How to revive the Irish language.

Lord TSC

*Spots topic has been revived again*

*Notices that someone is claiming someone else "hates" the language and then starts to question "where he is from"*

Ah, the same old tactics. Never work, but when does that stop anybody :rolleyes:

gallag

I really don't understand why people want to waste their kids education learning to speak to each other and no one else in the world in a different language??? It's so selfish and only serves to make a few of the parents feel better, also I can't help noticing the people most vocal about it are also quite anti-British, coincidence?

Crooked Jack

gallag wrote: »

I really don't understand why people want to waste their kids education learning to speak to each other and no one else in the world in a different language??? It's so selfish and only serves to make a few of the parents feel better, also I can't help noticing the people most vocal about it are also quite anti-British, coincidence?

Is there any thread you go into without the intention of pushing your deluded agend?

gallag

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Is there any thread you go into without the intention of pushing your deluded agend?

Would you like to discuss any of the points I made?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

golden lane wrote: »

i believe there will be the will......not by forcing, but by wanting.....

out there i believe is a majority of parents who would be so proud to hear their children speak both languages......

Of course we lack the will. If we didn`t, we wouldn`t be having this discussion.

Interest in History wrote: »

In the bad old days they did force it on (otherwise) free adults. For example, anybody going for state employment of any type. Or if they were young adults needing a Leaving Certificate.

But I admit that apart from that the main weight was (and is) laid on the schoolchildren. And some of that is being lifted by Ruairi Quinn.

Good. Ruairi Quinn´s remit is not the Irish language, it`s education. It´s not his job to promote it.

9959

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Is there any thread you go into without the intention of pushing your deluded agend?

Apologies in advance to the next poster who agrees with the statement:

I am a keen supporter of the Irish language and the attempts to revive it, but I have no interest whatsoever in any 'future' united Ireland.

Anyone?

Crooked Jack

9959 wrote: »

Apologies in advance to the next poster who agrees with the statement:

I am a keen supporter of the Irish language and the attempts to revive it, but I have no interest whatsoever in any 'future' united Ireland.

Anyone?

What has that got to do with my post?

9959

Crooked Jack wrote: »

What has that got to do with my post?

You rebuked 'gallag' for suggesting a connection or symbiosis between Irish language enthusiasts and those who could be broadly termed Irish Nationalists.
I agree with him, perhaps you're one of that rare breed who don't have a foot in both camps.
Are you?

Crooked Jack

9959 wrote: »

You rebuked 'gallag' for suggesting a connection or symbiosis between Irish language enthusiasts and those who could be broadly termed Irish Nationalists.
I agree with him, perhaps you're one of that rare breed who don't have a foot in both camps.
Are you?

I wouldn't say I rebuked him over anything. I merely questioned him on his constant suggestions that anything Irish is somehow inherently anti-British.
Big difference between being Irish nationalist and anti-British.
As you also point out i firmly believe that the language belongs to everybody on the island and Gallag's equating of it with anti-Britishness is an attempt to alienate a section of the community from a language they have equal ownership of.
It was also a poor attempt to drag a thread on the Irish language into the usual constitutional ranting, further attempting to associate the language with one community over the other.

gallag

I am not anti Irish aether, I just think Irish children would be better served learning to communicate with Brazilian or Chinese , French or German kids instead of years of education wasted learning a language to make the parents fell better about something they are mostly to lazy/uninterested to do themselves, there is uproar every time someone proposes forcing foreign nationals to learn the native language which would actually have a tangible benefit.

I understand why people would be sad to lose part of their heritage, especially in a country that lost a great deal of its culture over hundreds of years of imperialism/invasion/mixing etc but the answer is not handicapping your children, focus on adults, Irish speaking lunch clubs for pensioners, make really good Irish speaking media like tv/radio/films etc, offer free home courses online to every adult or day classes to the unemployed. Anything but pushing your romantic ideals onto your children when you know deep down they would be better served learning any other language used in top ten economy's.

I said this before but it would be fantastic if sign language was standardised and taught as a second language to every child in the world, then 99% of the planet could communicate.

dd972

I said this before but it would be fantastic if sign language was standardised and taught as a second language to every child in the world, then 99% of the planet could communicate.

Superb idea, blindingly obvious yet probably never come into most people's heads.

golden lane

mackerski wrote: »

It's your English I quoted. My point being that many people struggle to perfect one language, let alone two.

Bilingualism is a great thing and I'm all for it, but each of the languages has to come from somewhere. Parents who cannot speak Irish cannot teach it to children, which is why nature takes its course and most of us are native English speakers. This is just a thing that happens with languages. We don't pine for whatever language the fir bolg spoke, likewise there's no reason to agonise over Irish as the native language we never had. That's just glass half empty thinking.

you mean, misquoted.....

conor.hogan.2

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I prefer "Brain Dead" language. As in it would be dead if government life support was pulled.

But it was called dying years before it was on "government life support" and yet the rumors of its' ill health have been oft said but yet it is still here *.

* It has majority support by the people, democracy works two ways. There are numerous things various people don't like that get funding and support but you get on with it because humans have differing opinions. Something most people can deal with.

9959

Crooked Jack wrote: »

I wouldn't say I rebuked him over anything. I merely questioned him on his constant suggestions that anything Irish is somehow inherently anti-British.
Big difference between being Irish nationalist and anti-British.
As you also point out i firmly believe that the language belongs to everybody on the island and Gallag's equating of it with anti-Britishness is an attempt to alienate a section of the community from a language they have equal ownership of.
It was also a poor attempt to drag a thread on the Irish language into the usual constitutional ranting, further attempting to associate the language with one community over the other.

I'd still like to know if there are any Irish language supporters/ enthusiasts out there who don't have strong views on potential Irish unity, I take it from the fact that you haven't answered yes for yourself that you're not one of them.

I believe that gallag's observation of the link between the two in the context of threads such as this one is relevant.

Iwasfrozen

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

But it was called dying years before it was on "government life support" and yet the rumors of its' ill health have been oft said but yet it is still here *.

Pull the plug and how long do you think it will last. One generation? Two maybe? The real killer will be when without government subsidies pouring into the region gealtacht residents will have to move to urban areas to seek employment.

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

* It has majority support by the people, democracy works two ways. There are numerous things various people don't like that get funding and support but you get on with it because humans have differing opinions. Something most people can deal with.

Oh I can deal with it, I've dealt with it my whole life. It's not an important issue just a mild annoyance that my tax is being used to fund someone else's hobby.

A better way to deal with this would be to remove all government funding and allow taxes to drop with this. Then people would have the money to put into the language themselves in whatever way they wanted. That's real democracy.

Crooked Jack

9959 wrote: »

I'd still like to know if there are any Irish language supporters/ enthusiasts out there who don't have strong views on potential Irish unity, I take it from the fact that you haven't answered yes for yourself that you're not one of them.

I believe that gallag's observation of the link between the two in the context of threads such as this one is relevant.

Well, you for one, i assume you arent unique.
Secondly,his observation, if it could be called that, is utterly irrelevant in a thread about the revival of the language. as stated earlier the language belongs to everyone. if it happens that most irish speakers are in favour of unity that is simply because most irish speakers are irish and most irish people are in favour of unity.
again, utterly irrelevant in the context of the thread. he just saw another opportunity to make snide remarks.

conor.hogan.2

It has lasted for several generations without support, I think it would last several more without "life support". You would swear it was the only thing to get government support.

People often mistake "real democracy" for 100% capitalism, fortunately for all we don't have "real" democracy or 100% "real" capitalism because they do not work fairly.

Iwasfrozen

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

It has lasted for several generations without support, I think it would last several more without "life support". You would swear it was the only thing to get government support.

It has rapidly decreased in the number of speakers with the huge support it has gotten since the foundation of the state. Pull the support overnight and the language hasn't a hope of surviving. That's just an opinion though it doesn't matter to me whether it lives or dies as long as I don't have to pay for it.

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

People often mistake "real democracy" for 100% capitalism, fortunately for all we don't have "real" democracy or 100% "real" capitalism because they do not work fairly.

Capitalism is democracy, the only real form of democracy is to vote with your pocket. Let each individual person decide how important the language is to them and let them support it equivalently. That would be a much more efficient and representation system then the one we have now.

conor.hogan.2

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

That would be a much more efficient and representation system then the one we have now.

Fortunately, we have a better form of democracy in effect.

Iwasfrozen

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

Fortunately, we have a better form of democracy in effect.

Why is it better? With the way I propose each Irish person can decide how important the preservation of the irish language is to them in monetary terms. The amount of money the body receives will be equal to the combined total of each persons valuation of the language.

conor.hogan.2

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Why is it better? With the way I propose each Irish person can decide how important the preservation of the irish language is to them in monetary terms. The amount of money the body receives will be equal to the combined total of each persons valuation of the language.

Because I believe what is best wins through, of course there is always room for change and growth.

But I do not believe what can be afforded is always best, that goes against democracy (in its' current and most common definition).

Iwasfrozen

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

Because I believe what is best wins through, of course there is always room for change and growth.

But I do not believe what can be afforded is always best, that goes against democracy (in its' current and most common definition).

If what is best wins through then people will continue to support the language. At the moment what we have is a minority (supposedly) who do not wish to support it who are forced to do so by the state. This is not an efficient system. Let the government cease all funding and cut taxes in response. Those who are interested in Irish will continue to fund it's revival by whatever value they personally place on it. The amount of money the language body gets will equal the sum of interest the Irish taxpayers place on it. No more no less.

Peregrine

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

It has lasted for several generations without support, I think it would last several more without "life support". You would swear it was the only thing to get government support.

Given that it's one of the 3 core subjects and EVERY single student is taught the language for 14 years, I'd say it gets a lot of bloody suppory for a language that 95% of the students don't use after Leaving Cert.

My school doesn't even have proper subject choices for students, we didn't have a Chemistry teacher until last year and we can't afford a Chemistry lab but we have 4 feckin Irish teachers at €40,000 pa so it's all grand we get proper education we need. Excuse me but I think I have the right to believe it's given a crap load of support

9959

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Well, you for one, i assume you arent unique.
Secondly,his observation, if it could be called that, is utterly irrelevant in a thread about the revival of the language. as stated earlier the language belongs to everyone. if it happens that most irish speakers are in favour of unity that is simply because most irish speakers are irish and most irish people are in favour of unity.
again, utterly irrelevant in the context of the thread. he just saw another opportunity to make snide remarks.

Unlike you, I assume we're all unique

Secondly, saying "the language belongs to everyone" is a bit like saying "Jesus belongs to everyone", it sounds munificent when really it's just a trite bit of nonsense.

Why I believe his observation on the connection between Irish language revival and Irish nationalism to be relevant is for the following reasons:

1. When any cultural/political campaign is ongoing, whether it be pro-life, pro-choice, cannabis legalisation, stricter emigration controls and so on, it's always important to know the agendas, covert or overt, of the people and groups involved in, and in support of, such campaigns.
This is just common sense, we all do it, even here on these boards I would be reluctant to give someone a 'thumbs up' for a witty remark that they might make on 'Jedward' if I knew from reading other threads that they were 'dyed in the wool' racist.

2. Openly pushing a nationalist agenda is by fine by me, it won't get my support, but people are perfectly entitled to lobby support for their cause in any non-violent manner of their choosing.

3. Pushing an Irish language agenda - under the guise of a purely cultural movement- whilst failing to acknowledge the obvious kinship between nationalists and Irish language campaigners is dishonest, in my opinion you'd be hard pushed to find a Irish language devotee who didn't subscribe to the ultimate goal of a United Ireland.
By the way, I'm not saying that the same is true vice versa, being Dublin born and bred, I know a few people of a nationalist bent whose Irish vocabulary would consist of 'Tiochadh ar la' and little else.

Let's have a bit honesty here.
I'll ask again, is there anyone out there, (including you Crooked Jack), who keenly supports the Irish language and the attempts to revive it, but who couldn't give a fig for 'the National question'?

Merry Christmas to all regardless, including you 'Crooked Jack'.

conor.hogan.2

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

At the moment what we have is a minority (supposedly) who do not wish to support it who are forced to do so by the state.

A majority that do want to "support" it, bingo. And the minority are not hurt by it being "supported", tax money is being spent on dozens of things I do not like but that is democracy in its' current form.

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

Given that it's one of the 3 core subjects and EVERY single student is taught the language for 14 years, I'd say it gets a lot of bloody suppory for a language that 95% of the students don't use after Leaving Cert.

My school doesn't even have proper subject choices for students, we didn't have a Chemistry teacher until last year and we can't afford a Chemistry lab but we have 4 feckin Irish teachers at €40,000 pa so it's all grand we get proper education we need. Excuse me but I think I have the right to believe it's given a crap load of support

I had 3 chemistry teachers - what is your point? Also I do understand why you are angry about being at school and Irish and Maths are the most common subjects for you to direct your angst at. Also the majority of teachers are not on 40k, just so you know.

Also most students do it, not every student.

Interest in History

opti0nal wrote: »

....Reducing government support to a level appropriate to an important cultural relic, and more importantly, freeing children from the abusive obligation to learn and speak Irish would allow the Irish language and its supporters to operate in an environment of honesty and truthfulness.

It is so clear that this is true. If pupils learned Irish for the first three years of secondary school and then took it in Leaving Cert as a subject of choice, all the negativity would disappear. The teachers for the Leaving Cert would have a smaller number of students, but willing ones. And the number of people with good Irish and who enjoyed using it would not decrease. Probably it would increase.

So: the next question, not meant rhetorically: why is this not done? What are the interest groups that are blocking these practical and commonsense steps?

Ficheall

9959 wrote: »

Let's have a bit honesty here.
I'll ask again, is there anyone out there, (including you Crooked Jack), who keenly supports the Irish language and the attempts to revive it, but who couldn't give a fig for 'the National question'?

Anseo!

9959

Ficheall wrote: »

Anseo!

Go maith!

Monkeybonkers

This:

Bambi wrote: »

Can we just ban all n00bs from AH? Srsly folks.

Then this:

paullyons00 wrote: »

This may seem autocratic or communist

Iwasfrozen

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

A majority that do want to "support" it, bingo. And the minority are not hurt by it being "supported", tax money is being spent on dozens of things I do not like but that is democracy in its' current form.

You missed my point so I'll repeat it:

"If what is best wins through then people will continue to support the language. At the moment what we have is a minority (supposedly) who do not wish to support it who are forced to do so by the state. This is not an efficient system. Let the government cease all funding and cut taxes in response. Those who are interested in Irish will continue to fund it's revival by whatever value they personally place on it. The amount of money the language body gets will equal the sum of interest the Irish taxpayers place on it. No more no less. "

I want you to tell me why the current system is more fair then the system I propose.