How to revive the Irish language.

Toirdhealbhach Tadhg O Caoindealbhain

Wibbs wrote: »

Forget the Gaelegoiri, forget the Gaelscoils, forget the cupla focal lip service, the signs and documents the majority can't read and all that other stuff and you're still left with thousands who happily chat away as Gaelige on a daily basis as a tool of communication with others, a living language. That figure is holding pretty stable and has done for well over a decade. The previous century's decline has stabilised at that point. It's outside of that group the issue is more complex. It may grow as a second dialect coming from Gaelscoils, though I doubt it to the degree hoped. It may end up a "childish" version of the language stuck in the idioms of primary school level language. I still don't see much threat to the thousands aforementioned though.

Do you walk around fuming in anger everytime you see a bit of Irish on public signage? You must lead a very miserable life.

Wibbs

Toirdhealbhach Tadhg O Caoindealbhain wrote: »

Do you walk around fuming in anger everytime you see a bit of Irish on public signage?

No. How very odd a comment.

Iwasfrozen

Cú Giobach wrote: »

If this "tragedy" was the result of partition then it must be the responsibility of those that partitioned the island.

It is indeed. But it took two sides to partition the island. That's why you can't blame anyone.

Toirdhealbhach Tadhg O Caoindealbhain

Wibbs wrote: »

No. How very odd a comment.

You seem so incredibly bitter about everything else!

Ficheall

Toirdhealbhach Tadhg O Caoindealbhain wrote: »

You seem so incredibly bitter about everything else!

Maybe you should actually read Wibbs' comment?


On an unrelated note, I love the Irish language. It just always disappoints me how its most vociferous proponents often seem to be a bit dense.

Toirdhealbhach Tadhg O Caoindealbhain

Ficheall wrote: »

Maybe you should actually read Wibbs' comment?


On an unrelated note, I love the Irish language. It just always disappoints me how its most vociferous proponents often seem to be a bit dense.

Couldn't agree more. :eek:

Cú Giobach

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It is indeed. But it took two sides to partition the island. That's why you can't blame anyone.

I suggest you read up on The Government of Ireland Act 1920.
I'm not going any further with this here, it isn't the place to discuss that topic.

brianbaru

Nah, prisons no good. It costs the tax payer. Hang em and hang em high!

Iwasfrozen

Cú Giobach wrote: »

I suggest you read up on The Government of Ireland Act 1920.
I'm not going any further with this here, it isn't the place to discuss that topic.

And why was there a government of Ireland act 1920 in the first place? Like I said it takes two sides to partition an island. If irish is ever to gain ground with unionists within a united ireland it needs to lose it's connection to nationalism.

An Coilean

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And why was there a government of Ireland act 1920 in the first place? Like I said it takes two sides to partition an island. If irish is ever to gain ground with unionists within a united ireland it needs to lose it's connection to nationalism.

The Home Rule Movment? Partition was mainly caused by the Arming of Northern Unionists. Just how serious that was tends to be glossed over in our history books, its usually just seen as the cause of the Irish Voulenteers being set up, but before WW1 happened, many in the UK were afraid of a large scale Army mutieny over the issue.
The British Army had made some serious rumbellings about refusing to follow orders if those orders were to force home rule on Ulster.
WW1 was seen early on as a bit of a god send for the British Establishment in that it allowed them to move the most vocal oppisition away from the north and over to France.

Iwasfrozen

An Coilean wrote: »

The Home Rule Movment? Partition was mainly caused by the Arming of Northern Unionists. Just how serious that was tends to be glossed over in our history books, its usually just seen as the cause of the Irish Voulenteers being set up, but before WW1 happened, many in the UK were afraid of a large scale Army mutieny over the issue.
The British Army had made some serious rumbellings about refusing to follow orders if those orders were to force home rule on Ulster.
WW1 was seen early on as a bit of a god send for the British Establishment in that it allowed them to move the most vocal oppisition away from the north and over to France.

Yes irish nationalism and irish unionism where the two ideologies that forced the partition of the island. Had either one of those ideals never existed then we wouldn't have had partition and we would never have had this narrowing view of what's "irish" or not. Why do some people say you can't be irish and a member of the orange order? Why do some people say you can't be a prod and play GAA? Why can't a person identify as British (in a political, not geographical sense obviously) and Irish simultaneously? I'm not saying this is all to do with partition but people's idea of identity became much more rigid afterword. The militarisation of the irish language by the IRA is another example of this.

Wibbs

One could easily argue that there were always a number of different "Irelands" and what it meant to be "Irish", long before our independence and partition, even before the plantations. As IWF wrote the latter tended to polarise it the more. The "well, which side are you on?" effect.

An Coilean

Wibbs wrote: »

One could easily argue that there were always a number of different "Irelands" and what it meant to be "Irish", long before our independence and partition, even before the plantations. As IWF wrote the latter tended to polarise it the more. The "well, which side are you on?" effect.

What different versions do you think existed before the Plantations? Irish was the term used by the English to describe the native Gaelic people. They did not describe themselves as Irish, even if they were bourn and raised in Ireland, even the Normans who famously became more Irish than the Irish themselves were refered to as the Old English.

Toirdhealbhach Tadhg O Caoindealbhain

Perhaps he's talking about the tuath - the petty Gaelic kingdoms.

An Coilean

Toirdhealbhach Tadhg O Caoindealbhain wrote: »

Perhaps he's talking about the tuath - the petty Gaelic kingdoms.

They were political entititys, politically the countery was fragmented, but the Island and the peoples living on it were seen and saw themselves as a cultural whole, much like the Greek City States.

2218219

paullyons00 wrote: »

In my opinion, the only way we can possibly revive the Irish language to make it the first language of the people, business and pleasure, is as follows:

All citizens below the age of 30 and above the age of 17 have 5 years to reach an agreed level of fluency.

Each will be assessed through an oral and written exam at the end of those 5 years.

If the candidate does not pass on his/her first exam, they will be given a second chance to pass but at a higher pass mark.

Any candidate who fails the second exam should be stripped of their rights and citizenship and should face a hefty prison sentence.


This may seem autocratic or communist, but in my view its the only way we can revive the language or else it will die out in years to come.

I'd love to hear your opinions on my way of thinking and alternative views on how we should go about reviving the language.

in my opinion that "law" is worse than the laws in the arab world?

oldmangrub

Wibbs wrote: »

Riiight so accusing people of patronising, snobbish bigotry and of being crazy raving racists just because they may disagree with aspects of level of funding et al for the Irish language is OK in your book? Never mind the "agenda" stuff. Yes it's true, we have secret handshakes too. I've said too much...

Talk about an ad hominem argument. Jesus, if this is the opinion of some in the Irish language movement I do worry. Funny enough I've personally never heard it from actual native speakers to nearly this degree. It's almost always the second language Gaelgoiri that come out with this stuff.

Well then OMG you may as well write off the vast majority of Irish men and women of being patronising, snobbish, crazy, raving and racist bigots because the vast majority can't speak it more than a cupla focal. Hey work away and be my guest, but I'd prefer not to thanks very much. Nor BTW would I write off the minority of native speakers as cultural anachronisms. Neither tend to use their respective ways of communication as a stick to beat with.

1. I do not consider people who disagree with the level of funding as being necessarily "anti-Irish". "Anti-Irish" implies an opposition to the language itself or its speakers. Generalisations made about its speakers e.g "many Irish speakers are just"... "I've met so many Irish speakers that have an attitude that"... or comments about it being "dead" or "ugly" come from the same place, I believe, as racism. Most of these people have probably never had a conversation about Irish with an Irish-speaker. Their level of dislike of Irish makes any scenario this could take place just implausible in my mind. Gaeltachters can be just as guilty of bigotry. A minority are not particularly welcoming to newcomers to the language. Some people just don't like things that are "different" so we have a human tendancy for prejudice. In the case of the Irish language it's been unchecked so it is to be expected.

2. I shouldn't have used the word "agenda" and I apologise for that. Because prejudice towards Irish speakers is unchecked sites like this could play a role in making it less acceptable. I am offended that someone was allowed to post a wish that an entire community die. I would be just as offended if the comment was about any other group of people. I don't think you could state anything more extreme about any group of people. Maybe "burn them all"? So I think it's fair to question whether it was because the reference was to Irish speakers that it wasn't considered offensive. And yes, rightly or wrongy, I would assume that that is the reason.

3. I am not writing anyone off or attributing traits to anyone beyond the obvious. I do not believe for a second that the vast majority of Irish people are "anti-Irish" by my own definition. To do so would be comparable to stating the vast majority of supporters of the language support it because it's called Irish and English is called English. They're generalisations and patronising ones because I would be talking for other people and implying that they are somehow less capable of logic than myself. You're accusing me of doing something that I would never do, the same thing you are quite content to do yourself. This is just a "look lads, he's saying it about all of us, let's get him" kind of defence. I'm not.

4. I am not part of any "Irish language movement". Do you think I am because I prefer Irish and because I speak Irish? It is perfectly normal for this to be the case. I couldn't care less what language you speak or what language your documents are in. I pay my taxes, I matter as much as anyone else does. This is not a position I need to defend. I would favour availability in any language there was sufficient demand for as long as they were paying their taxes too so "Irish language movement" my arse.

5. If you're implying that you would write off the majority of Irish speakers as cultural achronisms then I give up. I hope that you're not trying to get in a dig and that was a typo. In which case you're possibly still writing off Irish speakers who speak it as a second language so I don't really take it as much of a compliment. I didn't raise my kids through Irish and three out of the four speak it now, only one in education. Those three all speak it with their kids or intend to. I have grandkids in Gaelscoils and their Irish is no more childish than their English. They still speak in Irish structures and use Irish phrases, they've just added a few English translations. What you began by stating as tentative "someone I know told me" opinion earlier in this thread has evolved into fact in your posts. It's as if you're waiting to see how people react and if they don't challenge you strongly you take liberties. Some kids have poor linguistic skills generally. Most do not. Likewise kids with OMG accents have just as much right to speak the language as kids who don't. Kids can f*** up Irish just as much as they f*** up English. There's little hope of it catching on.

6. Go away with your patronising "OMG" and your "Riight". That's no way to speak to someone who'll never be able to confront you in person. And stop trying to rouse people. Or ambush me! People are roused enough on this thread already. Give it a break.

Wibbs

oldmangrub wrote: »

1. I do not consider people who disagree with the level of funding as being necessarily "anti-Irish".

You're the one who was coming out with "patronising, snobbish, bigoted, raving racist" type descriptions, yet (rightfully) bemoan others being equally exaggerated in their opinions?

2. I shouldn't have used the word "agenda" and I apologise for that. Because prejudice towards Irish speakers is unchecked sites like this could play a role in making it less acceptable. I am offended that someone was allowed to post a wish that an entire community die. I would be just as offended if the comment was about any other group of people. I don't think you could state anything more extreme about any group of people. Maybe "burn them all"? So I think it's fair to question whether it was because the reference was to Irish speakers that it wasn't considered offensive. And yes, rightly or wrongy, I would assume that that is the reason.

So it's still an agenda regardless of your apology? Guess what? I would agree with you re the "Irish should die!!" type arguments. Funny that.

You're accusing me of doing something that I would never do, the same thing you are quite content to do yourself. This is just a "look lads, he's saying it about all of us, let's get him" kind of defence

Nope afraid not.

4. I am not part of any "Irish language movement". Do you think I am because I prefer Irish and because I speak Irish?

In this context at least I would tend to favour Occam's razor razor, or more colloquially if it quacks like a duck...

5. If you're implying that you would write off the majority of Irish speakers as cultural achronisms then I give up. I hope that you're not trying to get in a dig and that was a typo.

Eh you really don't get that someone might be looking at both sides of a debate do you? It appears you automatically assume a black versus white stance in others, which may say something about your own approach, or maybe not? Respectfully I suggest you should read it again in that context. Personally I grew out of that "others surely think as I do, even in opposition" in my 30's, admittedly and sadly about a decade too late to claim precocious wisdom on my part. *Little hint* I'm disagreeing with the "Irish should die" opinion. In case you or others(and they have) may have missed that part. I dunno how as I've expressed it more than once. Hell even reported a post on that score.

I have grandkids in Gaelscoils and their Irish is no more childish than their English. They still speak in Irish structures and use Irish phrases, they've just added a few English translations.

Fast forward 20 years. Which of their languages is likely to be the richer in vocabulary?

What you began by stating as tentative "someone I know told me" opinion earlier in this thread has evolved into fact in your posts.

Direct quote please, or as the shorthand goes "links or GTFO".

It's as if you're waiting to see how people react and if they don't challenge you strongly you take liberties.

Nope I read an opinion or fact and ask for examples, if I think them dubious to my ears. If given same I'm likely to agree, or at least agree to disagree, however if none are coming or are of the all too nebulous opinion posing as fact I ask why. The nature of debate etc.

6. Go away with your patronising "OMG" and your "Riight". That's no way to speak to someone who'll never be able to confront you in person.

Número uno, "OMG" is a shorthand for your username. Just in case of confusion; OldManGrub =OMG. Número de dos, trust me I'm quite happy to say what I write to anyone's face. Have done and will again, no "confrontation" required.

And stop trying to rouse people. Or ambush me! People are roused enough on this thread already. Give it a break.

Ambush you? Ehhh? Maybe it's my "agenda" talking, or maybe you're too easily roused. I suspect the latter.

oldmangrub

1. Bigotry exists. I didn't come out with this description.
2. We all have a natural inclination towards prejudice that can become bigotry if not kept in check. Because of campaigns and awareness, homophobia and racism are no longer accepted. Some people cannot apply the same logic to other groups and will resort to generalisations; replace these posts with "gays" or "blacks" and you'll see yourself. This extends to other groups too. Some of them with no "cultural" undertones; politicians for example.
3. It is not bigoted to state an abhorrence towards bigoted thinking. Peoples abhorrence of the Irish language is not comparable to this by any measure.

The poster I reported didn't state that he wished Irish do die out. He wants its supporters to. What he said was "The Irish language should die off gracefully, just like the biased, mostly bigoted, conservative, religious, nationalist, shower of backwards culchie goons that support it.".
Bigoted? Patronising? Snobbish? Check.

I think that perhaps you only understand one particular type of moo and you shouldn't presume to interpret quacks, squaks or oinks. Let me quack for myself please. I'm not part of any Irish language movement. Are English speakers part of an English language movement? Because in that case I'm part of that too. I don't want English speakers to die out either and wouldn't agree with them being described as "biased, mostly bigoted, conservative, religious, nationalist, shower of backwards culchie goons." I am easily roused though. I'd only be quacking away to myself with my "exaggerated opinions" about what is acceptable to state about the English speaking community, wouldn't I? Say if I said it was bigoted to state that most people who support the English language are goons, gombeens, or militant nationalists, would that be a more reasonable objection in your view?

I respectfully ask you that, when a poster presumes you made a typo and responds to what they presume was the intent instead of what would have been an embarrassing error.... you don't attack them and waffle on about black and white assumptions and speaking from "both sides." The fact that you imagine two sides kind of implies to me that, well, you see this discussion as having two sides. I actually don't. It's probably why you have jumped to the conclusion that I'm part of an "Irish language movement." Again you're accusing me of something that I haven't done and that you are doing. But go ahead. Be my guest. "Personally [insert patronisng comment here]"

"Richer" is a not a qualitive term really. I don't really think either language contains a "richer" vocabulary in the sense of it being superior to the other. Just a different vocabulary with different outlooks and cultural inheritences therein. Obviously, I'm fond of both. I enjoy languages and I enjoy knowledge. In the case of my own grandkids, they speak Irish in their home and hopefully will speak it to their own. That's where it gets passed on and that's what matters to us. My three are highly proficient in Irish. They know more colloquialisms from other Gaeltacht areas than I would.

I should apologise for misreading "OMG" but since your post is fairly lacking in grace I'll return the favour. What does GTFO mean? The opinions I referred to are in this thread, I don't really intend to look for it. You referred to a friend from Donegal who made some negative comments about the Irish spoken by non-Gaeltachters. I think you either quoted him or described these people yourself as "self-styled Gaeilgeoirs". I did put that in search but you possibly spelled the Gaeilgeoir part wrong. And no, I'm not trying to be patronising (not for me!), but it is a difficult word to spell.

If you're *hinting* that stating "Irish shoudn't die" means that your opinions towards the language must be fair and can't possibly be patronising or snobbish I don't follow your logic. Not because you're quacking or mooing or anything. Saying that most supporters of the language do so because it is called Irish and not English is extremely patronising. You know it too. Perhaps, because they don't sit into either side that you can see things from, you fail to understand them at all, or perhaps not.

Cú Giobach

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes irish nationalism and irish unionism where the two ideologies that forced the partition of the island. Had either one of those ideals never existed then we wouldn't have had partition and we would never have had this narrowing view of what's "irish" or not. Why do some people say you can't be irish and a member of the orange order? Why do some people say you can't be a prod and play GAA? Why can't a person identify as British (in a political, not geographical sense obviously) and Irish simultaneously? I'm not saying this is all to do with partition but people's idea of identity became much more rigid afterword. The militarisation of the irish language by the IRA is another example of this.

You ask a load of questions yet seem to be unaware of "the elephant in the room", Why can't you speak Irish and not be a militant Irish nationalist?

This militarisation of the language is all in your head and is just the kind of thinking you describe as "tragic".

Cú Giobach

Bye folks it was nice knowing ye (well some of ye anyway).

An Coilean

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Bye folks it was nice knowing ye (well some of ye anyway).

Bye Cú. Can I have you're fada?

speedboatchase

The amount of indignation-filled public sector spending threads on page one of After Hours and yet this thread survives and is packed with supporters :pac:

Iwasfrozen

Cú Giobach wrote: »

You ask a load of questions yet seem to be unaware of "the elephant in the room", Why can't you speak Irish and not be a militant Irish nationalist?

This militarisation of the language is all in your head and is just the kind of thinking you describe as "tragic".

I never said you couldn't speak irish and not be a militant irish nationalist. Just that the IRA has damaged the reputation of the language in the eyes of the "other" community. Speak irish all you want. Hell you can even write your epitaph in irish for all I care. Just don't go trying to force it down unwilling children's throats with compulsory irish. Or give state funded advantages to those who can speak it. That's all i ask.

An Coilean wrote: »

Bye Cú. Can I have you're fada?

*your. See kids this is what learning irish does to your english. :P

*pedantic I know, I apologise in advance.

An Coilean

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

*your. See kids this is what learning irish does to your english. :P
dvance.

Nope, thats what auto correct on your phone can do to your English;)

LordSutch

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Just that the IRA has damaged the reputation of the language in the eyes of the "other" community.

Good point that, now that I think about it..

An Coilean

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Just that the IRA has damaged the reputation of the language in the eyes of the "other" community.
*pedantic I know, I apologise in advance.

Interesting that the 'other' community has not damaged the reputation of English amongst Irish speakers, perhaps some members of the 'other' community are a little but touchy?

Iwasfrozen

An Coilean wrote: »

Interesting that the 'other' community has not damaged the reputation of English amongst Irish speakers, perhaps some members of the 'other' community are a little but touchy?

English is not a language associated with the 'other' community. English encompasses much much more then that. You could argue though, and I would definitely agree, that the actions of some unionists has diminished the view of the ulster scots dialect/language among the irish speaking community.

Edit: On second thought I'm going to put dialect first. That **** isn't a proper language.

Wibbs

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Edit: On second thought I'm going to put dialect first. That **** isn't a proper language.

Indeed. I've had conversations with folks speaking it and it's very easy to get your ear in. Think Robbie(or is that Rabbie) Burns on acid. You get about 90% of the convo. That said I was surprised how many people in certain areas of the north do speak the dialect. Some very strongly. Plus how many of the elderly peeps found me hard to understand(and I've been told by non English speakers learning the language that I enunciate very clearly. There were quite a lot of local dialect specific words. Yea, dialect alright(and that's OK) but in no way is it a distinct language like Irish.

Toirdhealbhach Tadhg O Caoindealbhain

If they want to call Ulster Scots a language, let them. People passing snide comments about it are not helping matters in the least.