One version in Irish the other in English?

TomF

I listerned to the oath-taking by Mary McAleese on RTE this morning, complete with Bertie reading some sentences in Irish. It seemed to me that the Irish had more references to Jesus and God than the English. Is the oath in English a true translation of that in Irish, or were things being de-godded for the benefit of the unbelievers who might happen to listen-in?

sceptre

I didn't see/hear it this morning but the designated oath that the President has to take has two mentions of God in the english version and two mentions of Dia in the irish version.

oscarBravo

TomF wrote:

It seemed to me that the Irish had more references to Jesus and God than the English.

Maybe the "Jesus" references you heard were from the President's name, which (I believe) is Máire Mac Giolla Íosa as gaeilge. Nach ea?

Gael

TomF wrote:

I listerned to the oath-taking by Mary McAleese on RTE this morning, complete with Bertie reading some sentences in Irish. It seemed to me that the Irish had more references to Jesus and God than the English. Is the oath in English a true translation of that in Irish, or were things being de-godded for the benefit of the unbelievers who might happen to listen-in?

Yes the Irish language is being used as a subtle and cunning tool by the religious right to slowly but surely roll back the progressions of secular Ireland and to establish a Christian theocracy.

oscarBravo wrote:

Maybe the "Jesus" references you heard were from the President's name, which (I believe) is Máire Mac Giolla Íosa as gaeilge. Nach ea?

Actually, this probably a more reasonable answer.

chewy

vox pop with kids on RTE radio 1 today...

do you like Mary McAleese?

yes

why

cos she likes building bridges and I want to be an mechanic when i grow up

aidan_walsh

If you saw "The Cafe" this evening on RTE2 (bloody sister of mine...), some of the reasons given as to why they would like to be a politician were actually worse. At least this kid managed to make a logical link, something beyond the teenage youth of the country, it seems...

"I want to be a politician because I'm young and all the politicians are old and don't know what we want..."

Fair reasoning if ever I've heard it :rolleyes:

simu

I caught some of the ceremony on TV this morning - the marching band was playing Indiana Jones music. :eek: Does that strike anyone else as being a bit pathetic?

johnKarma

From Article 12.8 of the Constitution as available on taoiseach.gov.ie

Voila le English Text:

"In the presence of Almighty God I ,do solemnly and sincerely promise and declare that I will maintain the Constitution of Ireland and uphold its laws, that I will fulfil my duties faithfully and conscientiously in accordance with the Constitution and the law, and that I will dedicate my abilities to the service and welfare of the people of Ireland. May God direct and sustain me."

Et voila le Irish text:

"I láthair Dia na nUilechumhacht, táimse, ******** , á ghealladh agus á dhearbhú go sollúnta is go fírinneach bheith i mo thaca agus i mo dhídin do Bhunreacht Éireann, agus a dlíthe a chaomhnú, mo dhualgais a chomhlíonadh go dílis coinsiasach de réir an Bhunreacht is an dlí, agus mo lándícheall a dhéanamh ar son leasa is fónaimh mhuintir na hÉireann. Dia do mo stiúradh agus do mo chumhdach."

I think the translation is pretty close. As far as I know, the English text was drafted first, and the Irish version is a translation of that. But the Irish version still takes precedence.

Not that this oath matters in the slightest to anyone.

OfflerCrocGod

What is "God" doing in there? Is Mary impersonating W Bush?

aidan_walsh

There has always been a reference to God and the Church in the constitution.

chewy

saw a few clips of the ceremony... and there was loads of people saying it was waste of money having an election if the was a clear winner beforehand...

so there was no money spent on the crowning at dublin castle
the 21 gun salute
the motorcade with the 2 dozen motorcyclists and Presidential Roll Royce

well that's all that stuff for, she wasn't elected she knows where the aras is...?


talk about rubbing it in

Hagar

The President is our president.

That sounds dumb but for years the Irish people have resented and undermined all positions of authority because they weren't ours. They were imposed on us. As a result we have become a nation of begrudegers who take pleasure in undermining everthing. It's about time we got over it and paid due honour to our chosen leaders. The Americans may be dumb but at least they manange that. I believe our leaders are a class above theirs and more deserving of our respect. A liitle bit of spectacle never hurt anybody. Pomp and ceremony have a place in occasions like this. We should enjoy it for what it is.

Ta leagan Gaeigle den "rant" seo le fail. Nil ach e a iarradh.

Here endeth today's lesson...

bonkey

Hagar wrote:

The Americans may be dumb but at least they manange that.

Whatever about yoour opinion of the people, don't you think the difference may be to do with the fact that they actively choose their President, whereas this time round, we didn't have any say in the matter?

When was the last time an American President was given a full term of office without having to gain the popular support of the people in order to do so?

I believe our leaders are a class above theirs and more deseving of our respect.

Deserving why? We didn't elect the President (this time).

I'd agree with you regarding the usual moaning and b1tching we see about the whole "President should be abolished cause its a worthless position" line of argument one sees from time to time, but I do think that the elected-without-contest issue is what really grates here.

The Presidency is a seperate office from the Dail and the Seannad for a reason. To reduce it to an office which is little more than a Dail-appointment is not an ideal situation.....but I do think that too many people are making too much of it.

jc

Redleslie2

simu wrote:

I caught some of the ceremony on TV this morning - the marching band was playing Indiana Jones music. :eek: Does that strike anyone else as being a bit pathetic?

That's pure Father Ted.

Hobbes

I wonder how much of the 5 million euro the speech writing was.

mycroft

the marching band was playing Indiana Jones music.

I was walking past a house at lunch yesterday and heard the music from an open window and was feeling miffed it was on and I was missing it. that's just cheered me up.

I believe our leaders are a class above theirs and more deserving of our respect.

You've not picked up a paper or watched the news any time in the last er 400 years have you?

Last year I worked on that pompous McAleese informational, sorry, documentary on paddys day, I was disgusted at the pomp and ceremony thats wasted on what is basically a ceremonial position. The military attaché's the garda, we need to grow up and realise we don't need or want this.

BolBill

TomF wrote:

complete with Bertie reading some sentences in Irish.

Yeah reading, all he ever does is read, never speaks for himself.

RuggieBear

chewy wrote:

...
talk about rubbing it in

What about the 2000 dignatories (sp?) invited.... the whole shebang probably cost more than an election!

TomF

"Máire Mac Giolla Íosa"

Excellent analysis, ocsarBravo!

Victor

oscarBravo wrote:

Maybe the "Jesus" references you heard were from the President's name, which (I believe) is Máire Mac Giolla Íosa as gaeilge. Nach ea?

Oddly enough I thought her name was "Mary McAleese" I hate this people having two different names business.

bonkey wrote:

When was the last time an American President was given a full term of office without having to gain the popular support of the people in order to do so?

Starting November 2000 - January 2001?*

* Did I miss your irony?

OfflerCrocGod

Victor wrote:

Starting November 2000 - January 2001?*

* Did I miss your irony?

DAMN YOU VICTOR! That was my pun

So cheap, so easy.

bonkey

Victor wrote:

Oddly enough I thought her name was "Mary McAleese" I hate this people having two different names business.Starting November 2000 - January 2001?*

* Did I miss your irony?

No. but you assumed that by popular support I meant "majority of support".

Bush was selected (rightly or wrongly) as President from two candidates who were closer together than the margin of error in the election. No matter who got elected, their appointment owuld have always been controversial...but both candidates had unquestionable support.

Ireland's current Presidency was chosen without reference to the people.

I see a difference....but it may just me.

jc

alleepally

bonkey wrote:

Ireland's current Presidency was chosen without reference to the people.

I see a difference....but it may just me.

jc

In principle you are right but the reason this is a non issue for most people is that she has popular and overwhelming support. Even assuming that there were candidates to run against her, the whole exercise would have been a waste of time and money.

bonkey

alleepally wrote:

Even assuming that there were candidates to run against her, the whole exercise would have been a waste of time and money.

But then surely the half-exercise they bothered withwas also a waste of time and money???

"Lets not bother with the election, but celebrating the winning of it....now thats important" Still...I suppose its in keeping with the Irish mentality of "any excuse for a party"

jc

The Corinthian

bonkey wrote:

Ireland's current Presidency was chosen without reference to the people.

Certainly while the chances of Dana actually winning were always going to be pretty slim to nil, the Machiavellian antics of the main parties to block even an election were disturbing to say the least. Many I heard argued that they were saving the taxpayer money on an unnecessary campaign, which would lead one to ask how far could such paternalistic interference stretch in the future?

There is a parallel to Nader in the US, where many Democrats attempted to block his name from appearing on numerous state ballots - their argument being that Nader would never win, but would only succeed at best in causing Kerry to lose (as he was widely blamed with Gore in 2000).

Perhaps the path to oligarchy is indeed paved with good intentions.

Victor

bonkey wrote:

No. but you assumed that by popular support I meant "majority of support".

But in the context of an election "popular support" means of the people and of the majority of people (that voted).

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=popular

4 entries found for popular.
pop·u·lar ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ppy-lr)
adj.

<snip>

3. Of, representing, or carried on by the people at large: the popular vote.

<snip>

[Middle English populer, commonly known, from Old French populeir, of the people, from Latin populris, from populus, the people, of Etruscan origin.]

<snip>

popular

\Pop"u*lar\, a. [L. popularis, fr. populus people: cf. F. populaire. See People.] 1. Of or pertaining to the common people, or to the whole body of the people, as distinguished from a select portion; as, the popular voice; popular elections. "Popular states.'' --Bacon. "So the popular vote inclines.'' --Milton.

And finally:

popular
adj 1: regarded with great favor, approval, or affection especially by the general public; "a popular tourist attraction"; "a popular girl";

Of course one daren't suggest that "a popular girl" is popular with the majority of the population.

oscarBravo

Victor wrote:

Oddly enough I thought her name was "Mary McAleese" I hate this people having two different names business.

Her name is Mary McAleese in English. Máire Mac Giolla Íosa is ainm di as gaeilge. In the same way, I'll refer to "Dublin" and "Ireland" when talking English, and "Baile Átha Cliath" and "Éire" when talking Irish (which isn't often, sadly). Why is that a problem?

Victor

oscarBravo wrote:

Her name is Mary McAleese in English. Máire Mac Giolla Íosa is ainm di as gaeilge.

I wonder if that is on her birth cert.

And shouldn't she be a "Ní", not a "Mac".

In the same way, I'll refer to "Dublin" and "Ireland" when talking English, and "Baile Átha Cliath" and "Éire" when talking Irish (which isn't often, sadly). Why is that a problem?

"McAleese" is not a translation of "Mac Giolla Íosa", it's a corruption of it.

bonkey

By the same token, Dublin is a corruption of Dubh Linn, rather than a translation of anything. So even allowing for pedantry as to whether its one or the other, the reality is that you seem to be questioning why people's names should be different in different languages....whereas I would wonder why people's names should be treated any differently to any other proper noun.

jc

magpie

Yes the Irish language is being used as a subtle and cunning tool by the religious right to slowly but surely roll back the progressions of secular Ireland and to establish a Christian theocracy.

Sounds about right.

As for Maire Bean an Ti or whatever she wants to call herself, yes it's just wonderful that she's El Presidente.

Bring back the old days when the President did what they are supposed to do, which is ensure no abuses of the Constitution. Not ponce around the world in Green tweed saving kittens from landmines and the like, a precedent that was set by good ole power-hungry Mrs Robinson who always had an eye to her next job.

mycroft

magpie wrote:

a precedent that was set by good ole power-hungry Mrs Robinson who always had an eye to her next job.

Or traveling to central africa and embarssing the UN into relief work,

Yes I can remember the power hungry way she choked back tears, during her press conference.

Oh and the way she took a job which meant she could made a real difference in the war againist the aids pandemic, rather than her tedious pointless duties.

And how she's quitely and without much of a public profile been one of the most active aids campaigners in the world.

God yes isn't she evil....

sceptre

magpie wrote:

Bring back the old days when the President did what they are supposed to do, which is ensure no abuses of the Constitution. Not ponce around the world in Green tweed saving kittens from landmines and the like, a precedent that was set by good ole power-hungry Mrs Robinson who always had an eye to her next job.

I read that as "bring back the days when the President did the minimum they are supposed to do..."

magpie

She's not very popular in Israel, mind you... http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-rubin052002.asp

You'll have to forgive my cynicism, but it appeared to me that Mary was using her tenure as President to line herself up for a plum UN job, rather than keeping her eye on her official duties. But hey, most people loved her which is why she got elected for a second term.

mycroft

magpie wrote:

She's not very popular in Israel, mind you... http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-rubin052002.asp

Thats the national review an absurdly right wing rag

You'll have to forgive my cynicism, but it appeared to me that Mary was using her tenure as President to line herself up for a plum UN job, rather than keeping her eye on her official duties. But hey, most people loved her which is why she got elected for a second term.

Again this is based on what?

I have a friend who's worked for her in the UN and her opinion is based on working with our former president. My friend is of the opinion that Mary jumped ship when the state of the aids pandemic first surfaced and dire problem africa is facing, she knew she had to do something.

She didn't bother standing for a second term (and if she did we would have had the same situation that arose last month) turning down a plum job (which the presidency of ireland is) to do some good. So frankly stuff your cyncism.

oscarBravo

magpie wrote:

it appeared to me that Mary was using her tenure as President to line herself up for a plum UN job, rather than keeping her eye on her official duties. But hey, most people loved her which is why she got elected for a second term.

I'm confused. Which Mary was lining herself up for a UN job? The one that got one, or the one that got a second term?

Whichever you're talking about, you're implying that at least one of them neglected her duties as president. I've yet to see any facts to back this up.

magpie

Sorry, that was referring to Mary2 who seems to be following a similar path to Mary1. Apologies for the confusion.

All I'm saying is that the duties of the Irish President are, as far as I can gather.

Appointing members of the Government, judges and other officials

Summoning and dissolving the Dáil

Convening the Oireachtas

Representing the people

Signing Bills and referring Bills to the Supreme Court

Acting as Supreme Commander of the Defence Forces

All I'm saying is that Pre-Robinson (e.g. Hillary) the president kept a low profile and did not personally align himself (and by implication the Irish Nation) with any charitable causes.

Maybe it's a good thing that the two Marys have changed all that.

oscarBravo

You said earlier: "...rather than keeping her eye on her official duties." Which duties do you feel she took her eye off? Are there unappointed judges hanging in limbo somewhere? Any bills sitting in her in-tray that we should know about?

seamus

magpie wrote:

Maybe it's a good thing that the two Marys have changed all that.

I think so. As head of state, but without official power, I think the President's primary concern should really be PR. To represent the Irish people abroad and at home. A head of state who actually has control, e.g. GWB, has a much more difficult position as they simultaneously have to be in control of the country and be the PR guy. It can present a conflict of interests in that he may enact something which is desirable at home, but bad overseas, and negatively damages PR. With a separate Taoiseach and President, effectively it can arranged so that the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing, or in other words, desseminate any blame.