumped to the conclusion you wanted, If you look at it objectively it is clear that poor curriculum and teaching methods are the root cause of Irish not being widely spoken, As we have seen, when Irish is compulsory, but tought correctly, as is the case in the Gaelscoileanna then students have no problem developing an ability to speak Irish competently and also develop a love for the language too.

Yea sure, I don't see a problem with English being optional post Junior level, if you do not have sufficient English to communicate at Junior level, then it is the system which needs to be reformed.
If we reformed the teaching of English at primary level, it could be entirely optional at secondary level also.
I personally do not see a problem with this - English is a functional language, this is why it is important.

Not when English is the language of the home, As the System weather good bad or otherwise dose not hamper the ability of someone who can speak Irish from home.

(While we are at it, I studied Maths up to degree level for Comp Sci, did Honours for leaving (Hons Gaeilge too) and Maths desperately needs to be reformed also, so much unnecessary junk in there that should be learned only at college level if relevant)

I have no problem with that, I think the important think to bear in mind is that if reformed properly, Irish over time could end up taking less up time as other subjects could, once the system is worked out, be tought through Irish, Subjects such as PE. This would mean that less dedicated time would needed for Irish classroom work.

Not true.
It is lower status to English in functionally English speaking countries such as Ireland.
Not in Germany, Not in France, Not in Russia etc.
In those countries, Irish is lower status to the functional language of those countries.
English would be at best even par, but that's merely a notion, it is lower status also.

In general terms English Is the Higest Status Language, In so far as A third party is more likely to choose English as a second language than German for example. You are of course right in saying that in Germany, German would be the Highest status language.

It is lower status in Ireland because the functional language is English.
That is not going to change unless the functional language becomes Irish again (considering the economic catastrophe we are in, that is not going to change in the next 50 years)

Irish is already a functional language in the Gaelthachts and among groups who choose Irish over English,
However English Is the Higher status language generally, and there in lies the problem, If you want to increase the use of Irish then Compulsion in School is a necessary as otherwise, as the evidence has shown, large numbers will not learn it due to love of the language, That is not to say the majority don't want to learn Irish, It just means that as a group they wont do so in Sufficient numbers. There are many reasons for this, Ultimatly, it comes down to that while they may want to, they dont need to and then as a result of the distractions inherent in adult life, they dont. That is why it is necessary to teach it in School;.

Missing the point completely.
If it were not compulsory, you wouldn't have to learn it as it is now.
You're putting the cart before the horse.

Very much not im afraid, Again the problem is not Compulsion, but Curriculum, That may not automatically change if it is made optional, in fact it most likely wont, And that is ignoring the damaging domino effect that would then go through the education system, marginalizing Irish even further.

Personally I wanted to study German and French at leaving cert level, rather than Irish. I got better points in Irish than I probably would have in German anyway, but I had more than enough points and the German would have been vastly more useful when I got to college and industry (plus my brother in law is German, lol)

But there you go, The points system at work, With the added restriction that you cant actually choose whatever you want, It boils down to the list of options that dont clash with each other, so there will be those who would want to do Irish not being able to due to it clashing with other subjects they want.

And I at the very beginning - I asked you, how did you come to this realisation?
How do you know that the majority want Irish to be preserved?
I've only ever heard 2 people say it and both of those people are employed via Irish (one is a lecturer/research and one is a teacher)

Epsos, mrsi study. The one Cyclopath is hell bent on claiming was conducted and manipulated by the Irish language Lobby.

When I was at school, we were taught religion etc.
Some students were subject to this, others exempt.
Same should apply to Irish.

Why? I dont agree, The Evidence I have seen suggests that the (vast) majority want Irish preserved and Promoted, and that Making it optional would be devastating to that.

Religion Should be optional though.

Granted, but 2 wrongs don't make a right.
There are certain reasons why Maths and English need to be taught to a certain standard, as it has lifelong implications.
If we are failing to do that, then we should reform those systems as a matter of urgency, and non-priority subjects like Irish can become optional.

Indeed, But that standard is reached long before the LC course starts, But still I believe that these subjects should remain compulsory,(With due Reform) For the LC. Not because they are needed from a utilitarian perspective, but for their role in forming the person.

By whom?
In that case, why are French and German not compulsory in Ireland?

They effectively are, except its French or German, (or in some schools Spanish)

That entirely depends on your personal perspective.
I happen to agree with your perspective, but I'm conscious of the fact that there is an opportunity cost.

Nor does it directly correlate to points opportunism, it could simply be a student selecting a more relevant subject for them.[/QUOTE]

But the thing is, student do get to choose the majority of there subjects,
There is an opportunity cost, But from what I have seen, The penalty of making Irish optional is sealing the fate of its slow decline, At best, the continuance of its stay on 'Life Support' till another backward step is taken to finish it. And from the evidence I have seen, That is not what the people want.

Dannyboy83 · 29-11-2010 1:59pm

Rebelheart wrote: »

This 2009 ESRI survey, for starters.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.pobail.ie/ie/Preaseisiuinti/file,9801,ie.pdf
1,015 respondents.:rolleyes:

I could show you a cross section of Irish society which proves 93% of Irish people wish to exterminate the travelling community, working off those kind of figures.

Regardless, lets dig a little deeper:

Of the Irish born sample, 40% wish to see it revived, while 52% wish to see it preserved
Positive aspirations therefore were held by over 93%

First, their maths is wrong, LOL
Second, less than half of respondents wish to see the language returned to use as a primary language, while just over half wish to see it used side by side.

So in fact, only 2/5 of those surveyed wish to see the language revived.
That's not a democratic majority, so Deise is incorrect in the use of his statement that he majority want the language to be promoted.

Dannyboy83 · 29-11-2010 2:04pm

My honest suspicion is that Brian Hayes has just found a method to reform public expenditure and wasteful spending of which the majority will strongly approve.

The Gravy Train couldn't keep going forever lads.

cyclopath2001 · 29-11-2010 2:04pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Epsos, mrsi study. The one Cyclopath is hell bent on claiming was conducted and manipulated by the Irish language Lobby.

In the interests of clarity, provide a link? The poster who requested the information can then form his own opinion as to its relevance..

What are Epsos and MRSI?

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 2:16pm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

'
Don't buy that for a second. If you love the language you will learn it. Loads of people in Belfast are taking it up at all ages. I think you need to realise a lot of people don't care as much about the language as they say they do.

Indeed, and it is great to see it, But it cant be denied(though in other threads I would) There is extra motivation in Belfast than Here to take an interest in the language.

That article you've posted is sensationalist tripe which doesn't compare like for like. I'm up to page 12 and the arrogance of the man is driving me nuts. The dropping of GCSE compulsory languages is not a valid comparison, it is more like our Junior cert. Also Irish people have a bigger connection to Gaelic than English kids do to foreign languages. Its just a cheapshot and the fact he couldn't come up with anything better shows how petty his agenda is.

Perhaps if that was the only relevant evidence he put forward, but the expert opinion agrees with his argument, Large amounts of people will not learn a language simply for the love of it, That is why the System failed after Independance, It was assumed that love of the language would revive it, that was not the case

Of course not. People are always goign to be interested in literature. Look at how many people do it here and in the UK where English is not compulsory for A-levels.

Here its compulsory, In the UK? I dont know, I have not seen the figures, but I have yet to meet someone who gained a deep love or appreciation for the Bard during the LC.

It would still be pointless to many even if it were taught better for those 2 years. Those people have the right to that choice if you're ok with democracy.

Not only for those two years, Again, see the OP, I provided a link to the Plan I believe would best see Irish tought Effectively, That plan is about the reform of Irish in its entirety, Not just for the LC. As for Democracy? Come now, Leave the Hyperbole aside.

If it were optional and they kept it the same huge numbers would drop it. To prevent that they'd have to change the system.

Why the roundabout rout? Reforming the System is the obvious solution. The problem is that it will be a political decision, Making it optional is the headline, not reform.
In any case, as was shown in Britain, it dident matter how much they tried to reform or encourage students to take up languages, Once it was made optional the floodgates were open and it continued to decline.

Its relevant because it shows making it optional for the final two years would make no difference to people's ability to use the language.

Not really, As it is now not much is learned, However, I am not arguing In favor of the current system remaining in place, I want reform of the System.

Right. Most people are generally in favour of personal choice for most things. Perhaps this is the real root of the argument.

Not really, You have failed to show substantial benefit form choice, and most people dont have a problem with Compulsion per se, rather with the poor curriculum. If compulsion its self it would be a problem across the board, not just for Irish.

Aye so much so that the tanaiste is urging universities to recognise a fail in higher maths as an acceptable grade to get in. There's no evidence for this well rounded student idea, the British system makes far more sense.[/QUOTE]

But the question isent about individual faults in Either system, How dose one compare against the other in overall performance.
Of course there is room to improve the system, If there wasent we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Link to the survay I mentioned. Link

cyclopath2001 · 29-11-2010 2:24pm

Relevant article from today's Irish Times

LANGUAGE COMMISSIONER Seán Ó Cuirreáin has called for “positive discrimination” in recruitment to the public service to tackle the fall in State workers able to deal with the public through Irish, one of the two official languages of the State.

A new survey within the Department of Education and Skills has found only 1.5 per cent of officials can deal with the public through Irish...The Language Commissioner – an independent office akin to an ombudsman – said the figure of 1.5 per cent of administrative staff able to provide services through Irish amounted to a halving since 2005 when 3 per cent of staff were able to use Irish. “This means that 98.5 per cent of staff members were unable to deal with the public through Irish. This fall in the department’s Irish language capacity has happened at a time when the national language is, in general, undergoing an undoubted resurgence in popularity,” Mr Ó Cuirreáin said. “This is a scandal.”

Kind of odd, if the langauge is 'undergoing an undoubted resurgence in popularity', that the number of people who want to speak it has halved?

There was strong official recognition of the language, he said. It was mentioned in 140 Acts, some €700 million a year was spent teaching it, there were State-funded Irish radio and television stations but there was no practical application. Students spent 13 years and 1,000 hours learning Irish but there was no opportunity to use it, he said. “We have failed utterly to link learning Irish with using the language,” he said.

It seems that the commissioner is just as perplexed by reality as the pro-compulsion posters here.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 2:35pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Relevant article from today's Irish Times

Kind of odd, if the langauge is 'undergoing an undoubted resurgence in popularity', that the number of people who want to speak it has halved?

It seems that the commissioner is just as perplexed by reality as the pro-compulsion posters here.

Where dose it say the numbers wanting to speak it have halved?

I believe he is referencing the growth of Irish medium Education and the positive attuide of the Irish population tword the language.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 29-11-2010 2:49pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Indeed, and it is great to see it, But it cant be denied(though in other threads I would) There is extra motivation in Belfast than Here to take an interest in the language.

Yes its quite interesting to see how the pattern is working. Sinn Fein should think long and hard about introducing an Irish language act, might leave them with less Irish speakers in the future.

Perhaps if that was the only relevant evidence he put forward, but the expert opinion agrees with his argument, Large amounts of people will not learn a language simply for the love of it, That is why the System failed after Independance, It was assumed that love of the language would revive it, that was not the case'

Its the main thrust of the article, he mentions it constantly and linking it to Fine Gael. You'd swear Fianna Fail had a hand in writing it. Though it is fallacious, as that English plan took away compulsory status at age 14 whereas I want it taken away at around 17(leaving cert years) for Irish Gaelic. Also look at his references. Using news webites is generally smirked at when it comes to scientific papers.

Here its compulsory, In the UK? I dont know, I have not seen the figures, but I have yet to meet someone who gained a deep love or appreciation for the Bard during the LC.

Not only for those two years, Again, see the OP, I provided a link to the Plan I believe would best see Irish tought Effectively, That plan is about the reform of Irish in its entirety, Not just for the LC. As for Democracy? Come now, Leave the Hyperbole aside.

Why the roundabout rout? Reforming the System is the obvious solution. The problem is that it will be a political decision, Making it optional is the headline, not reform.

They won't budge on their system unless their hand is forced.

In any case, as was shown in Britain, it dident matter how much they tried to reform or encourage students to take up languages, Once it was made optional the floodgates were open and it continued to decline.

I've pointed out how that ridiculous, pro fianna fail, sensationalist paper is not a valid comparison. Cling to it if you want but no one's going to take it seriously

Not really, As it is now not much is learned, However, I am not arguing In favor of the current system remaining in place, I want reform of the System.

Not really, You have failed to show substantial benefit form choice, and most people dont have a problem with Compulsion per se, rather with the poor curriculum. If compulsion its self it would be a problem across the board, not just for Irish.

I don't care about substantial benefit. I think choice would leave us with more people speaking it day to day, more people doing higher level and far fewer people doing it at ordinary level. Less people doing it overall for the final two years but more people doing it properly.

But the question isent about individual faults in Either system, How dose one compare against the other in overall performance.
Of course there is room to improve the system, If there wasent we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Don't know how you'd measure that precisely but look at it this way there's hundreds of schools abroad use the British educational system whereas the only place outside the 26 counties using the leaving cert is in Libya of all places! (though ironically enough they're excempt from Irish)

sparkling sea · 29-11-2010 2:59pm

deise go deo wrote: »

I assume you feel the same for English and Maths. Students hate them too.

deise go deo wrote: »

Indeed they do but these subjects benefit them if and when they have to leave Irieland. They are also recognised as core subjects, Irish is not.

I can only comment on what I see and as a very grown adult( nice way of saying I am more mature years) I have seen little evidence of the Irish language benefiting the majority, however there are a minority who love it and I would never want to take away they choice of learning it.

I just don't think it should be pushed on those who don't want it, as I this usually has an adverse effect

Dannyboy83 · 29-11-2010 3:04pm

Great article here; expresses many points clearly with which no rational person can disagree.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/article607071.ece

cyclopath2001 · 29-11-2010 3:09pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Where dose it say the numbers wanting to speak it have halved?

Where I quoted:

– said the figure of 1.5 per cent of administrative staff able to provide services through Irish amounted to a halving since 2005 when 3 per cent of staff were able to use Irish.

deise go deo wrote: »

I believe he is referencing the growth of Irish medium Education and the positive attuide of the Irish population tword the language.

That is so nice, but he supplies no statistics.

Quite how he wants to increase the number of Irish-speaking administrators without discrimination and without adding to the already high cost of supporting Irish (to little effect), is not said.

deise go deo wrote: »

Link to the survay I mentioned. Link

Isn''t that survey the one that was funded, authored and interpreted by the Irish language lobby?

You originally credited this to the prviously unheard-of epsos and mrsi organisations, who are these?

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 3:13pm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Yes its quite interesting to see how the pattern is working. Sinn Fein should think long and hard about introducing an Irish language act, might leave them with less Irish speakers in the future.

Well the evidince suggests that an Irish language act would be good for Irish so I can only imagine it will remain the Aim. If it would harm Irish you have to wounder why the DUP is blocking it.

Its the main thrust of the article, he mentions it constantly and linking it to Fine Gael. You'd swear Fianna Fail had a hand in writing it. Though it is fallacious, as that English plan took away compulsory status at age 14 whereas I want it taken away at around 17(leaving cert years) for Irish Gaelic. Also look at his references. Using news webites is generally smirked at when it comes to scientific papers.

Indeed it is, and it attacks FG for good reason, they wanted to take an action that would be highly damaging to Irish. I dont think it was Written by FF, as the Conclusion has several suggestions for FG to put the Government under pressure.
It is hardly fallacious when he is taking an expert theory that backs his point and then shows how it has played out in practice, What do you think would make it different if it Happned here?
It just would?

They won't budge on their system unless their hand is forced.

So force reform, not the damaging dropping of compulsion.

I've pointed out how that ridiculous, pro fianna fail, sensationalist paper is not a valid comparison. Cling to it if you want but no one's going to take it seriously

Again a paper that actively advises how to put the Government under preassure is hardily pro FF

Now if you want to contend that its findings are inaccurate I would Ask For Evidence, maybe a counter theory?

I don't care about substantial benefit. I think choice would leave us with more people speaking it day to day, more people doing higher level and far fewer people doing it at ordinary level. Less people doing it overall for the final two years but more people doing it properly.

Sorry, but there has to be a reason for it.
The article I provided shows why that dosent work in theory, and that it hasent worked in practice, Where is your evidence to back up your stand point? The article claimed that FG did not and could not back up its policy with evidence, I would say the same to you.

Don't know how you'd measure that precisely but look at it this way there's hundreds of schools abroad use the British educational system whereas the only place outside the 26 counties using the leaving cert is in Libya of all places! (though ironically enough they're excempt from Irish)

How exactly is it Ironic? Do Lyabians want to learn Irish? Is Irish their First national Language?

Ireland is a small country while Britain has had an empire that encompassed 1/4 of the world and still has a large commonwealth so the difference is hardly surprising.
But anyway that isent really relevant to the topic.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 3:20pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Where I quoted:

That % relats to the amount of people in the Dpt who can deal with the public through Irish, Not the amount of people who want to use Irish.

That is so nice, but he supplies no statistics.

The Newspaper provided no statistics, You, I am sure have already seen the graph that shows the Massive increase in the Gaeilscoil movement.

Quite how he wants to increase the number of Irish-speaking administrators without discrimination and without adding to the already high cost of supporting Irish (to little effect), is not said.

Well its hardly discrimination if you hire people who have the relevant skill set required for a job, The Civil Service is required to provided its Services through Irish when Requested.

Isn''t that survey the one that was funded, authored and interpreted by the Irish language lobby?

Im sorry, You have yet to show that the survay is inaccurate, Counter evidence would be nice, But i have asked for this before in vain, So to quote you.

That is so nice, but he supplies no statistics.

You originally credited this to the prviously unheard-of epsos and mrsi organisations, who are these?

Ipsos Mrbi, Sorry Its been a while since I saw the Survay, It was NUI Maynuth that compiled the Survay.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 3:23pm

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Great article here; expresses many points clearly with which no rational person can disagree.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/article607071.ece

Dident need to go past the headline, The answer to which is No by the way

sipstrassi · 29-11-2010 3:26pm

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

No, we speak Hiberno-English.
That is OUR language, it is not a foreign language.
Nobody speaks those dialects except the people of Ireland.
If it dies, part of us dies.

We have more Nobel literary prizes for the English language, per head of population, than England has herself.

We have a long tradition of world renowned Irish authors and literary geniuses in the English language.

Shame/inferiorty complexes are not a sufficient reason to convince me to learn Gaelic.
You cannot shame me out of speaking Hiberno-English, I am proud to speak Hiberno-English. I am proud of who I am.

Why are you ashamed of your own people?
Why do you look down on us for speaking Hiberno-English?

Hiberno-English is thriving not only at home, but among the diaspora.
I see it as a fundamental part of who I am.
I don't want a personality or language transplant.

I am not ashamed of Irish people nor do I look down on anyone.

I am concerned that SOME Irish people seem to hate their native language and want to scrap it. Once it's gone, it's too late.

Irish is our native language. Just because we took a language that was forced upon us and adapted it and excelled around the world at it still doesn't change the fact.

I would appreciate you not reading more into what I said than was actually there. To further go on and comment in an agressive manner about what you thought I meant without actually bothering to ask if it was what I meant shows you would rather have a rant than a discussion.
So rant away - no doubt you will eventually have the thread to yourself. I for one will leave you to it.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 3:28pm

sparkling sea wrote: »

I just don't think it should be pushed on those who don't want it, as I this usually has an adverse effect

Yet Im sure you dont mind English being Pushed on Irish speakers?

Your basic argument is that because you cant see Irish being Usefull then it should be made optional.

The problem comes when you start attacking it because it is compulsory.
If you have a problem with Irish say it, If you have a problem with compulsion Say it, But if you want to use compulsion against Irish then it must apply in equal measure to any other compulsory subject.

LordSutch · 29-11-2010 3:31pm

The Sunday Times article mentioned in Post#63 sums up the whole argument perfectly for me.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 29-11-2010 3:35pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Well the evidince suggests that an Irish language act would be good for Irish so I can only imagine it will remain the Aim. If it would harm Irish you have to wounder why the DUP is blocking it.

Intuition would say it will benefit the language which is why Sinn Fein support it and DUP are against it. IMO logic says otherwise. Has official 1st language status here and few people speak it.

Indeed it is, and it attacks FG for good reason, they wanted to take an action that would be highly damaging to Irish. I dont think it was Written by FF, as the Conclusion has several suggestions for FG to put the Government under pressure.

If you think making the final 2 years of a 14 year course optional then you musn't have a great deal of respect for the language

It is hardly fallacious when he is taking an expert theory that backs his point and then shows how it has played out in practice, What do you think would make it different if it Happned here?
It just would?

Not going to repeat this again. It is fallacious because comparing a foreign language decline in England due to making it optional at age 14 is not comparable to making Irish in Ireland optional at 17. The fact you're refusing to acknowlege this point is seriously weakening your argument.

So force reform, not the damaging dropping of compulsion.

Hasn't happened in the last 90years, I don't wanna waste any further time. Plus those who dont want to study it shouldn't have to.

Again a paper that actively advises how to put the Government under preassure is hardily pro FF

It was written at a time when FG were the major opposition coming up to an election. It is pro FF for that reason alone.

Now if you want to contend that its findings are inaccurate I would Ask For Evidence, maybe a counter theory?

It doesn't have any findings, it's effectively an opinion piece.

Sorry, but there has to be a reason for it.
The article I provided shows why that dosent work in theory, and that it hasent worked in practice, Where is your evidence to back up your stand point? The article claimed that FG did not and could not back up its policy with evidence, I would say the same to you.'

The paper quotes f*cking BBC articles as sources, you're only accepting it because you want it to be right.

How exactly is it Ironic? Do Lyabians want to learn Irish? Is Irish their First national Language?

Ireland is a small country while Britain has had an empire that encompassed 1/4 of the world and still has a large commonwealth so the difference is hardly surprising.
But anyway that isent really relevant to the topic.

Ironic because of this discussion and its the only school on earth outside the 26 counties to have the leaving cert and they don't have to do Irish. Even in non-commonwealth countries there's always British exam schools, sometimes use international bacceulaurete but never Irish leaving cert!

Wolfe Tone · 29-11-2010 3:40pm

I did my LC this year and did higher level Irish and got a C1. I would agree 100% with the description of ordinary level as "retard level". Higher level however, is quite hard. It is full of bullsh1t poems and stories. I had no time for them, and simply couldn't get my head around learning answers to them off by rote(what we were told to do) so I focused on the oral and aural exam. I can honestly say that I learnt more Irish in the six months where I went to a 1 hour grind each week coming up to the exams then I did in the decade previous. The grind was simply speaking Irish, just talking about everything and anything, difficult at first, but it got easier as it went along. My written exam was a bit of a disaster.

The way Irish is taught needs to change. Needs to focus more on actually speaking the language, and not reading crap poems which only serve to intimidate people and put them off the language.

I am not too sure how English is taught in other countries, but I hardly think they would be trying to get students to learn about themes, metaphors etc in Wordsworth, Shakespeare and Yeats when the students can barely string together a few basic sentences for the purpose of the oral exam.

Dannyboy83 · 29-11-2010 3:42pm

sipstrassi wrote: »

To further go on and comment in an agressive manner about what you thought I meant without actually bothering to ask if it was what I meant shows you would rather have a rant than a discussion.

Yet you are entitled to comment in an aggressive manner about what you THINK I, as an Irish person, want?

Sorry, but if you are going to make mass generalizations on a discussion forum, prepared to be rebutted.

cyclopath2001 · 29-11-2010 3:47pm

deise go deo wrote: »

That % relats to the amount of people in the Dpt who can deal with the public through Irish, Not the amount of people who want to use Irish.

It's as useful a demographic as the sample taken from 1000 people in your survey. Except, it measures fluency rather than sentiment.

deise go deo wrote: »

The Newspaper provided no statistics, You, I am sure have already seen the graph that shows the Massive increase in the Gaeilscoil movement.

I'm sure you must have noticed the Massive number of people speaking English in Ireland?

deise go deo wrote: »

Well its hardly discrimination if you hire people who have the relevant skill set required for a job, The Civil Service is required to provided its Services through Irish when Requested.

Only if it is a condition of employment for a particular job. The hugely expensive requirements imposed by the Official Languages Act applies to the department, not the person. Given that all Irish speakers have a perfect grasp of English, there is ample scope for cost-saving if we simply repeal that act.

deise go deo wrote: »

Im sorry, You have yet to show that the survay is inaccurate

It's simply biased and lacks objectivity and independence.. It is based on leading questions, designed to elicit favourable responses. The interpretation throws the answers into the most favourable light for its backers.

deise go deo wrote: »

Ipsos Mrbi, Sorry Its been a while since I saw the Survay, It was NUI Maynuth that compiled the Survay.

The survey was neither commissioned nor published by the ESRI, their staff were merely employed to ask the questions set by the Irish language lobby. Quite frequently, when this survey is trotted out by people such as yourself, it is represented as an ESRI survey, is this an attempt to conceal who commissioned and authored it?

What was the involvement in the survey of IPSOS?

LordSutch · 29-11-2010 3:55pm

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I am not too sure who English is thought in other countries, but I hardly think they would be trying to get students to learn about themes, metaphors etc in Wordsworth, Shakespeare and Yeats when the students can barely string together a few basic sentences for the purpose of the oral exam.

Not sure if you mean how English is thought of in other countries, or ??? but leaving that aside, I agree with you 100% re the teaching methods & the current curriculum, which still sems to be missing the point altogether (the spoken word). Will the Dept of Education ever learn?

I am not 'Anti' the Irish language, but as I have said many times before in previous threads, the compulsive nature of the curriculum must be stood down & replaced with a more pragmatic approach, one in which those who wish to learn the language are encouraged, and those who don't, learn to admire & respect those who do wish to speak the language. The compulsive nature of 'force feeding' will always stifle the love for the Irish language . . . .

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 3:55pm

LordSutch wrote: »

The Sunday Times article mentioned in Post#63 sums up the whole argument perfectly for me.

Three Questions,

Do you agree that Poor teaching methods and Curriculum are the cause of the poor results Irish?
If not, Why?

Do you believe that if the current system was made optional but left unchanged there would be better success in the teaching of Irish,

Do you believe resentment is caused more by Irish Being Compulsory or Irish Being tought so badly as to be effectively pointless?

Unfortunately The article fails to identify the problem. The Article claimed the Compulsory Education of Irish has failed. It puts forwand the Impression that the failure was inevitable and that Compulsion was largly responciple for that Failure..
Not True. Irish can be tought successfuly when it is done right and compulsion has very little influence on that. That has been shown irrefutably by the Gaelscoils, I can think of no logical reason that the same principle cannot be applied to The Education System as a Whole.

The problem with the article is that it quite falcely suggests that Irish education is doomed to failure and as such is a waste of time and money.
The flaws of Irish Education have been identified and there is no reason to saaume that if reformed Irish education would fail.

Secondally, The article suggests that It is OK to let Irish go. A fair notion in its self, but at now point dose it suggest any reason to other than that it dosent make us less Irish.
I would have to ask So what? I dont see that as a reason to do anything let alone let Irish go.

Thirdly, the article suggests that having as many people as possible speaking the same language is a good thing, Promoting the false notion that English is good enough because I wont need any other language to communicate no matter where i go. Compleatly ignoring the proven benifits of Bi-Lingualism and even multi-lingualism

Nothing new in that article and nothing that stands up to scrutiny.

Wolfe Tone · 29-11-2010 4:00pm

LordSutch wrote: »

Not sure if you mean how English is thought of in other countries, or ??? but leaving that aside, I agree with you 100% re the teaching methods & the current curriculum, which still sems to be missing the point altogether (the spoken word). Will the Dept of Education ever learn?

I am not 'Anti' the Irish language, but as I have said many times before in previous threads, the compulsive nature of the curriculum must be stood down & replaced with a more pragmatic approach, one in which those who wish to learn the language are encouraged, and those who don't, learn to admire & respect those who do wish to speak the language. The compulsive nature of 'force feeding' will always stifle the love for the Irish language . . . .

Sorry, brain is a bit frozen this morning! I meant that you would hardly be teaching Shakespeare etc to a group who could barely tell you about their family, hobbies and stuff in English!

Bottle_of_Smoke · 29-11-2010 4:02pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

It's simply biased and lacks objectivity and independence.. It is based on leading questions, designed to elicit favourable responses. The interpretation throws the answers into the most favourable light for its backers.

Yeah, I really couldn't believe how obvious they were being about this too - with the available answers to the questions. "He continued: “Over 93 per cent of respondents hold positive aspirations for the language and want to see it either revived or preserved, while only 6.7 per cent want Irish to be ‘disregarded and forgotten’.”"
Be like if an immigration survey said

"Do you think we should ...

A. Accommodate Muslims in Ireland by introducing Sharia law in some circumstances

B. Shoot every Muslim on their arrival to the country.

Then come up with a headline "93% of Irish people want Sharia law"

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 4:04pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

It's as useful a demographic as the sample taken from 1000 people in your survey. Except, it measures fluency rather than sentiment.

Not what you said it was though is it?

I'm sure you must have noticed the Massive number of people speaking English in Ireland?

I have, dose that mean there cant be a revival of Irish?

Only if it is a condition of employment for a particular job. The hugely expensive requirements imposed by the Official Languages Act applies to the department, not the person. Given that all Irish speakers have a perfect grasp of English, there is ample scope for cost-saving if we simply repeal that act.

Well, I agree with Irish speakers having the right to conduct their business through the first official language of the state.

It's simply biased and lacks objectivity and independence.. It is based on leading questions, designed to elicit favourable responses. The interpretation throws the answers into the most favourable light for its backers.

Yes, i know your opinion of it, now can you show that you are correct in what you are saying? The burden of proof really dose lie with you.

The survey was neither commissioned nor published by the ESRI, their staff were merely employed to ask the questions set by the Irish language lobby. Quite frequently, when this survey is trotted out by people such as yourself, it is represented as an ESRI survey, is this an attempt to conceal who commissioned and authored it?

I said it was conducted by NUI Maynuth.

What was the involvement in the survey of IPSOS?

I believe I apologized for that. They were not Involved, As I said, it has been a while since I saw the survey.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 4:07pm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Yeah, I really couldn't believe how obvious they were being about this too - with the available answers to the questions. "He continued: “Over 93 per cent of respondents hold positive aspirations for the language and want to see it either revived or preserved, while only 6.7 per cent want Irish to be ‘disregarded and forgotten’.”"
Be like if an immigration survey said

"Do you think we should ...

A. Accommodate Muslims in Ireland by introducing Sharia law in some circumstances

B. Shoot every Muslim on their arrival to the country.

Then come up with a headline "93% of Irish people want Sharia law"

So how would you have asked if they wanted Irish to disappear?

Bottle_of_Smoke · 29-11-2010 4:15pm

deise go deo wrote: »

So how would you have asked if they wanted Irish to disappear?

I would never ask such a stupid question on a survey.

It would have been more realistic to ask along the lines of

"Irish being the first spoken language of this country is important to me"

On a scale of 1-10, 1 meaning strongly disagree and 10 meaning strongly agree what score would you give the above statement.
But no, they wanted to make a statement so they used questions that guaranteed backup for their comments.

LordSutch · 29-11-2010 4:21pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Three Questions,

Do you agree that Poor teaching methods and Curriculum are the cause of the poor results Irish?
If not, Why?

I do agree, but I also think there is a kind of apathy in the public at large regarding the language, people just can't be bothered to learn it, even though they will fill out a survey form stating that they 'Love the language' and that it should remain compulsory in school for ever! the very same people (who in reality) don't take the language seriously at all :cool:

deise go deo wrote: »

Do you believe that if the current system was made optional but left unchanged there would be better success in the teaching of Irish,

Yes because the hatred of Irish would subside, and No because the current curriculum is just as crap as all the previous versions over the last eighty+ years.

deise go deo wrote: »

Do you believe resentment is caused more by Irish Being Compulsory or Irish Being tought so badly as to be effectively pointless?

Both, plus the fact that children/teenagers just can't see the point of learning it for their MTV lifestyles.

I say make Irish optional in secondary school, maybe have a language choice (Irish, French, Spanish, German, etc) in fifth & sixth years, or something along those flexible lines . . .

sparkling sea · 29-11-2010 4:22pm

deise go deo wrote: »

The problem comes when you start attacking it because it is compulsory.
If you have a problem with Irish say it, If you have a problem with compulsion Say it, But if you want to use compulsion against Irish then it must apply in equal measure to any other compulsory subject.

Equal measure should not be applied because Irish is not relevent outside of Ireland.

I have huge issues with Irish being compulsory and if a government tried to force it on me as an adult I think it would be a very paternalistic and undemocratic move.

I also feel that every parent has the right to decide what is in the best interest of their children - and besides fundementals of safety, health, etc it falls outside their remit to decide what is in the best interest of a child on an ancilliary issue like this one.

As I have said I hated Irish and it has served me no purpose in adult life.
However I have become very fond of the language now but it is for the sheer sound of the language itself and not for it usefullness.
Having learned it in primary school, I always had the fundementals, I am quite happy for it to be taught to this level but when teenagers enter secondary school they many question its usefulness and cannot motivate themselves to learn it, no matter how its taught.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 4:25pm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I would never ask such a stupid question on a survey.

It would have been more realistic to ask along the lines of

"Irish being the first spoken language of this country is important to me"

On a scale of 1-10, 1 meaning strongly disagree and 10 meaning strongly agree what score would you give the above statement.
But no, they wanted to make a statement so they used questions that guaranteed backup for their comments.

That is a poor question, Many if not all Irish enthusiasts dont see Ireland speaking Irish first as feasible, I would answer low on that as a result.

Unless you agree with the concept as a whole you will score it low,

I for one would like a Bi-Lingual Nation, In theroy I should score around 7-8 but in reality, because Irish being the First spoken language isent in my opinion either feasible or even desirable I would give it 5 or less.

Most learners of the language I know are of a similar view point.

So, That puts us back at square one.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 29-11-2010 4:30pm

deise go deo wrote: »

That is a poor question, Many if not all Irish enthusiasts dont see Ireland speaking Irish first as feasible, I would answer low on that as a result.

Unless you agree with the concept as a whole you will score it low,

I for one would like a Bi-Lingual Nation, In theroy I should score around 7-8 but in reality, because Irish being the First spoken language isent in my opinion either feasible or even desirable I would give it 5 or less.

Most learners of the language I know are of a similar view point.

So, That puts us back at square one.

Fine so change it to "It is important to me a majority of Irish people are proficient in the Irish language" Do you honestly think the way they phrased the question and answers was a good way of gauging the nation's feelings?

LordSutch · 29-11-2010 4:33pm

This is one of countless threads over the last three of four years about the Irish language, the same arguments are trotted out by those for, & those against the compulsive nature of the curriculum, people have a lot to say about this subject, & very in depth views are held by many! but to what avail ?

I suspect things will never change, Irish will always be mandatory subject & thats that :cool:

Iwasfrozen · 29-11-2010 4:37pm

LordSutch wrote: »

This is one of countless threads over the last three of four years about the Irish language, the same arguments are trotted out by those for, & those against the compulsive nature of the curriculum, people have a lot to say about this subject, & very in depth views are held by many! but to what avail ?

I suspect things will never change, Irish will always be mandatory subject & thats that :cool:

Fine Gael want it made optional.

LordSutch · 29-11-2010 4:39pm

Really? I wasn't aware.

Thats a start.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 4:40pm

LordSutch wrote: »

I do agree, but I also think there is a kind of apathy in the public at large regarding the language, people just can't be bothered to learn it, even though they will fill out a survey form stating that they 'Love the language' and that it should remain compulsory in school for ever! the very same people (who in reality) don't take the language seriously at all :cool:

Ya, but what is there to be anything but apathetic about? The system is still in need of reform. If that was the case after proper reform of the system then you might have a point.

Yes because the hatred of Irish would subside, and No because the current curriculum is just as crap as all the previous versions over the last eighty+ years.

I think you over estimate 'Hatred' for Irish.
Anyway people may hate it less, That dosent mean they will choose it if it is poorly tought. And more importantly, poorly thought of as a subject to learn, It being optional dosent make the curriculum any less crap, Would you honestly choose a subject knowing you will most likely not gain any competence in by studying it?

Both, plus the fact that children/teenagers just can't see the point of learning it for their MTV lifestyles.

I would say that all evidence points to the poor curriculum etc being the biggest factor holding it back.

How many times do you here I hate it cos its pointless/crap/useless

By comparison to I hate it cos Im forced?

As for MTV lifestyles, The group that are tought it effectively don't seam to mind it being compulsory and do see it as useful. Why do you assume it would be different if tought effectively in Other Schools?

[/QUOTE]
I say make Irish optional in secondary school, maybe have a language choice (Irish, French, Spanish, German, etc) in fifth & sixth years, or something along those flexible lines . . . [/QUOTE]

But there already is the option of learning one of those Languages. Why dose Irish Need to be made optional for that?

cyclopath2001 · 29-11-2010 4:42pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Not what you said it was though is it?

That number of people (in the department) wanting to speak Irish has halved? That's what the Irish Language Enforcer said.

deise go deo wrote: »

I have, dose that mean there cant be a revival of Irish?

Not along the gigantic scale aspired to by you and your fellow enthusiasts and certainly not by forcing people to speak Irish.

deise go deo wrote: »

Well, I agree with Irish speakers having the right to conduct their business through the first official language of the state.

At unlimited expense to your fellow citizens.

deise go deo wrote: »

Yes, i know your opinion of it, now can you show that you are correct in what you are saying? The burden of proof really dose lie with you.

The survey is not scientific fact, it's opinion dressed up as statistics. The survey claims that a massive percentage are in favour of the Irish language, yet very, very few people speak it or make any effort to learn it. Go figure what this means.

deise go deo wrote: »

I said it was conducted by NUI Maynuth...I believe I apologized for that. They were not Involved, As I said, it has been a while since I saw the survey..

You tried to conceal the origin of the survey and got caught out. The author has personally claimed copyright, not the University...what does this mean?

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 4:45pm

LordSutch wrote: »

Really? I wasn't aware.

Thats a start.

Its directly referenced in the OP. The article I posted up was a direct critique of that policy.
They Did want to make it optional, It was in their old Education policy, They have since withdrawn that policy and are drawing up a new one that is supposed to be based on sweedens Education System,
I dont know what their position on Irish will be in their new one.

Lets just hope they think long and hard about it, the make Irish optional stance was not much more than a hunch by Enda.

Hence my point that they did not nor could not support it with evidence.

LordSutch · 29-11-2010 4:46pm

deise go deo wrote: »

But there already is the option of learning one of those Languages. Why dose Irish Need to be made optional for that?

Irish should be made an optional language so that people have a choice, will I learn French or will I study Irish, maybe I'll do both!

Simples

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 4:57pm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Fine so change it to "It is important to me a majority of Irish people are proficient in the Irish language" Do you honestly think the way they phrased the question and answers was a good way of gauging the nation's feelings?

I dident read the questions, just the groupings they put the results in,

Yes I can see that there is a problem with them.
They are quite vague, The two about bi-lingualism are just splitting hairs and the one about preservation in the gaelthacht and cultural reasons is more of a catch all than anything, It could have been easily resolved by asking if they would like to see an Increase in the use of Irish.

However, That said, It is the only survey i have seen. If you were to find evidence to counter it I would be more than happy to have a look at it.

To put it this way, My evidence may be crap, but you don't have any.

The other Evidence I have to back me up is the Indisputable Growth of Irish medium Education, it is(or at least would be if the Government would support it) The fastest growing sector in Irish education.

There are currently 10 Gaelscoil campaigns around the country that have the numbers that are waiting for recognition,
Most notably the Gaelscoil In Ráth Tó county Meath which has decided to go ahead without government support or recognition.

Link

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 4:59pm

LordSutch wrote: »

Irish should be made an optional language so that people have a choice, will I learn French or will I study Irish, maybe I'll do both!

Simples

Why? Is it worth the potential damage to Irish,
Lets say the report I have is even half correct, The damage done to language learning in Britain was huge.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 29-11-2010 5:01pm

deise go deo wrote: »

I dident read the questions, just the groupings they put the results in,

Yes I can see that there is a problem with them.
They are quite vague, The two about bi-lingualism are just splitting hairs and the one about preservation in the gaelthacht and cultural reasons is more of a catch all than anything, It could have been easily resolved by asking if they would like to see an Increase in the use of Irish.

However, That said, It is the only survey i have seen. If you were to find evidence to counter it I would be more than happy to have a look at it.

To put it this way, My evidence may be crap, but you don't have any.

The other Evidence I have to back me up is the Indisputable Growth of Irish medium Education, it is(or at least would be if the Government would support it) The fastest growing sector in Irish education.

There are currently 10 Gaelscoil campaigns around the country that have the numbers that are waiting for recognition,
Most notably the Gaelscoil In Ráth Tó county Meath which has decided to go ahead without government support or recognition.

Link

Well I do support them, they seem to teach Irish properly so best of luck with them. Would much rather the government funded them than waste it on leaving cert stuff.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 5:04pm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Well I do support them, they seem to teach Irish properly so best of luck with them. Would much rather the government funded them than waste it on leaving cert stuff.

Its only waste because the system hasent been reformed, It is possible to see great results if the correct method was applied.

ReefBreak · 29-11-2010 5:16pm

deise go deo, you seem pretty passionate about the Irish language. And you've posted a lot today.

But despite all that, I still don't see the point of Irish.

Do you not agree that making Irish compulsory for Junior Cert is, but optional for Leaving Cert, is a fair compromise? By Junior Cert, a student is familiar enough with the language to make their own decision as to whether to continue or not.

How about making it compulsory for a student to learn two languages in secondary school? So they could learn Irish & French, or French & Spanish? Or even better, German & Chinese?

Whatever your response, I simply cannot see why anyone could think that making Irish compulsory, while Science/Engineering/Computing is not compulsory is a good idea. The sooner this changes, the better for Ireland.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 5:24pm

ReefBreak wrote: »

deise go deo, you seem pretty passionate about the Irish language. And you've posted a lot today.

But despite all that, I still don't see the point of Irish.

Do you not agree that making Irish compulsory for Junior Cert is, but optional for Leaving Cert, is a fair compromise? By Junior Cert, a student is familiar enough with the language to make their own decision as to whether to continue or not.

How about making it compulsory for a student to learn two languages in secondary school? So they could learn Irish & French, or French & Spanish? Or even better, German & Chinese?

Whatever your response, I simply cannot see why anyone could think that making Irish compulsory, while Science/Engineering/Computing is not compulsory is a good idea. The sooner this changes, the better for Ireland.

No, It is clear to me that that majority want Irish to be promoted, Reformed Compulsory Irish is certainly the best way to do that, That is why I support it.

No, If you read the article in the OP you will see the damage that could be done If Irish was dropped as a compulsory subject, You don't have to agree with Irish being compulsory, but I cannot see how someone would wantonly put the future of the Irish language at risk when there is no great need to do so.

ReefBreak · 29-11-2010 5:29pm

deise go deo wrote: »

No, It is clear to me that that majority want Irish to be promoted, Reformed Compulsory Irish is certainly the best way to do that, That is why I support it.

No, If you read the article in the OP you will see the damage that could be done If Irish was dropped as a compulsory subject, You don't have to agree with Irish being compulsory, but I cannot see how someone would wantonly put the future of the Irish language at risk when there is no great need to do so.

This so-called "majority" (which I don't believe is true) might want Irish to be promoted, but not if that extends to learning it themselves.

Actually, I think there is a need to drop the compulsory status of Irish. We can then divert resources to teaching our kids someone that will have a use in life, such as science/tech, or another modern European language (which does not include Irish).

I'd be interested to see a poll on this forum on the subject.

deise go deo · 29-11-2010 5:41pm

ReefBreak wrote: »

This so-called "majority" (which I don't believe is true) might want Irish to be promoted, but not if that extends to learning it themselves.

Actually, I think there is a need to drop the compulsory status of Irish. We can then divert resources to teaching our kids someone that will have a use in life, such as science/tech, or another modern European language (which does not include Irish).

I'd be interested to see a poll on this forum on the subject.

I don't think politics allows polls, There was a poll on P.ie a while ago, There were 1323 votes cast with 57% in favor of Irish remaining Compulsory.
Naisc

You may not think Irish is useful but it clearly enjoys the support of a great many people, As for your jibe about not learning it, Many are, Many can not due to work and other commitments.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 29-11-2010 6:00pm

deise go deo wrote: »

No, It is clear to me that that majority want Irish to be promoted, Reformed Compulsory Irish is certainly the best way to do that, That is why I support it.

No, If you read the article in the OP you will see the damage that could be done If Irish was dropped as a compulsory subject, You don't have to agree with Irish being compulsory, but I cannot see how someone would wantonly put the future of the Irish language at risk when there is no great need to do so.

It shouldn't be up to the majority to decide what individuals study. In a united Ireland you wouldn't try and force Irish on kids from unionist backgrounds so how could compulsory Irish be successfully implemented if Ireland was one jurisdiction?

The Status Of Irish.

Comments