How much should be spent on Irish?

Cú Giobach

lividduck wrote: »

Wrong as usual, but of course since you judgement is skewed by cultural nazi-ism we can expect no differnt ,Ulster-scots is a pidgen dialect of Scots Gaelic.
Typicical of the cultural Nazis to believe that they have some propietery ownership of celticness!

Now you are just embarrassing yourself.

The Ulster Scots Language Society

deise go deo

AngryBollix wrote: »

I didnt say that. I'm saying it isnt the only factor in ones intellectual development. Ones linguistic skills are just a part of the bigger picture.

Yep, You did, you said being bilingual does'nt change how you think, just go back and look at your post.

deise go deo

AngryBollix wrote: »

Did you make the comment about if Ulysses were writen in french it wouldnt be the same book?

If not then I apologise and stand corrected

I did indeed, saying that if a book like Ulysses were written in a different language it would not be the same book is not the same as making a comparative judgement between two languages.:rolleyes:

dirtyden

deise go deo wrote: »

Have a look at the research into the effect of Bilinguialism on cognative development.

Pick One

Yor are mistaking cognitive development with thought. Ability to learn and understand is quite different to the more abstract notion that is thought. Your argument was that bilingualism makes someone think differently not learn differently.

Also this artilce suggests learning any other language 'may' impart these cognitive benefits. It does not really support your argument with respect to Irish.

I read the Wikipedia article that you directed me to. At the very best it was ambiguous.

AngryBollix

deise go deo wrote: »

Yep, You did, you said being bilingual does'nt change how you think, just go back and look at your post.

What I meant was, If a person is bilingual then the way they think does not change according to the language they speak. If you take someone who, for example, speaks english and irish. Their view on things will be the same and is not dependent on which language they are speaking at any one time.

I imagine this is different to comparing being someone who is bilingual to somene who is monolingual or multilingual.

AngryBollix

deise go deo wrote: »

I did indeed, saying that if a book like Ulysses were written in a different language it would not be the same book is not the same as making a comparative judgement between two languages.:rolleyes:

Then what was wrong with the same comparison being made with english and irish.

Besides, we are getting into little more than wordplay here.

AngryBollix

dirtyden wrote: »

Yor are mistaking cognitive development with thought. Ability to learn and understand is quite different to the more abstract notion that is thought. Your argument was that bilingualism makes someone think differently not learn differently.

Also this artilce suggests learning any other language 'may' impart these cognitive benefits. It does not really support your argument with respect to Irish.

I read the Wikipedia article that you directed me to. At the very best it was ambiguous.

I was about to make a very similar post

dirtyden

AngryBollix wrote: »

I was about to make a very similar post

There is a phrase about great minds or maybe it is angry bollixes thinnking alike.

Cú Giobach

AngryBollix wrote: »

What I meant was, If a person is bilingual then the way they think does not change according to the language they speak. If you take someone who, for example, speaks english and irish. Their view on things will be the same and is not dependent on which language they are speaking at any one time.

I imagine this is different to comparing being someone who is bilingual to somene who is monolingual or multilingual.

Do you speak another language besides English?

AngryBollix

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Do you speak another language besides English?

No but I have degrees in more than one discipline. A variation on the above theme

Cú Giobach

AngryBollix wrote: »

No but I have degrees in more than one discipline. A variation on the above theme

What qualifies you to say which language you are speaking doesn't affect how you think?
Anyone who speaks more than one understands this perfectly well. It's (for me at least) one of the joys of learning other languages.

AngryBollix

Cú Giobach wrote: »

What qualifies you to say which language you are speaking doesn't affect how you think?
Anyone who speaks more than one understands this perfectly well. It's (for me at least) one of the joys of learning other languages.

Nothing but I can only assume that you are fully qualified to pontificate on the extent a language affects your thought process.

Its one of many aspects of life that influences how you think so lets not overstate it relevance.

Cú Giobach

AngryBollix wrote: »

Nothing but I can only assume that you are fully qualified to pontificate on the extent a language affects your thought process

As would anyone who speaks more than one be.
Interesting that you use the word "pontificate" to describe people giving their opinions here. Do you enjoy pontificating?

Its one of many aspects of life that influences how you think so lets not overstate it relevance.

Nobody is, they are just correcting your incorrect assertion that it doesn't.

AngryBollix

Cú Giobach wrote: »

As would anyone who speaks more than one be.
Interesting that you use the word "pontificate" to describe people giving their opinions here. Do you enjoy pontificating?


Nobody is, they are just correcting your incorrect assertion that it doesn't.

This is a blind alley if ever I saw one

Cú Giobach

AngryBollix wrote: »

This is a blind alley if ever I saw one

Yep, you lost that one.

AngryBollix

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Yep, you lost that one.

And your basis for that contention is? I need a laugh

Cú Giobach

AngryBollix wrote: »

And your basis for that contention is? I need a laugh

Well first you say
"What I meant was, If a person is bilingual then the way they think does not change according to the language they speak. If you take someone who, for example, speaks english and irish. Their view on things will be the same and is not dependent on which language they are speaking at any one time."

Then you say
"Its one of many aspects of life that influences how you think so lets not overstate it relevance."
in response to me me saying, which language you are speaking does influence how you think, as any speaker of two languages will testify to.

Seems pretty clear cut.

AngryBollix

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Well first you say
"What I meant was, If a person is bilingual then the way they think does not change according to the language they speak. If you take someone who, for example, speaks english and irish. Their view on things will be the same and is not dependent on which language they are speaking at any one time."

Then you say
"Its one of many aspects of life that influences how you think so lets not overstate it relevance."
in response to me me saying, which language you are speaking does influence how you think, as any speaker of two languages will testify to.

Seems pretty clear cut.

That constitutes losing an argument?

If a person speaks two languages, then it goes without saying that they need to apply the correct set of grammatical rules. English rules do not apply to irish or vice versa. The change in language will require change of thought from that perspective.

The use of grammatical rules are not applied to life in general. Ones view of the world cannot be limited or influenced by full stops and commas and words on their own. The way one thinks is affected by a hell of a lot more than language and I have mentioned this on more than one occasion previously

Cú Giobach

AngryBollix wrote: »

That constitutes losing an argument?

If a person speaks two languages, then it goes without saying that they need to apply the correct set of grammatical rules. English rules do not apply to irish or vice versa.

The use of grammatical rules are not applied to life in general. Ones view of the world cannot be limited by full stops and commas.

The differences between languages go way beyond just grammar, it's not just a case of exchanging one set of rules for another.

You can say something in one language and when trying to say the same in another you might have to change the meaning slightly, (depending on how related the languages are) this changes how you think about what you said or wanted to say.
I find that fascinating, and as I said it's why I love learning other languages.

It's something I feel monoglots can't understand because they have nothing to relate it to, it's like trying to explain colour to a blind man.

texidub

NinjaK wrote: »

How can a language be useless? Its for communicating with other people. Problem here is all people think about is business and money. Its pathetic.

No this blind perspective on the Irish language is pathetic.

The fact is that Irish people --REAL Irish people, whether you like it or not-- can already communicate with each other. There is no linguistic gain (in terms of expanded communication with new people) at all from learning Irish. It's at best a sideways step... and at worst a step backwards.

It made some sense (in terms of expediency) to support the language at the foundation of the republic since it helped distinguish the new regime from the old British regime.

Now it makes no sense at all. Gaeltacht allowances.. Gaeltacht allowances for Guards.. TG4 so Irish speakers can pretend at being relevant media.. the waste just goes on and on and on.

Face facts. The dead gaelic langauge is going nowhere.. brings no glory to Ireland and is a massive waste of our cultural and economic resources.

The culture isn't dead because of the Brits, or because of West Brits, or because all Irish people aside from the saintly gaeilgoirs are materialistic scum.

It's dead because it has nothing to offer Irish people.

And no matter how many efforts are spent trying to expand its reach, nothing can hide the fact that Irish language lobbyists have an inherently anti-Irish (i.e. opposed to the will of the majority of Irish people) agenda.

I'm all for a multicultural Ireland (Unionists *shivers* and Gaeligoirs alike), but don't try and impose your culture on the VAST majority.

Finally, there is an interesting political aspect to all this too that is rarely discussed: Irish is the language of the establishment, of governmental authority, of the media classes. People are entitled to reject it on those grounds alone.

Give Ireland back to the Irish!

texidub

deise go deo wrote: »

I think you will find that language means much more to people than just that. Language is the vechical of culture and plays a major part in identity, if language had no signifiance outside being a means of communication, why are the speakers of smaller languages around the world seemingly content to continue to use them instead of replacing it with a larger more 'usefull' language?

Because people can be ignorant and backward, which leads to them preferring to communicate with their own 'pack' then with people from 'foreign' cultures.

Insecure types feel they will lose their identity if they abandon the sounds they make to describe everyday objects --even if they gain the ability to communicate with more people in the process.

lividduck

AngryBollix wrote: »

This is a blind alley if ever I saw one

When dealing with Nazis the best advice is to escape the Ghetto.

Dostoevsky

lividduck wrote: »

it is a dead language promoted by culture nazis.

lividduck wrote: »

in the same way as there are "Grammer Nazis" there will always be little Irelanders with no grasp of the real history of this island who can best be described as "Culture Nazis".

lividduck wrote: »

I meant you were wasting your time arguing with the Culture Nazi's.

lividduck wrote: »

Wrong as usual, but of course since you judgement is skewed by cultural nazi-ism...
Typicical of the cultural Nazis

lividduck wrote: »

When dealing with Nazis the best advice is to escape the Ghetto.

As consistently challenged and extremist posts go, yours take some beating. Fortunately for you, incitement to hatred legislation in Ireland does not currently extend to attacks on linguistic communities.

Yeah, yeah we get the idea: you spent, by your own admission, "most of your youth" in Britain and then moved to Ireland and felt Irish culture was alien. You then developed a chip on your shoulder/massive insecurity about your identity in Ireland because of your upbringing in Britain and being "different". If you can't join them, hate them and blame them. Lame.

Oh, and seeing as you had the gall to correct somebody else's spelling, the plural of Nazis is not 'Nazi's'. Grammar is not spelt 'grammer'. 'Your' and 'you're' are different words. Protestant is not spelt 'Protestand'. Unemployed is not spelt 'unemplyed'. Argument is not spelt 'arguement'. And so, so much more.

closeline

I hate Irish with a passion..have no time for promoting it and all that ****

MyKeyG

I'll put it to you this way it's worth a damn sight more than a lot of the sh1te our money goes towards.

GoldDustWoman

I think it's a tricky question - obviously in an ideal world we would all like to be able to speak our national language but when it comes to investing in it you have to consider the benefit and not many people, if any, speak it beyond corners of our own country. If I had to choose I think less should be spent on it given our current economic situation.

Cú Giobach

texidub wrote: »

No this blind perspective on the Irish language is pathetic.

Face facts. The dead gaelic langauge is going nowhere.. brings no glory to Ireland and is a massive waste of our cultural and economic resources.

Face facts you say.....

The culture isn't dead because of the Brits, or because of West Brits, or because all Irish people aside from the saintly gaeilgoirs are materialistic scum.
It's dead because it has nothing to offer Irish people.

Fact no 1, Irish culture or language isn't dead, a few people stating incorrectly over and over again that it is, won't change that fact.

And no matter how many efforts are spent trying to expand its reach, nothing can hide the fact that Irish language lobbyists have an inherently anti-Irish (i.e. opposed to the will of the majority of Irish people) agenda.

Fact no 2, the majority of Irish people respect and would like to see the language expand, it is you who are in the minority. (just look at the poll above for a start).
Start "facing".

I'm all for a multicultural Ireland (Unionists *shivers* and Gaeligoirs alike), but don't try and impose your culture on the VAST majority.

Seems you want to impose your feeling on the majority, not the other way around.

Finally, there is an interesting political aspect to all this too that is rarely discussed: Irish is the language of the establishment, of governmental authority, of the media classes. People are entitled to reject it on those grounds alone.

That's interesting, most people with your attitude say it's the language of "boggers", nice to see a different attitude.

Give Ireland back to the Irish!

Yes indeed I totally agree, and since the majority want to see money invested in Irish lets keep it that way.

texidub

Cú Giobach wrote: »

That's interesting, most people with your attitude say it's the language of "boggers", nice to see a different attitude.

Yes indeed I totally agree, and since the majority want to see money invested in Irish lets keep it that way.

Well, I didn't say that it isn't such a language, nor that our establishment --political, cultural-- isn't run by such people. Nor did I imply that gaelic-speaking (however rare) is the problem with rural Ireland. The language is accidental to such things, as always, and that's a different topic.

I meant my point separately however. I genuinely see Gaelic as having a disproportionate presence in the political and media establishment --disproportionate to its actual use throughout Ireland, that is.

I accept the will of the majority no problem.

But there is a weird disconnect between people's level of use and the degree of interest they claim to have in the language.

I personally would divert those funds entirely into basic social funding (with a focus on health) for the next five years. Now there's a REAL emergency in the social fabric in Ireland and we need to prioritise. If things pick up...

You didn't respond to my point about there being no net gain for Irish people in terms of the number of extra human beings we can communicate with by speaking Irish. We can already communicate perfectly well with each other in Hiberno-English. I think this lack of practical ends, is what makes some people call it a 'hobby.'

Cú Giobach

texidub wrote: »

Well, I didn't say that it isn't such a language, nor that our establishment --political, cultural-- isn't run by such people.
Nor did I imply that gaelic-speaking (however rare) is the problem with rural Ireland. The language is accidental to such things, as always, and that's a different topic.

Not one I would waste my time getting into with people.

I meant my point separately however. I genuinely see Gaelic as having a disproportionate presence in the political and media establishment --disproportionate to its actual use throughout Ireland, that is.

The visibility of a language is essential to its growth.

I accept the will of the majority no problem.
But there is a weird disconnect between people's level of use and the degree of interest they claim to have in the language.

Weird? Not really, when people have the chance to learn Irish in school they for the most part don't feel it's important, however when they grow up this attitude changes, but by then day to day realities get in the way of taking the time and effort to learn another language.
That is why the Gaelscoileanna are important, generation by generation more and more people will be able to speak Irish, growing from the ground up so to say.

I personally would divert those funds entirely into basic social funding (with a focus on health) for the next five years. Now there's a REAL emergency in the social fabric in Ireland and we need to prioritise. If things pick up...

Lots of money could be diverted from lots of things, it galled me to see Cork city centre being revamped at the cost of millions when people were still waiting on hospital trolleys in the CUH.

You didn't respond to my point about there being no net gain for Irish people in terms of the number of extra human beings we can communicate with by speaking Irish. We can already communicate perfectly well with each other in Hiberno-English. I think this lack of practical ends, is what makes some people call it a 'hobby.'

The spread of the language has nothing to do with speaking with more people, actually irrespective of the language they speak, the vast majority of Irish people will still speak to the same number of people.
Often in these threads I get a laugh when people say they would rather learn Chinese so they can speak to a billion people instead of the few hundred thousand who speak Irish, when will they ever get to speak to the population of China? Delusions of grandeur there.

Spreading the language is about storing, keeping safe and actually using a unique, special and irreplaceable part of Irish culture.

texidub

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Not one I would waste my time getting into with people.

I agree.

The visibility of a language is essential to its growth.

I see that as an establishment agenda. I'm fine thanks. I'm as Irish as the day is long, whether I am having mundane, every day conversations in Irish or English.

Sure half those west coast Irish speakers are blow-ins from Spain anyway. Do they have the required paperwork? Visas, etc? Feckin' blow-ins

then day to day realities get in the way

That's kind of my point.

Lots of money could be diverted from lots of things, it galled me to see Cork city centre being revamped at the cost of millions when people were still waiting on hospital trolleys in the CUH.

I agree. There's also the fact that many of Ireland's problems are structural rather than fiscal, so throwing money at things isn't necessarily the answer. It's using money more efficiently and introducing fully transparent performance metrics into the public service.

the vast majority of Irish people will still speak to the same number of people.

Sure we're known for travelling! What about non-English speakers? How does knowing Irish enable you to communicate with them when *they* arrive in Ireland? Perhaps knowing Polish, or Portugese, or Chinese...

Often in these threads I get a laugh when people say they would rather learn Chinese so they can speak to a billion people instead of the few hundred thousand who speak Irish, when will they ever get to speak to the population of China? Delusions of grandeur there.

I think you're exaggerating there. Irish people travel all over the world.

Spreading the language is about storing, keeping safe and actually using a unique, special and irreplaceable part of Irish culture.

I see your point, honestly. I just think people's limited energies --and our badly managed public purse-- should be directed elsewhere at the minute.