Would you prefer to speak Irish?

DyldeBrill

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

The amount of people who THINK they can sepak Irish has grown. As has the amount of catholics.

Elaborate please.What do mean by Think?

Kirby

I would be wary of using census data to back up any point. For example, hundreds of thousands of people accross the world state they belong to the "Jedi religion" on their nations census. Perspective please.

I also find it interesting why you point out a supposed increase in irish speaking numbers since 1946 but fail to notice the dramatic decrease over the last several hundred years since we were colonized. Is that not more significant? Does the fact that our national broadcaster is called radio telefis eireann and yet broadcasts in english so that the nation can enjoy it?

Paz-CCFC

Kirby wrote: »

I would be wary of using census data to back up any point. For example, hundreds of thousands of people accross the world state they belong to the "Jedi religion" on their nations census. Perspective please.

The Irish language is a world away from the Jedi religion. The latter was popularly done as a protest vote (though some would actually consider themselves genuine followers of this religion). I doubt many non-Irish speakers would use the language as a protest vote - if anything, I think more people who might actually have some ability to speak Irish might say they don't, due to their dislike of the language following how they were taught it.

I also find it interesting why you point out a supposed increase in irish speaking numbers since 1946 but fail to notice the dramatic decrease over the last several hundred years since we were colonized. Is that not more significant? Does the fact that our national broadcaster is called radio telefis eireann and yet broadcasts in english so that the nation can enjoy it?

I'm not disputing that the language declined dramatically in the fashion you state. However, in more recent times, it has undergone a re-birth and we've seen it regrowing.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

Well, yes, the nature of the census information is hugely at the discretion of whomever fills it out. Do you have any figures to suggest that those who claim, on the cesnsus, that they have some ability to speak/understand Irish actually don't?

DyldeBrill wrote: »

Elaborate please.What do mean by Think?

Personal experience. I know lods of people who "think" they can sepak Irish (why are the filling out the English section of the census them.... )

Think is probably the wrong word. Exaggerate would be far more likely. In 2006, the figure was 42.6% said they could speak Irish. And 53% of househlolds had at least one Irish speaker. In the Gaeltacht areas, yes, no probllem; but nationwide, that doesn't add up.
(Figures are from 2006, couldn't find 2011)
People think "a cupla focal" translates in to "full fluency".
http://www.cso.ie/en/newsandevents/pressreleases/2007pressreleases/2006censusofpopulation-volume9-irishlanguage/

Paz-CCFC

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Personal experience. I know lods of people who "think" they can sepak Irish (why are the filling out the English section of the census them.... )

To be fair, anecdotal evidence isn't exactly the most persuasive. I know loads of people who think that they can't speak Irish, yet I've had hour-long conversations with them.

Think is probably the wrong word. Exaggerate would be far more likely. In 2006, the figure was 42.6% said they could speak Irish. And 53% of househlolds had at least one Irish speaker. In the Gaeltacht areas, yes, no probllem; but nationwide, that doesn't add up.
(Figures are from 2006, couldn't find 2011)
People think "a cupla focal" translates in to "full fluency".
http://www.cso.ie/en/newsandevents/pressreleases/2007pressreleases/2006censusofpopulation-volume9-irishlanguage/

I believe that the question asked on the census is if people can speak some level of Irish, no? And it's then broken down into sub-categories, based on how often you use it?

Even so, let's assume that of the 1.1 million increase of people that claim to speak Irish between 1946 and 2006 are all people who can only string a few sentences together/have a laten interest in the language. Does that not prove some growth in the language? Over an extra million people would have made an attempt to learn some Irish and/or have a bit of interest in the language.

SafeSurfer

It would be interesting to find out how many people request and fill in the Irish language version of the census form.

Found figures for 2002 and 2006.

In short, the total number of Private households (also including individuals in private homes and communal homes) using the Irish form rose from 5,022 in 2002 to 6,672 in 2006.

http://www.irishgaelictranslator.com/translation/topic84357.html

Guess Irish speakers have large families.

Paparazzo

SafeSurfer wrote: »

It would be interesting to find out how many people request and fill in the Irish language version of the census form.

They only fill it out in irish if they get a government grant to.

Iwasfrozen

SafeSurfer wrote: »

It would be interesting to find out how many people request and fill in the Irish language version of the census form.

Found figures for 2002 and 2006.

In short, the total number of Private households (also including individuals in private homes and communal homes) using the Irish form rose from 5,022 in 2002 to 6,672 in 2006.

http://www.irishgaelictranslator.com/translation/topic84357.html

Guess Irish speakers have large families.

Out of how many in total?

Paz-CCFC

SafeSurfer wrote: »

It would be interesting to find out how many people request and fill in the Irish language version of the census form.

Found figures for 2002 and 2006.

In short, the total number of Private households (also including individuals in private homes and communal homes) using the Irish form rose from 5,022 in 2002 to 6,672 in 2006.

http://www.irishgaelictranslator.com/translation/topic84357.html

Guess Irish speakers have large families.

And what exactly does that prove? Just because someone didn't fill out the Irish form doesn't mean they don't have Irish. Perhaps it's their second language, and they felt more comfortable filling out the English version. Or perhaps, while they can speak the language fine, their literacy isn't of a high enough level.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

To be fair, anecdotal evidence isn't exactly the most persuasive. I know loads of people who think that they can't speak Irish, yet I've had hour-long conversations with them.



I believe that the question asked on the census is if people can speak some level of Irish, no? And it's then broken down into sub-categories, based on how often you use it?

Even so, let's assume that of the 1.1 million increase of people that claim to speak Irish between 1946 and 2006 are all people who can only string a few sentences together/have a laten interest in the language. Does that not prove some growth in the language? Over an extra million people would have made an attempt to learn some Irish and/or have a bit of interest in the language.

Therein lies the problem: the census does not differentiate between basic and fluent, so you can hardly say that the number has grown if the actually amount of Irish spoken is minimal. Anecdotal eveidence is all you're going to get because at the end of the day that's all that exists.

I mean, I speak "some level" of Irish, but then I also speak some livel of French, Italian, German, Swedish, Norwegian and Danish (varying degrees of fluency, all better than Irish).

I am not sayign that the langauge is not growing, but you need to take into account other factos such a rise of poopulation, quality of Irish spoken and how many of these 1.1 million "made an attempt" because they were forced to in school before you say "interest is growing".

Paparazzo

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

And what exactly does that prove? Just because someone didn't fill out the Irish form doesn't mean they don't have Irish. Perhaps it's their second language, and they felt more comfortable filling out the English version. Or perhaps, while they can speak the language fine, their literacy isn't of a high enough level.

Good way of finding out how many people truely speak irish every day though.

SafeSurfer

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Out of how many in total?

Out of 1,624,134 total dwellings. Irish language = 0.4%.


Audio and large print versions of the form were also available as was assistance from enumerators, so literacy issues should not be a major factor.

deise go deo

Kirby wrote: »

A few thousand people who use Irish as their primary language in a world of over six billion people is clearly the sign of a language in decline.

Do you know what the word decline means? What you have referenced is the proportion of Irish speakers to non Irish speakers in the world, that has nothing to do with decline or growth, nor much else for that matter.

deise go deo

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

And what exactly does that prove? Just because someone didn't fill out the Irish form doesn't mean they don't have Irish. Perhaps it's their second language, and they felt more comfortable filling out the English version. Or perhaps, while they can speak the language fine, their literacy isn't of a high enough level.

Or perhaps they just got the English version in the post and dident feel like going looking for the Irish version.

briany

I think after going through the whole 13 years of schooling from age 5-18, I'd say I know maybe two dozen words of Irish at this point. I knew a lot more around the time of my Irish leaving paper, upon the finishing of which I forgot nearly all of what I knew. I couldn't wait to forget about it!

Irish lessons had been the bane of my academic career from being a puzzled five year old wondering what this gobbledygook was that they were putting on front of me when I just getting on top of the whole English thing and thinking there was something wrong with me when I couldn't quite get it, to (cult like) chanting the conjugation of verbs to finding the sentence that resembled the wording of the question in reading comprehension tests, no actual comprehension involved and for every one who did well in the language there was maybe five who hated it or just wished that they could be doing something else. There's people who hate maths as well but simple mathematics, like the kind you learn in primary school, is very useful and we use it every day. Somebody mentioned that you should have Irish in gaelteacht areas in order to avoid feeling like a stranger in your own land, well I say that if it comes down to that, people for the most part will simply start avoiding gaelteacht areas.

The Irish language is a beautiful language though and I support the speaking of it if only because I like things that keep the human cultural stew as diverse and interesting as possible but I resent the fact that I had to learn it at a time when I was too young to question why, I hate the way it was taught to me and others and, if it's still like that, then here's to another generation of school goers who'll loathe their constitutionally native tongue and another generation of politicians who insist on flushing money down the toilet based on a nationalistic and archaic notion.

Wibbs

DyldeBrill wrote: »

What did you think I was talking about....Irish within the school system?Nope ! It's growing within and outside the school system, and not only in the Gaeltacht regions.Projects like Béal na nGael have been put forth encouraging people to speak "an cúpla focal" .

The major growth has been in Gaelscoils. Though major may need some defining. 100 odd schools out of 4000 odd overall, while a start is hardly a cultural brush fire.

no...you are joking?

Oh I'm smiling alright, but I'm not the source of amusement.

How can you say that there is enough funding going into the Irish language...please do tell.

Really. You're actually serious? Can you begin to count up the literal billions ploughed into the language since the foundation of the state. The compulsory teaching from primary through to the LC. The requirements for various universities, civil service jobs, the law etc. Requirements that were even higher in the past and still the language declined.

The fact that Foinse has to close down, a major Irish Newspaper, due to lack of investment says something surely? The same story with Lá Nua.

Newspapers and other periodicals cease trading for pretty much only one reason. Lack of circulation figures/readership. This makes advertisers go feck that and funding dries up. No successful newspapers has ever gone to the wall unless a government agency bans it or they're crippled by legal fees. Those two papers failed because they didn't have enough readers. Their niche market was too tiny to sustain them, even though both were subsidised by an outside agency.

The link that you send me there was a brief alt from the Irish Times...doesn't really say much.

How many references do you want on how much TG4 is subsidised? It says quite a bit, especially in the face of the claim that the UK government has funded the Irish language more than our own.

We studied it in a lecture last year in NUIG.I have just asked my lecturer to send on the information and links to me, so I will post that here the minute I get them and I can pm them to you also.I apologise for not having them on me right now, but will surprise you!.

It'll more than surprise me, my monocle will fly across the room.

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

The amount of Irish speakers has grown census-on-census since 1946. Perhaps not all the speakers are fluent, but they possess some level of Irish, which shows that the language is growing somewhat. If it were dying, then this amount would be falling. If it were dead, then this amount would be zero.

Perhaps not all the speakers are fluent P? If they were even close to fluent I doubt this debate would be happening.

Son Of A Vidic

It would be nice if this nation actually used its native tongue, instead of just mere tokenism. So considering this, I could careless since it bears no relevance to my daily life. The Welsh on the other hand, well they're actually doing it right.

KeithAFC

Does anyone know how much money is wasted on the Irish language? It seems a lot people aren't happy with it and I wonder if it is because a lot of money is spent on it?

4zn76tysfajdxp

KeithAFC wrote: »

It seems a lot people aren't happy with it and I wonder if it is because a lot of money is spent on it?

I suspect that's a major source of ire, alright.

It's really annoying when people come into After Hours and frankly embellish figures of how many people actually speak Irish fluently/natively. Lying to yourselves and to everyone else isn't gonna make people join your crusade, folks.

enfant terrible

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

No, English is the global lingua franca. I can speak to over a billion people through the medium of English, while only around 75,000 people through the medium of Irish. If Ireland had its own empire and took over a quarter of the globe and spread the Irish language, then maybe I might consider using Irish. I put my priorities on numbers not on some nationalist fantasy. I say this and I went through 14 years of education as Gaeilge (because my parents made me) so I can still speak it. Do I regret it? Yes, my English syntax is all fecked up because of it.

That's interesting how did it affect your English syntax?

quietriot

I would prefer to be a native English speaker and for Irish to be none of my languages.

I sincerely hope I get to see the day that is removed from being compulsory in school and let die like it should.

4zn76tysfajdxp

quietriot wrote: »

I would prefer to be a native English speaker and for Irish to be none of my languages.

I sincerely hope I get to see the day that is removed from being compulsory in school and let die like it should.

Why "should" it die?

quietriot

Everleigh Hallowed Chrysalis wrote: »

Why "should" it die?

No, it should be let die. It should be let attempt to stand on its own two feet as a language or be ushered into the closet of irrelevance which is where I would put my money on it going.

It is being propped up by the enforcement of its learning in the schools system and nothing more.

Edit: Sorry, "nothing more" is incorrect. I know of quite a number of people sending their children to Irish schools and giving them Irish names out of nothing but xenophobia. Can't have little Ruairi mixing with Piotr after all.

GaryIrv93

Everleigh Hallowed Chrysalis wrote: »

Why "should" it die?

in a way i agree with quietriot. because he's been forced to learn the language from a young age and not have any choice, he's learned to resent it for the rest of his life. i feel the same way. take a slave for example - force him to do something for 12-13 years straight and then set him free. do you think he'd go back to doing the activity that he was forced to do? no, he's learned to resent it forever. the same's true with conscription into the army - soldiers who are simply forced to join are usually miserable in there and usually aren't bothered when they're sent off to war. that's the situation with compulsory irish - because young people like myself are forced to learn it in school, it's hated by the majority of us and we may discourage our kids to learn it in the future. the language doesn't need to ''die'', it just needs to be made optional in schools, not to mention taught better as well. why is it that i can speak so much better french in only 6 years of doing it than irish, which i've been learning for 12 years? it's proof of how badly it's taught, another reason why students hate having to learn it. sure most of us won't even need to use it in the future. where's the logic in forcing students to learn something irrelevant, let alone waste their time and tax payers money too, on something that isin't even taught well? that's no way to keep a language alive.

PhlegmyMoses

quietriot wrote: »

No, it should be let die. It should be let attempt to stand on its own two feet as a language or be ushered into the closet of irrelevance which is where I would put my money on it going.

It is being propped up by the enforcement of its learning in the schools system and nothing more.

Not sure why you would want it stop being taught as a compulsory subject in schools. If you'd rather we teach a foreign language for business needs, why not teach both? What are the Welsh doing right that we're doing wrong?

Edit: Sorry, "nothing more" is incorrect. I know of quite a number of people sending their children to Irish schools and giving them Irish names out of nothing but xenophobia. Can't have little Ruairi mixing with Piotr after all.

This seems odd to me. Having done Irish as part of my degree, I can't say I've ever met anyone who has sent their kids to a Gaelscoil for any reason other than the fact that they're often quite good (Coláiste Eoin\Íosagán) or that they are from this kind of background themselves. I actually think it's quite a disingenuous statement that is hard to find evidence for.

GaryIrv93

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Not sure why you would want it stop being taught as a compulsory subject in schools. If you'd rather we teach a foreign language for business needs, why not teach both? What are the Welsh doing right that we're doing wrong?

why should irish be kept compulsory? foreign languages are more useful, and irish isin't the general spoken language in Ireland, it's english. what kind of a country forces it's youth to learn a language, that the vast majority don't use and will never use again? if it stops being taught as a compulsory subject, the government would save much more money, and student's time wouldn't be wasted.

PhlegmyMoses

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

why should irish be kept compulsory? foreign languages are more useful, and irish isin't the general spoken language in Ireland, it's english.

Again, why not teach both? It's more useful to become proficient at computer progamming than to read Ulysses but both have their merits.

what kind of a country forces it's youth to learn a language.

Wales. Parts of France teach Occitan as a compulsory language etc. I'm sure there are others.

if it stops being taught as a compulsory subject, the government would save much more money, and student's time wouldn't be wasted.

We would just replace it with a different language so we wouldn't save money. So we get back to usefulness. Well, the most useful languages to speak currently, from a business point of view, would probably be Chinese and Portuguese as China and Brazil are the two economies experiencing a really big boom at the moment. So if we follow the x>y argument to its logical conclusion, we should be learning these. Do you reckon our kids would be any happier learning these? Do you reckon our schools would be better at teaching them? Probably not. We would get a load of kids who hate the subject and would finish up barely able to speak a word like they do with Irish now. Still useful? We should probably perfect how we teach languages before we overhaul what languages we teach.

Anyway, I digress. For me, it's not an either or situation. There is room in the school system to learn both.

quietriot

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Not sure why you would want it stop being taught as a compulsory subject in schools. If you'd rather we teach a foreign language for business needs, why not teach both? What are the Welsh doing right that we're doing wrong?

Because Irish is not used on anything but road signs and by an absolutely microscopic amount of people in a remote part of the country? Why support it? How many jobs does it create in Ireland? It is a dead language. Let it go.

Kids should be taught the foundation of skills they'll use in life. Irish is not one of them. Having them do two foreign languages from a young age would be far more beneficial.

This seems odd to me. Having done Irish as part of my degree, I can't say I've ever met anyone who has sent their kids to a Gaelscoil for any reason other than the fact that they're often quite good (Coláiste Eoin\Íosagán) or that they are from this kind of background themselves. I actually think it's quite a disingenuous statement that is hard to find evidence for.

Gaelscoils boomed during the celtic tiger years - the years when we had a massive influx of people coming from other countries to live here. It's not like a load of people suddenly just made enough money to send their kids to these schools. It was a motivated movement.

People like to pretend otherwise but there's a massive issue with xenophobia in this country. There's an integration problem, certainly, but there's also a genuine attitude problem held by an enormous amount of people here.

quietriot

[QUOTE=PhlegmyMoses;76947152
We would just replace it with a different language so we wouldn't save money. So we get back to usefulness. Well, the most useful languages to speak currently, from a business point of view, would probably be Chinese and Portuguese as China and Brazil are the two economies experiencing a really big boom at the moment. So if we follow the x>y argument to its logical conclusion, we should be learning these. Do you reckon our kids would be any happier learning these? Do you reckon our schools would be better at teaching them? Probably not. We would get a load of kids who hate the subject and would finish up barely able to speak a word like they do with Irish now. Still useful? We should probably perfect how we teach languages before we overhaul what languages we teach.

Anyway, I digress. For me, it's not an either or situation. There is room in the school system to learn both.[/QUOTE]

You're really scraping for answers here. At the end of the day, there is absolutely no reason for Irish to be taught anymore except for the sole reason of keeping it alive. That is the only reason it is taught. Everything else has merit because it enriches a child's education and development, Irish does not.

It's ok though, the language will be wiped out within 100 years, no matter how hard you clinger-ons (to it) grip at it.

deise go deo

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

why should irish be kept compulsory? foreign languages are more useful, and irish isin't the general spoken language in Ireland, it's english. what kind of a country forces it's youth to learn a language, that the vast majority don't use and will never use again? if it stops being taught as a compulsory subject, the government would save much more money, and student's time wouldn't be wasted.

That would be every country in the EU except Scotland.;)