Why must Irish be compulsory??

RadioClash

jumpguy wrote: »

Imagination? Oh dear, that sounds subjective to me.

No it's not really. An example of a subjective judgement shall be provided and helpfully illustrated by you further down.

jumpguy wrote: »

As I said earlier in this thread, the Irish requirement for courses where it is not relevant (which is most of them) should be dropped, as should every other non-relevant requirement. For example, your knowledge of Hamlet shouldn't be the decider of whether you're fit to study computational mathematics. Nor should your language of Irish. At the Leaving Cert stage of the game, knowledge you don't want is just being stuffed down your throat.

We're getting to the crux of matter. The curriculum and the LC are designed and implemented, not to make you the finished article or a Fulbright scholar, but to provide you with a broad range of minimum competencies across a range of disciplines. Relevance to every individual students particular want's doesn't come into it, the LC makes you an expert in precisely nothing. Matriculation for University follows this model, and as such certain compulsory core subjects are needed for this purpose. As a language Irish fulfills this criteria perfectly, and it helps that we A. have the teaching infrastructure for it B. Is a National language of significance to the country, constitutionally, culturally and otherwise.

jumpguy wrote: »

I think that's a view that'd satisfy all but the more extreme viewed people on this subject. Admittedly, I'd rather Irish be made completely optional all the way through second level. Latin would've been of far more use to me than Irish (because almost everything in scientific taxonomy comes back to Latin...)

Ladies and gentlemen, a subjective judgement on the merits of Irish and Latin...

Edit: Latin, (along with Hebrew, Arabic etc.) is on the Leaving cert, and offered by many schools. If it's not offered by your school, quit blaming Irish and take it up with your headmaster/board of management. Or, you could ask your parents to get you a Latin tutor to teach towards the LC. But I get the feeling you don't really want to study Latin and wouldn't if it was offered, it's a straw-man to prop up your argument.

Neodymium

I honestly don't understand what all of the controversy is about. We only have to spend around forty minutes per day in Irish class, it's not like Irish is forced upon us in every class and we are forced to speak it constantly. I personally don't like having to learn Irish nor am I particularly talented at the language, but I don't mind having to spend forty minutes in ordinary level Irish class a day. Looking back from where I am now, if I wasn't so contrivedly ignorant towards learning Irish perhaps I wouldn't detest learning it as much and I might even be good at it. From what I can see in my year is that the people who are good at Irish tend to be good at learning other languages also. Learning anything has more value than the initial understanding.

partyatmygaff

RadioClash wrote: »

I said mutually shared language.

I know what you said. I fail to see the relevance or point of your reply.

Droll, but One of my mates works as an Irish language journalist, another teaches it in the States at a private college (yes foreigners learning it), another as aforementioned legal translator. Use your imagination.

Fascinating. But why does that justify Irish's position as a mandatory subject?

Irish stays mandatory, mop up your tears. If you didn't have the imagination to use Irish, that's a shame but thousands of others have benefited from learning it and using it

When your logic fails, the most dignified thing to do is to concede your point or try for a counterargument. The least dignified thing you can do is go for pathetic jeers like "mop up your tears" and nonsense about "If you didn't have the imagine to use Irish".

It is a valid point and it's been done to death.

It's a valid point? Why? Just because you say it is?

We have the teaching infrastructure to teach compulsory Irish, we most certainly do not for Chinese. French is offered in every school I know of so you can stop the whinge there(and if it was mandatory I don't doubt for a second there would be whinge threads like this).

I've never seen so much dancing around the point...

Link on Latin being more used as a vernacular or GTFO.

Hint: Science and Academia
More specific hint: Anatomy

RadioClash wrote: »

We're getting to the crux of matter. The curriculum and the LC are designed and implemented, not to make you the finished article or a Fulbright scholar, but to provide you with a broad range of minimum competencies across a range of disciplines.

Fantastic. Why does anyone need to be competent in Irish? I understand needing a minimum competency in English as that's our primary language and the language of commerce. I understand needing a minimum competency in Mathematics as numeracy and logic is important to life. What I don't understand is why we need to know an archaic language that is nothing more than a niche language.

Relevance to every individual students particular want's doesn't come into it, the LC makes you an expert in precisely nothing. Matriculation for University follows this model, and as such certain compulsory core subjects are needed for this purpose. As a language Irish fulfills this criteria perfectly, and it helps that we A. have the teaching infrastructure for it B. Is a National language of significance to the country, constitutionally, culturally and otherwise.

So your point is that "This is how it is at the moment, therefore it should stay that way"? That's some argument.

Edit: Latin, (along with Hebrew, Arabic etc.) is on the Leaving cert, and offered by many schools. If it's not offered by your school, quit blaming Irish and take it up with your headmaster/board of management. Or, you could ask your parents to get you a Latin tutor to teach towards the LC. But I get the feeling you don't really want to study Latin and wouldn't if it was offered, it's a straw-man to prop up your argument.

How odd. You're complaining about straw-men when you know perfectly well why those other languages are being mentioned but seemingly find it fitting to avoid tackling the point head on.

We are not saying "Irish is why we can't study language X". We are saying "Why is a relatively useless language like Irish compulsory and why does it have so much resources when far more useful languages get left to the wayside?"

rainbowtrout

jumpguy wrote: »

Imagination? Oh dear, that sounds subjective to me.

As I said earlier in this thread, the Irish requirement for courses where it is not relevant (which is most of them) should be dropped, as should every other non-relevant requirement. For example, your knowledge of Hamlet shouldn't be the decider of whether you're fit to study computational mathematics. Nor should your language of Irish. At the Leaving Cert stage of the game, knowledge you don't want is just being stuffed down your throat.

Irish can still be mandatory for Junior Cert and a curriculum subject in primary school. Improve how it's taught and maybe you'll get more people choosing to do in Leaving Cert.

I think that's a view that'd satisfy all but the more extreme viewed people on this subject. Admittedly, I'd rather Irish be made completely optional all the way through second level. Latin would've been of far more use to me than Irish (because almost everything in scientific taxonomy comes back to Latin...)

The Dept of Education sets out a curriculum to be followed in second level schools. Third level colleges set their own requirements. While they certainly influence the choices students make in fifth year, you are not completely restricted from third level entry by a lack of Irish.

In all of the institutes of technology, the requirement is English or Irish as well as Maths. And I know from attending UL the requirement is English, Maths, and Irish or a another foreign language. The very fact that a student can enter a course with an exemption from Irish shows that it's not necessary for the vast majority of courses, so perhaps if you have an issue with third level entry requirements you should start lobbying the colleges rather than complaining about the second level system.



What saddens me is seeing such a hatred towards Irish and to see posts here that say the language doesn't have any use and that we have culture without it. Language is a part of culture, and it amazes me to see so many people who are only dying to distance themselves from an inherent part of that culture. There are plenty of countries around the world where a language is spoken that is only spoken in that country and they seem to get along just fine. There is a strange trait running through the Irish population that we seem to be ashamed to proclaim our own identity (through our language) and we would prefer to take on the language of other nations instead. I see students every day speaking with American accents, like there's something wrong with our own. I never meet people from other countries who do this. On the other side of that coin, there are thousands of Americans who proclaim their Irish roots and are often met with derision 'you're not Irish, you're American' by the very same people who don't want to speak our native language. I met plenty of Americans in college when I was there who were here for a year and chose to take beginners Irish while they were here. Despite the fact that it's not spoken in any other countries and is not widely spoken here.

French has been mentioned a number of times on this thread. It's spoken in many countries, many of which are former French colonies, but despite so many people doing it for Leaving Cert and possibly having a better command of the language than Irish, I don't hear of too many people heading to France (or other French speaking countries) to live or work. Most still head to the UK/USA/Canada/Australia. So I'm not sure would we travel all that much if we had all these other languages at our disposal in secondary schools. By and large if you go to France they expect you to speak French, and are not as willing to converse in English. French is their language, like it or lump it is the attitude.

The notion that we are the only country that speaks Irish doesn't wash. There are loads of countries where a language is only spoken in that country and the world hasn't stopped turning. They use other languages (mainly English) to converse with people of other nationalities.

I wonder why people have such little respect for our language, when you don't see it in places like Wales where Welsh is much more widely spoken and accepted as part of their culture.

I found this interesting piece on the revival of Hebrew from a dead language to the principal language of Israel. You might find it interesting as it quotes comments from De Valera on their success and our failure at language revival.

http://www.pij.org/details.php?id=226

partyatmygaff

rainbowtrout wrote: »

What saddens me is seeing such a hatred towards Irish and to see posts here that say the language doesn't have any use and that we have culture without it.

Just because you think a language is useless doesn't mean you hate it. Also whether or not you love a language has nothing to do with whether or not it should be compulsory at second level.

Language is a part of culture, and it amazes me to see so many people who are only dying to distance themselves from an inherent part of that culture.

Not wanting Irish to be compulsory at second level =/= Dying to distance yourself from Irish culture. Irish culture and the Irish language are not inextricably linked.

There are plenty of countries around the world where a language is spoken that is only spoken in that country and they seem to get along just fine.

I've bolded the important part of that sentence. The reality of the matter is that on a modern Irish street you're more likely to hear someone speaking Chinese than someone speaking Irish.

Whether or not you want to acknowledge it, Irish is for all intents and purposes a niche language. A lot of people may like it but very few like it to the point that they use it to communicate (I.e. as their primary language).

There is a strange trait running through the Irish population that we seem to be ashamed to proclaim our own identity (through our language) and we would prefer to take on the language of other nations instead. I see students every day speaking with American accents, like there's something wrong with our own. I never meet people from other countries who do this.

The identity of a modern Irish person has very little to do with the Irish language. As for accents, that's none of your business. Their accent is their accent. It's ridiculous to suggest that everyone with an american-sounding accent in Ireland is actually repressing an Irish accent.

I met plenty of Americans in college when I was there who were here for a year and chose to take beginners Irish while they were here. Despite the fact that it's not spoken in any other countries and is not widely spoken here.

And i've met plenty of people who've taken courses in archaic languages like ancient Greek. It still doesn't justify keeping Irish as a mandatory subject.

The notion that we are the only country that speaks Irish doesn't wash. There are loads of countries where a language is only spoken in that country and the world hasn't stopped turning. They use other languages (mainly English) to converse with people of other nationalities.

You're labouring under the belief that we actively speak Irish. We don't. In other countries, people actively speak their language and as such need compulsory education in it to be able to effectively communicate with the rest of the country.

Over here, we throw ridiculous sums of money at the language to try and artificially prop it up to give the illusion that the entire country actually speaks the language when in fact it's only a small minority that use it as their primary language.

rainbowtrout

partyatmygaff wrote: »

The identity of a modern Irish person has very little to do with the Irish language. As for accents, that's none of your business. Their accent is their accent. It's ridiculous to suggest that everyone with an american-sounding accent in Ireland is actually repressing an Irish accent.

They are, I teach students every day. I see students come to school from homes in the west of Ireland where everyone speaks with a local accent and the child has a full blown American accent.

I don't care what accent they speak with but to see people actively rid themselves of their local accent while living in their home area is a little sad.

muineachan

As someone not from Ireland (and from the big bad colonial country that is England) I though I would throw in my two cents...

As a native English speaker when deciding I wanted to leave England in 2009 I had quite a few options for English speaking countries; USA, Canada, Ireland, Australia. I settled on Ireland because it is close to England I can see my family more, and I have an Irish background so I wouldn't be totally alien to Irish society and had some knowledge of the politics, culture, sports etc.

But the most alien of things to me was the Irish language, I know a few of the Irish language haters on this thread probably think that put me off and they should do away with Irish to accommodate the new Irish and/or so Ireland is more relevant to the real world. It was quite the opposite actually, I thought it was great this ancient (and beautiful as I soon discovered) language was still alive (just about). I picked up a course and I got a cúpla focal and I fell in love with it. Why did I bother learning Irish? Because I think it matters, culture is a strong thing. If Germany had of taken over England a few hundred years ago and the English were speaking German with the English language relegated to rural Norfolk, and had England finally gotten independence 100 years ago, do you think the English would still be speaking German? Not a chance, they would have seized their native language despite German being very useful economically.

The above is a bit of a pre-amble, the main point of the post is should it be compulsory? I think absolutely, why would you not teach your children the ancient language of Ireland? I personally would split it into two subjects, an oral compulsory subject focused on spoken fluency, then an optional literature course for those more interested in that. The way its taught should be reformed and more inter-activities with nearby Gaelscoileanna should be encouraged to get children playing as Gaeilge, and I also think another lesson like PE should be taught through Irish.

"What is the point? They will never use it again?" Well what is the point of many things, the aim of an education is not purely driven by economics it should create rounded individuals and in my opinion include learning the native language of this fine country. "I did it for 14 years an amn't fluent" I did art for 14 years and can't paint an apple, does that make me hate art? No. I do agree it should be reformed in the way its taught, but to become good in anything you need to practice it outside the classroom. If you've no interest in it thats fine, I didn't have an interest in English at school but I am not calling for it to be dropped.

It's a democracy, and if the majority don't feel it should be compulsory then I accept that but I don't agree with Ruairí Quinn who clearly has a personal agenda. If Ireland as a nation doesn't want Irish, you need to go back and amend your constitution which gives Irish a special place in Irish society and that will always be the case until you decide to update it, then the rest of society will follow; no compulsion, no grants etc. and probably ultimately the death of the language which would be a great loss to the worlds heritage.

Stark

rainbowtrout wrote: »

What saddens me is seeing such a hatred towards Irish and to see posts here that say the language doesn't have any use and that we have culture without it.

I don't hate the language, I hate aggressive pushers of the language.

Stark

muineachan wrote: »

If Germany had of taken over England a few hundred years ago and the English were speaking German with the English language relegated to rural Norfolk, and had England finally gotten independence 100 years ago, do you think the English would still be speaking German? Not a chance, they would have seized their native language despite German being very useful economically.

Eh? English evolved from language brought to England by German invaders. I also don't see anyone clamouring for a return to Old English following the Norman invasions. There are a handful of people speaking Cornish and the like but certainly no mass movement to speak ancient British languages.

jumpguy

RadioClash wrote: »

No it's not really. An example of a subjective judgement shall be provided and helpfully illustrated by you further down.

In fairness, I'm keeping my subjective feelings out of it and trying to be as objective as possible. I made it clear that was my own opinion - that is how I personally feel toward Irish.

We're getting to the crux of matter. The curriculum and the LC are designed and implemented, not to make you the finished article or a Fulbright scholar, but to provide you with a broad range of minimum competencies across a range of disciplines. Relevance to every individual students particular want's doesn't come into it, the LC makes you an expert in precisely nothing. Matriculation for University follows this model, and as such certain compulsory core subjects are needed for this purpose. As a language Irish fulfills this criteria perfectly, and it helps that we A. have the teaching infrastructure for it B. Is a National language of significance to the country, constitutionally, culturally and otherwise.

With 6 subjects being the amount of subjects you have to pick, you're still gonna get a broad range of subjects - but at least you get to pick that range.

Also, the Leaving Cert is designed to give minimum competencies? No, the Junior Cert is designed for that. It would make learning at senior level much more engaging and self-directed if a student could pick all their own subjects, without someone else's ideals or agendas being shoved down their throat. Be that the NUI or the school itself.

I really don't think there's much point in me pressing this argument with you, since you're obviously fairly dug in with your ideas. I think having Irish compulsory up until LC is a fair compromise that'd satisfy the majority.

Edit: Latin, (along with Hebrew, Arabic etc.) is on the Leaving cert, and offered by many schools. If it's not offered by your school, quit blaming Irish and take it up with your headmaster/board of management. Or, you could ask your parents to get you a Latin tutor to teach towards the LC. But I get the feeling you don't really want to study Latin and wouldn't if it was offered, it's a straw-man to prop up your argument.

My school days are over, there's no point taking it up with the board of management now. :P Latin's not offered by any schools around my home town for a good 30 miles I would say - demand is too low. All I'm saying is I would've preferred to study it instead of Irish, as even Latin would've been of more use.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

The Dept of Education sets out a curriculum to be followed in second level schools. Third level colleges set their own requirements. While they certainly influence the choices students make in fifth year, you are not completely restricted from third level entry by a lack of Irish.

In all of the institutes of technology, the requirement is English or Irish as well as Maths. And I know from attending UL the requirement is English, Maths, and Irish or a another foreign language. The very fact that a student can enter a course with an exemption from Irish shows that it's not necessary for the vast majority of courses, so perhaps if you have an issue with third level entry requirements you should start lobbying the colleges rather than complaining about the second level system.

If you want to go to university and not an IT though, you're only left with UL or TCD (who are also fairly lax on the Irish requirement afaik). If you want to do a course that's not in UL or TCD, then you need Irish. For quite a large proportion of students then, Irish is needlessly compulsory (that is, students who go to a NUI college and do a course not involving Irish in the slightest). Very few students are gonna cut their choice of university so drastically when choosing LC subjects.

muineachan

Stark wrote: »

Eh? English evolved from language brought to England by German invaders.

Eh? not by German invaders, but Germanic languages were brought to areas of England by Germanic tribes, and this evolved and eventually became the dominant language of England (other regional languages became extinct). A similar thing happened in Ireland, an early form of what you would call Irish today was brought to Ireland by Celtic tribes, this evolved over centuries to become the Irish you know today.

That is not a good comparison of English in Ireland, where the language shift happened unnaturally. A more accurate comparison might be French that was used in England in the courts and by the rulers, this is largely as English was in Ireland, confined to the areas of power. The difference is the people continued to speak their language in England, whereas in Ireland laws were introduced to remove Irish as the language of the people. This attempt largely failed outside 'The Pale' up until the famine when the population en masse switched to English as a result of laws against Irish & the necessity of English for the famine struck population who needed it for America.

muineachan

Stark wrote: »

Eh? English evolved from language brought to England by German invaders. I also don't see anyone clamouring for a return to Old English following the Norman invasions. There are a handful of people speaking Cornish and the like but certainly no mass movement to speak ancient British languages.

Ah the old edit. There is a difference, old British languages as would have been spoken in England are long extinct, Irish is not. My comparison was based on recent (relatively) colonization. In my example I said *if* English was confined to rural Norfolk. i.e. being alive. Irish is alive and therefore can be learned properly. Yes English descended from Germanic languages, but English today is a distinct language, if that were supplanted by a foreign ruler and it was confined to a rural area of England it is my opinion the England would regain its own language. Also don't forget, the majority of English are descended from such tribes (a big mix) and therefore the language English today is their language. The majority of Irish people are descended from the said Celtic tribes (yes with a mix of norman and many other 'tribes') and therefore English wasn't evolved from their ancestors, it was brought by foreign rulers.

This is not what I wanted to argue about, but I did write it so feel free to pick away

p.s. Cornish is a Celtic language.

partyatmygaff

muineachan wrote: »

The above is a bit of a pre-amble, the main point of the post is should it be compulsory? I think absolutely, why would you not teach your children the ancient language of Ireland?

Kids might not care much for the language.
Kids might benefit more from learning another language.

When we have limited resources (recession) we should make sure every cent spent on education is being put to good use and is ultimately benefiting people. An education in Irish (Much like an education in hieroglyphics) while nice to know offers little to no benefit over teaching another language. Teaching children Latin would be more useful than Irish. Thousands of classical texts are written in Latin and the world of academia (Particularly the sciences and law) still frequently use Latin. Even if not for that, Latin is the progenitor of a huge amount of other languages. Learning it will make learning other descendant languages a lot easier.

Something to note... I am not talking about Latin in particular or indeed making Latin a mandatory subject. I am still pressing my point that there is no reason for Irish to be mandatory whilst other far more worthy subjects are kept optional or unavailable.

I personally would split it into two subjects, an oral compulsory subject focused on spoken fluency, then an optional literature course for those more interested in that. The way its taught should be reformed and more inter-activities with nearby Gaelscoileanna should be encouraged to get children playing as Gaeilge, and I also think another lesson like PE should be taught through Irish.

Why? How would anyone benefit from using Irish instead of English?

"What is the point? They will never use it again?" Well what is the point of many things

Not in education it isn't.

There are three "core" subjects in the LC. These are English, Irish and Maths.

English is the primary language of Ireland, the language of business and the main language of many countries in the world including Ireland. I assume I don't need to explain why an education in English is important.

Maths is excellent for developing logical thinking and for laying a solid foundation for many university courses.

Irish on the other hand is of dubious benefit. What I learned in Irish (Under threat of missing out on my university course) in the LC:

• Was how to write awfully clichéd essays about "Fadhbanna na daoine oige".
• How to write essays about how we were all "ar muin na muice" and supposedly driving around in "SUVanna".
• How to decipher conversations about X-Factor in ridiculous, unintelligible sing-song accents.
• How to write about delightfully insightful poetry such as "Jack" and how the poet used "friotal simplí agus éifeachtacht".

...Very useful knowledge and skills to have as i'm sure you'll agree. Just yesterday I was talking to an Irish monoglot who wanted to talk about the celtic tiger with me.

/The above may be sarcastic and/or fictional

rainbowtrout

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Irish on the other hand is of dubious benefit. What I learned in Irish (Under threat of missing out on my university course) in the LC:

• Was how to write awfully clichéd essays about "Fadhbanna na daoine oige".
• How to write essays about how we were all "ar muin na muice" and supposedly driving around in "SUVanna".
• How to decipher conversations about X-Factor in ridiculous, unintelligible sing-song accents.
• How to write about delightfully insightful poetry such as "Jack" and how the poet used "friotal simplí agus éifeachtacht".

...Very useful knowledge and skills to have as i'm sure you'll agree. Just yesterday I was talking to an Irish monoglot who wanted to talk about the celtic tiger with me.

/The above may be sarcastic and/or fictional

It's hilarious that you're slagging off 'sing song accents' when in an earlier post you told me that other people's accents were none of my business.

There are problems with the way Irish is taught, but why shouldn't be normal to be able to communicate with each other in Irish on a day to day basis? Nobody is saying get rid of English and have Irish as the only language of the country but to have it on an equal footing with English, not just on paper as official language of the country but to allow people to be able to speak either language on a daily basis.

partyatmygaff

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It's hilarious that you're slagging off 'sing song accents' when in an earlier post you told me that other people's accents were none of my business.

There's a difference between mocking an accent that's quite obviously being put on for the purposes of a recording and claiming that certain people's day-to-day accents are the product of repressing their inherent natural accent. The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other and the fact you even brought it up (Whilst ignoring the bulk of my post) would lead me to believe you simply don't have an answer to any of what I said.

There are problems with the way Irish is taught, but why shouldn't be normal to be able to communicate with each other in Irish on a day to day basis? Nobody is saying get rid of English and have Irish as the only language of the country but to have it on an equal footing with English, not just on paper as official language of the country but to allow people to be able to speak either language on a daily basis.

We already can speak either language. No one is stopping people from speaking Irish.

So far none of the proponents for keeping Irish compulsory have actually given a valid reason for keeping Irish as a mandatory subject.

Stark

rainbowtrout wrote: »

There are problems with the way Irish is taught, but why shouldn't be normal to be able to communicate with each other in Irish on a day to day basis? Nobody is saying get rid of English and have Irish as the only language of the country but to have it on an equal footing with English, not just on paper as official language of the country but to allow people to be able to speak either language on a daily basis.

People are allowed speak Irish on a daily basis, they just don't want to. Lead a horse to water and all that...

muineachan

Well you dont speak for me when you say nobody has given a valid reason as to why Irish shouldn't be compulsory. Culture & heritage *are* valid reason's in my opinion, so for me, many people have given valid reasons. And of those who have a similar opinion to me, I think 100% would also say the way Irish is taught needs to be reformed. The Irish school system has failed us too, as well as the people who hate it.

rainbowtrout

partyatmygaff wrote: »

We already can speak either language. No one is stopping people from speaking Irish.

So far none of the proponents for keeping Irish compulsory have actually given a valid reason for keeping Irish as a mandatory subject.

In your opinion.

Stark wrote: »

People are allowed speak Irish on a daily basis, they just don't want to. Lead a horse to water and all that...

People don't have the ability to unfortunately. I did higher level Irish for my LC and was able to write essays about the youth of today etc, all the things that partyinmygaff outlined, but not as capable of holding a conversation about day to day stuff in my local pub or wherever. If I go to the supermarket I know the basic food items in irish: meat, potatoes, milk, butter, fish, barra seacláide , but I wouldn't have that much vocabulary beyond that. I know I can go and look up a dictionary, but it would be so much better if the Irish syllabus was structured in such a way that we could have these conversations. We might be far more disposed to speaking the language then.

I know learning role play type stuff in French and German in school might have seemed daft at the time, but if I'm in one of those countries I can order in a restaurant and understand the menu. I don't think I've ever seen a menu in Irish, in school or otherwise and if I was to walk into a restaurant in Connemara and was handed an Irish menu I might have trouble understanding what was on it beyond, sicín and prátaí.

partyatmygaff

muineachan wrote: »

Well you dont speak for me when you say nobody has given a valid reason as to why Irish shouldn't be compulsory. Culture & heritage *are* valid reason's in my opinion, so for me, many people have given valid reasons. And of those who have a similar opinion to me, I think 100% would also say the way Irish is taught needs to be reformed. The Irish school system has failed us too, as well as the people who hate it.

I'm afraid I do speak for you as I see absolutely no reason for "culture and heritage" to be taught halfheartedly packaged within a language.

If a culture needs to be taught to its own people then it's not current culture. It's historical culture and as such should be taught in history. The same goes for heritage.

Unless you can give me a good reason for keeping Irish mandatory (Other than its historical/cultural content which has now been diluted to the point of almost complete negligibility with the recent revision to the exam)

muineachan

I am afraid you don't speak for me. You speak for you, and you have your own ideas on what you consider valid or not. I have have mine. Don't be so condescending.

RadioClash

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I know what you said. I fail to see the relevance or point of your reply.

Not my problem if you fail to see things.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Fascinating. But why does that justify Irish's position as a mandatory subject?

When your logic fails, the most dignified thing to do is to concede your point or try for a counterargument. The least dignified thing you can do is go for pathetic jeers like "mop up your tears" and nonsense about "If you didn't have the imagine to use Irish".

It's a valid point? Why? Just because you say it is?

Logic? Ok Mr.Spock. To take a line out of you're playbook, it's not valid because you say it is? Get lost, I've given you plenty of rational reasons, you're plugging your ears like a stubborn child shouting 'it's not valid'! You are not the judge or arbiter of what is and isn't valid, get over yourself.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I've never seen so much dancing around the point...

I've been consistent. Where in God's name are we going to get the resources and teachers to make a more 'useful' language mandatory for 14 years, what language should that be and how does it get implemented without a mass whinge? Answer that coherently and without invective and you may be able to retrieve your point Mr.Spock.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Hint: Science and Academia
More specific hint: Anatomy

Wow thanks I didn't know that, do you need Latin or is it subjectively useful to you? And would you concede is subjectively useless to others? You've boxed yourself into a corner.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Fantastic. Why does anyone need to be competent in Irish? I understand needing a minimum competency in English as that's our primary language and the language of commerce. I understand needing a minimum competency in Mathematics as numeracy and logic is important to life. What I don't understand is why we need to know an archaic language that is nothing more than a niche language.

Does anyone need Latin, French, Hindi etc as a native English speaker? No. Are some more useful to others? I could say that French is subjectively less useful to me, no ties to France, no plans to live there, don't go there save for a holiday 10 years ago etc. etc. You'd hear a lot of this argumentation if it was made compulsory, probably from the likes of yourself.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

So your point is that "This is how it is at the moment, therefore it should stay that way"? That's some argument.

Except that isn't my argument is Mr.Spock. My argument is and has been, we have the teaching infrastructure in place to teach a language over the entire course of 14 years of schooling, that language is Irish, which happens to be constitutionally an official national language and also culturally significant. We do not have thousands of primary and secondary teachers proficient in Mandarin, French or any other language you care to mention.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

How odd. You're complaining about straw-men when you know perfectly well why those other languages are being mentioned but seemingly find it fitting to avoid tackling the point head on.

I've 'tackled' it, perhaps not to your satisfaction as you've screamed 'it's not valid' any time you've been outboxed. Learning Irish to a high standard over 14 years will improve your language acquisition skills(that is if you bother). I've seen it in practice and it's borne out by research that bilingualism improves your ability to acquire other tounges. I can't wait for you to tell me 'it's not valid', because it bloody well is.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

We are not saying "Irish is why we can't study language X". We are saying "Why is a relatively useless language like Irish compulsory and why does it have so much resources when far more useful languages get left to the wayside?"

LOL, Irish has gone from being 'objectively useless' to 'relatively'. What backtrack awaits for the next post? What language have you been denied the opportunity to learn because of Irish? (pretty please answer this one)

partyatmygaff

muineachan wrote: »

I am afraid you don't speak for me. You speak for you, and you have your own ideas on what you consider valid or not. I have have mine. Don't be so condescending.

You said that when I said "No one has made any valid point" I was not speaking with regard to you. I clarified what I meant. I don't see where condescension comes in to it.

RadioClash wrote: »

Not my problem if you fail to see things.

?

Logic? Ok Mr.Spock. To take a line out of you're playbook, it's not valid because you say it is? Get lost, I've given you plenty of rational reasons, you're plugging your ears like a stubborn child shouting 'it's not valid'! You are not the judge or arbiter of what is and isn't valid, get over yourself.

What rational reasons? I've seen none so far.

I've been consistent. Where in God's name are we going to get the resources and teachers to make a more 'useful' language mandatory for 14 years, what language should that be and how does it get implemented without a mass whinge? Answer that coherently and without invective and you may be able to retrieve your point Mr.Spock.

I'm getting tired of this. How many times do I have to repeat myself when I say "Why is Irish mandatory when other more educationally useful languages are optional or unavailable?"? It's not about replacing Irish with something else. It's about making Irish optional.

Wow thanks I didn't know that, do you need Latin or is it subjectively useful to you? And would you concede is subjectively useless to others? You've boxed yourself into a corner.

Saying i've boxed myself into a corner doesn't mean I actually have.

Nothing is useful to everyone. We have to look at what is useful to the majority of people. Learning Latin, what with its current use in many fields, its use in thousands of classical texts and its status of being the origin of many of the world's languages is far more useful than learning Irish.

Except that isn't my argument is Mr.Spock. My argument is and has been, we have the teaching infrastructure in place to teach a language over the entire course of 14 years of schooling, that language is Irish, which happens to be constitutionally an official national language and also culturally significant. We do not have thousands of primary and secondary teachers proficient in Mandarin, French or any other language you care to mention.

I'm not going to repeat myself fully again. Shut down your strawman factory and focus on why Irish should remain compulsory.

I've 'tackled' it, perhaps not to your satisfaction as you've screamed 'it's not valid' any time you've been outboxed. Learning Irish to a high standard over 14 years will improve your language acquisition skills(that is if you bother). I've seen it in practice and it's borne out by research that bilingualism improves your ability to acquire other tounges. I can't wait for you to tell me 'it's not valid', because it bloody well is.

Learning any second language to a high standard does that. Obviously it would be better if said second language was actually useful in its own right... and no, having a "cupla focail" isn't useful to the vast majority of people. It's a novelty.

RadioClash

partyatmygaff wrote: »

What rational reasons? I've seen none so far.

This is slipping away from you Spock, I'd like to refer to my previous posts and hope you'd re-read them with your 'logic' hat on.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I'm getting tired of this. How many times do I have to repeat myself when I say "Why is Irish mandatory when other more educationally useful languages are optional or unavailable?"? It's not about replacing Irish with something else. It's about making Irish optional.

What language was unavailable to you? Everything from Arabic to Japanese can be done for the LC, and if there are teachers in the school to teach them, they're offered. Irish is mandatory because of the pool of teachers available to schools at all levels(this being Ireland after all), and because of it's status as National language. It's entirely appropriate that it should be that way.
I'll ask it again, what language or subject have you been denied the opportunity to learn because of Irish?

'Educationally useful', once more, for the umpteenth time, is subjective. (and you're getting tired of repeating yourself??)

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Saying i've boxed myself into a corner doesn't mean I actually have.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Nothing is useful to everyone. We have to look at what is useful to the majority of people. Learning Latin, what with its current use in many fields, its use in thousands of classical texts and its status of being the origin of many of the world's languages is far more useful than learning Irish.

Latin is offered in the LC, and historically it was widely taught in schools (as a compulsion), and funnily enough was the subject of major whingefests such as the one you're neck deep in.

'Far more useful' for the very last time is subject to the opinion of the individual.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I'm not going to repeat myself fully again. Shut down your strawman factory and focus on why Irish should remain compulsory.

This has been addressed over and over again... and oh, I don't use taxonomy as a means to bolster my clumsily concealed hatred for learning a language, that actually is strawman argumentation.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Learning any second language to a high standard does that. Obviously it would be better if said second language was actually useful in its own right... and no, having a "cupla focail" isn't useful to the vast majority of people. It's a novelty.

There's only one language that we have the ability, resources and teaching infrastructure to teach to a high level for 14 years. That language is Irish. You may only have the 'cupla focail' because that's what you bothered to learn, hundreds of thousands have far more. More the shame for you, props to everyone else who actually did.

partyatmygaff

I will ask you one more time. Hopefully the final time.

Why should Irish remain compulsory when other languages which offer the same intrinsic benefits of studying another language as well being more useful in their own right are left optional or unavailable?

Please read the question carefully and try to answer it directly without resorting to snide comments about my ability in Irish and strawman arguments revolving around other languages.

RadioClash

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I will ask you one more time. Hopefully the final time.

Why should Irish remain compulsory when other languages which offer the same intrinsic benefits of studying another language as well being more useful in their own right are left optional or unavailable?

Please read the question carefully and try to answer it directly without resorting to snide comments about my ability in Irish and strawman arguments revolving around other languages.

Are you actually being serious?? I've answered these questions directly in the post above yours(as well as several other posts). You've lost it mate.

partyatmygaff

RadioClash wrote: »

Are you actually being serious?? I've answered these questions directly in the post above yours. You've lost it mate.

There's only one language that we have the ability, resources and teaching infrastructure to teach to a high level for 14 years. That language is Irish. You may only have the 'cupla focail' because that's what you bothered to learn, hundreds of thousands have far more. More the shame for you, props to everyone else who actually did.

If the best reason you can come up with is that then i'm afraid to say you're both factually wrong and completely missing the point of my question. For one, we have similar (If not better) infrastructure in place for teaching English. Secondly, how on Earth does "We have the infrastructure for it" justify keeping Irish mandatory?

If you will allow me to rephrase your argument:
"We shouldn't change the status quo because we've got the infrastructure in place to maintain it."

Peanut

muineachan wrote: »

Well you dont speak for me when you say nobody has given a valid reason as to why Irish shouldn't be compulsory. Culture & heritage *are* valid reason's in my opinion, so for me, many people have given valid reasons.

If you agree with this, then you should also agree that History is made a compulsory subject too.

Ultimately, it's a question of priorities. I don't think many would argue against a small quantity of background in these subjects, but the chunk allocated at the moment appears too much for many people, and not just students.

DepoProvera

RadioClash wrote: »

Are you actually being serious?? I've answered these questions directly in the post above yours(as well as several other posts). You've lost it mate.

So, your argument is: 'sure it has always been that way, what else are we going to do with all these teachers??'. Nice circular justification there bud..

You say the compulsory learning of Irish is vital to retaining and appreciating Irish culture? As has been said by me and others before: History is a much better way to learn about Ireland's heritage.

You say Irish is actively spoken? Um, no.. It's spoken by a niche group of people living in the back end of nowhere. That population is (through pure conjecture, I concede; could be wrong) shrinking as the majority of them are getting on in the years. The only time Irish I've ever heard spoken is a) students speaking in broken sentences trying to outwit foreigners b) some unique little petal who is just so engrossed in her cultural roots(they are far from fluent either)

He isn't saying replace Irish with another compulsory language. You don't seem to have been able to answer the question I posed pages ago..

We all agree that any type of learning is beneficial, and of course learning Irish is also, but should we not direct our finite resources towards something that will actually have some further use?"

You answered that with incredibly clumsy deflection. That is the crux of the discussion and if you can't answer that with anything better than "we already have all of these resources committed to it" then.. I don't know... Are you familiar with the phrase 'cut your losses'. Besides being a complete waste of time and money for the VAST majority of students, it is also harming your side as, as we've stated before, it is absolutely eradicating any possible appreciation for it. To say that because something is so deeply ingrained there is no point in trying to get rid of it, a sentiment you've expressed in previous posts, is just feeble and a generally poor argument to put forward.

edit: snap partyatmygaff

RadioClash

partyatmygaff wrote: »

If the best reason you can come up with is that then i'm afraid to say you're both factually wrong and completely missing the point of my question. For one, we have similar (If not better) infrastructure in place for teaching English. Secondly, how on Earth does "We have the infrastructure for it" justify keeping Irish mandatory?

I presume you agree that learning a language thoroughly for your entire school period is good yes? Well having an infrastructure to do that is imperative to if you want to achieve that outcome. We don't have it for, Mandarin, nor Hebrew, nor French, nor Swedish.

That is not factually wrong, and frankly I don't care if you think if I've interpreted your question any which way.

The reason we have a good infrastructure for English as well as Irish is because they are our two National tongues, historically, culturally, and in constitutionally. It's every bit appropriate that both should be mandatory, as well as practical reasons outlined above. If you don't like it, well... there's not a lot anyone can do about it, the attitude stinks if you ask me.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

If you will allow me to rephrase your argument:
"We shouldn't change the status quo because we've got the infrastructure in place to maintain it."

My argument has been outlined exhaustively over the course this thread. No, you're little soundbite doesn't quite capture it.

muineachan

Why it should:
1. Irish plays a significant part in understanding Irish history
2. Many significant works are originally in Irish, Irish was a truly European language, many works being written outside of Ireland. Therefore Irish is an important language and should be studied, in Ireland.
4. Schools have a role to play in reviving Irish outside the Gaeltacht, as a key part of our heritage this is important and helps keep our rich traditions alive.
5. It gives Irish people a grounding with a cupla focal and helps facilitate the many people who love Irish in the same way Irish speakers facilitate English speakers.
6. Developmental advantages of being bilingual


Why it shouldn't be:
1. The current method of teaching it is doing harm to attitudes towards it.
2. The time could be spend learning another major world language.
3. There are few job opportunities through Irish and therefore its not a major economic benefit.
4. Millions of tax euro are spent on it with little monitary return
5. As many people who love Irish see Irish as a waste of time in school.
6. After 14 years many students arent fluent.

Im sure there are more points, if I considered the above, while I believe the language is culturally significant, if it was a 'one or the other' situation then i'd say Irish shouldn't be compulsory, in economic terms it doesnt add up, especially when children arent coming out fluent.

But it isnt so black and white, i believe there is a 3rd way and that is reforming the way Irish is taught so kids can speak it fluently so it is the spoken language that is the focus, with the literature comonent optional, I put a lot of store in culture, heritage and history. I visted more historical sites last year than banks and believe whole heartidly with reform in the way its taught it is a fully worthwhile compulsory course.