How to revive the Irish language.

twinQuins

Ms.M wrote: »

I have never met someone who considered French, German or Polish central to their identity as an Irish person. We're talking about Ireland, not Europe.

Do you see anything wrong about the highlighted part?

LordSutch

Crooked Jack wrote: »

WOW. The bile being directed at our national language here is shocking. Personally I'd like to see it revived, but the way to do that, as many people have already said, is to make pre-schools and primary schools bilingual, or at least make Irish a large part of it, and then have it as an option at secondary education. Forcing it on people doesnt work. I know i hated it in school because of my teacher but have really been enjoying it ever since signing up to the Liofa campaign.
Some of the attitudes towards the language here are incredibly short sighted. There's pragmatism and then there is just attacking the national identity because you're ashamed of it for some reason. I suspect these are the same type of people who would like to see everyone in the world speaking Yankee-Saxon just for handiness.
Tír gan teanga, tír gan anam

As a matter of interest would you include my sentiments in post #160 as being negative towards the Irish language, or productive?

Enkidu

Carson10 wrote: »

we live in Ireland. The main language is ENGLISH and will stay that way. It is about image. It looks dumb when people speak to someone in Irish when they know how to speak in English and that is their main language.

When you go to France they speak FRENCH because that is their main language.

What? There are countries with several languages. In France they also speak Breton. Why "must" you speak one of them always.

Speak English in Ireland because that is our main language. Simple.

I do. To people who can also speak Irish, I speak Irish provided there is nobody there who that would exclude. Why shouldn't I? Because it's not normal to Carson10?

conor.hogan.2

I can not believe people live in such a black and white world where everything is so fine cut and easy.

We can (and do…) speak English and Irish and we can (and do….) teach both English, Irish and another language (or two in some students cases)

SafeSurfer

Reviving our dead language should be way way down our list of national priorities.

Take the example of Croke Park on all Ireland final day. A small minority of those attending that most nationalistic expressions of Irish "culture" are able to understand the token pigeon Irish part of the winning team captain's speech let alone the meaning of the words of the anthem they so enthusiastically sing at the start of the match.

languagenerd

Carson10 wrote: »

Totally. The money should be spent on kitting out schools with State of the Art IT suites and information Technology and Science Labs where the real jobs are in the future and can guide the kids towards this better life. The only kids who get a job out of Irish are the ones who go on to be Teachers themselves. Its a silly circle really!

I can understand some of your earlier points, but bringing "real jobs" into it? For one thing, there are jobs in Science and IT at the moment but that doesn't mean we should push everyone towards them. In a few years time, we'll end up with too many people looking for jobs in that sector (like there was with teachers and nurses a while ago) and not only that, some of them will be of lesser quality because they never wanted to be scientists in the first place. Plus not everyone is good at science and technology subjects.

Also, people with Irish degrees go on to be translators (at home and in the E.U.) as well as broadcasters, journalists and publishers. Not just teachers!

Anyway, since when is school supposed to be all about jobs? Is providing a well-rounded education not its main priority? We shouldn't start treating the country like a business and the citizens like employees. Why financialize every little part of life?!

deise go deo

Interest in History wrote: »

Surely this can't be true? Surely everybody in Ireland to-day under the age of fifty or sixty to-day has been born to English-speaking parents and grw uo with an English programme going on their family TV set? And if they have been using a good deal of Irish, surely their main experience of life and the communal culture has been through English.

Have you ever been to a Gaeltacht? In strong Gaeltacht areas many children will not begin to learn English untill they go to school. There are plenty of children who would not have any grasp of English before 7 or 8, they don't need it before then.

Interest in History

Ms.M wrote: »

... People over fifty or sixty are still entitled to communicate through Irish if they wish....

...... Are you proposing that the entire world should just speak English? ...

I only meant to question the suggestion that there are many people on Ireland who can speak Irish better than they can speak English. I think they must be very few indeed and that they must be very old if their parents spoke only Irish to them. They must have been borne on (say) the Aran Islands before 1950.

Incidentally; I personally don't care what language people speak as long as I can understand them, and that category includes Irish. And as for everybody in the world speaking English? Why should I care? If they choose to, let them. And since the Irish have in fact made this choice, let them too.

Bambii_

I think it should be made optional in schools. If a persons feels like that chose to learn it then they might be more enthusiastic about learning it. We're forced to learn it from a young age so we develop a strong dislike towards it and we put a mental bloke on learning it.

Or we could import alot of those Americans that are learning it. It's meant to be a very big language over there.. Very popular..

Or we could just let it die out.. it's not that nice of a language anyway (:

MysticalRain

languagenerd wrote: »

I can understand some of your earlier points, but bringing "real jobs" into it? For one thing, there are jobs in Science and IT at the moment but that doesn't mean we should push everyone towards them. In a few years time, we'll end up with too many people looking for jobs in that sector (like there was with teachers and nurses a while ago) and not only that, some of them will be of lesser quality because they never wanted to be scientists in the first place. Plus not everyone is good at science and technology subjects.

Also, people with Irish degrees go on to be translators (at home and in the E.U.) as well as broadcasters, journalists and publishers. Not just teachers!

Anyway, since when is school supposed to be all about jobs? Is providing a well-rounded education not its main priority? We shouldn't start treating the country like a business and the citizens like employees. Why financialize every little part of life?!

A good education system should be about both. Culture is great. But that is of little consequence for an someone on the dole or struggling in a dead end job. You can't really have one without the other.

Our education system is one of the few economic resources this country has, and right now it is not fit for purpose. Far too much time is spent on rote learning, the Irish language, and religion. Not enough time is spent on training people for careers in the more productive areas of the economy. Ultimately, Irish needs to be made optional beyond national school level to make way for a more modern curriculum focused more on STEM subjects, and modern languages.

Interest in History

deise go deo wrote: »

Have you ever been to a Gaeltacht? In strong Gaeltacht areas many children will not begin to learn English untill they go to school. There are plenty of children who would not have any grasp of English before 7 or 8, they don't need it before then.

Yes: I had work that took me to the Galway gaeltacht ten years ago, but everybody dealt with me in English. Ditto in Ring two years ago. So my visits did not qualify me to say how much Irish was in use generally.

I get my references from A Study of Gaeltacht Schools by the Council for Gaeltacht and gaelscoileanna Education 2004. The Report said that the largest group of children entering junior infants classes in the majority of Gaeltacht schools had little or no Irish. That would be at (?) age five?

But I don't know if that historical information will mean much when the new linguistic definition of Gaeltacht comes in. So perhaps we should not waste time on it.

GaryIrv93

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

The point is this is Ireland and the education system is there to educate. Not to get you a job. You get yourself a job by being educated and/or dedicated enough to whatever you want to work in.

The purpose of an education system is not to keep a language alive though. In Ireland far too much importance is placed in schools on so-called ''national identity'' and ''cultural heritage''. So why is it just the language? Why not also Irish dancing? or Hurling, or Gaelic football? They're also ''part of our culture'', so why aren't they also compulsory, considering they would also keep kids fit? Times have changed - it's time to move on from keeping our language on the life support which (hasn't helped a bit) and let it live naturally.

Interest in History

MysticalRain wrote: »

Our education system is one of the few economic resources this country has, and right now it is not fit for purpose. Far too much time is spent on rote learning, the Irish language, and religion.... Ultimately, Irish needs to be made optional beyond national school level to make way for a more modern curriculum focused more on STEM subjects, and modern languages.

The official allocation of time to English and Irish in primary schools is three and a half hours of Irish to every four hours of English. Nobody seems to know what the actual allocation of time is in practice. What we do know is that large groups of pupils in disdvantaged circumstances leave primary school illiterate. In fact, primary school has been the least productive application of resources in reviving Irish.

If Irish were to be treated as a cultural resource and not as a political symbol, the logical thing to do would be to start it in secondary school, have it a fixed part of the curriculum for two years, and then make it a subject of choice in the Leaving Cert.

yawha

Ms.M wrote: »

I have never met someone who considered French, German or Polish central to their identity as an Irish person. We're talking about Ireland, not Europe.

But you just said that this was about equality, not about identity...

Iwasfrozen

Ms.M wrote: »

Yes I most definitely think it is an equality issue. There are plenty of Irish speakers who are less able to communicate in English. Especially in regards to low frequency words. You may be overestimating the cost of duplicating documents. The documents that are duplicated would be sent to Gaeltacht homes in English but are instead sent in Irish. People's imagination's have got the better of them in this case. It's not very expensive. The amount spent on English "monoglots" far outweights that spent on Irish-speakers even when you take into account the lesser percentage of Irish-speakers. So Irish-speakers pay OVER their fair share for documents produced in English; why shouldn't they be allowed documents in Irish?

And with respect, I don't think your comments are bigoted. (I'm not going to re-read all your posts though!) Some of the arguments made are certainly offensive. I didn't say yours were.

I really don't see how that's a problem there are very few irish speakers who are not able to speak english and we can service them much cheaper on a term by term basis rather then having a whole system of duplication in services set up just for a small minority. This is only placing unecessary economic duress on the ordinary tax payer.

And here we see the logical fallacy of your argument. When money is being wasted, be it by a minority group or a vested interest or any other reason then surely it is the governments duty to stop that waste regardless of how big it is. Saying "It's alright to continue because it's only a small waste" is counter productive. Surely we should try to stop any waste, great or small. I really don't see how you can say irish speakers are compensating the price of english language documents. That's just ridiculous. Especially when you consider the gaeltacht is totally economically dependent on government grants while Dublin, the economic powerhouse of this country is will within the english speaking part of Ireland.

I notice you didn't comment on the David Mitchell video. That's a shame because I wanted to hear your views on it.

conor.hogan.2

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

The purpose of an education system is not to keep a language alive though. In Ireland far too much importance is placed in schools on so-called ''national identity'' and ''cultural heritage''. So why is it just the language? Why not also Irish dancing? or Hurling, or Gaelic football? They're also ''part of our culture'', so why aren't they also compulsory, considering they would also keep kids fit? Times have changed - it's time to move on from keeping our language on the life support which (hasn't helped a bit) and let it live naturally.

It is not keeping it alive. It is teaching it in schools in Ireland.

Just like how we teach other languages in PE with do all sports (Irish ones included)

PE is compulsory pretty much.

Interest in History wrote: »

the logical thing to do ….

… is to do what the vast vast majority of people are in favour of doing and that is continued use of Irish in education along with English, Maths and several other subjects.

languagenerd

MysticalRain wrote: »

A good education system should be about both. Culture is great. But that is of little consequence for an someone on the dole or struggling in a dead end job. You can't really have one without the other.

Our education system is one of the few economic resources this country has, and right now it is not fit for purpose. Far too much time is spent on rote learning, the Irish language, and religion. Not enough time is spent on training people for careers in the more productive areas of the economy. Ultimately, Irish needs to be made optional beyond national school level to make way for a more modern curriculum focused more on STEM subjects, and modern languages.

I know, but I think there's a fine line that we shouldn't cross. If we decided that Irish wasn't worth our money/time, then what other subjects would we cross off the list? It can't all be about jobs and the economy. Schools should be giving students a grounding in a wide range of subjects, teaching them about life and society AND preparing them for work. Learning Irish can teach other skills, like analytical thinking, logic, comparison etc. It also makes learning other languages easier (if it's done right).

Yes, schools should teach the skills necessary for the workforce, but that should be only one of their aims. That said, I think that compulsory Irish is one of the reasons that people seem to hate it so much. Making it optional could change people's opinions of it, as long as it was accompanied by a new curriculum to get rid of the perception that it's difficult!

Carson10

languagenerd wrote: »

I can understand some of your earlier points, but bringing "real jobs" into it? For one thing, there are jobs in Science and IT at the moment but that doesn't mean we should push everyone towards them. In a few years time, we'll end up with too many people looking for jobs in that sector (like there was with teachers and nurses a while ago) and not only that, some of them will be of lesser quality because they never wanted to be scientists in the first place. Plus not everyone is good at science and technology subjects.

Also, people with Irish degrees go on to be translators (at home and in the E.U.) as well as broadcasters, journalists and publishers. Not just teachers!

Anyway, since when is school supposed to be all about jobs? Is providing a well-rounded education not its main priority? We shouldn't start treating the country like a business and the citizens like employees. Why financialize every little part of life?!

My view has nothing to do with financializing anything. Doubt there is much demand for an Irish Gaelic speaking translator anywhere in the world, the only suitation i could think there would be need for an Irish translator would be if there was some organic hippy arressted for prostesting about fracking or somthing and he demand his rights to be read in Irish, just to be different and awkward.

Also i think training kids in Information Technology would massively outway teaching them a pointless subject like Irish. Technology is used in every single job now. Even someone hired to clean an office prob has to be able to use a computer to check emails from their employer. Id say out of every 500'000 kids in Ireland trained in Irish only about 5 would actually get an adult real job.

MysticalRain

languagenerd wrote: »

I know, but I think there's a fine line that we shouldn't cross. If we decided that Irish wasn't worth our money/time, then what other subjects would we cross off the list? It can't all be about jobs and the economy. Schools should be giving students a grounding in a wide range of subjects, teaching them about life and society AND preparing them for work. Learning Irish can teach other skills, like analytical thinking, logic, comparison etc. It also makes learning other languages easier (if it's done right).

Yes, schools should teach the skills necessary for the workforce, but that should be only one of their aims. That said, I think that compulsory Irish is one of the reasons that people seem to hate it so much. Making it optional could change people's opinions of it, as long as it was accompanied by a new curriculum to get rid of the perception that it's difficult!

I don't think anyone is saying here that the Irish language should be erased from the school curriculum. Only that it should be made optional, and less time devoted to it. I would see the subject of Irish as being equivalent to Irish history (which I regard as being far more important in cultural terms). It's one of those subjects people should study for cultural reasons, and there should probably be about the same level of time devoted to both subjects.

Regarding learning Irish to teach other skills, like analytical thinking, logic, comparison etc...I don't really associate languages with teaching those skills, at least not in comparison with science and math. If there is some benefit, then it is a very small one.

It's true that learning one language makes it a lot easier to learn another. The problem with the Irish school curriculum is that is it basically only teaches one language (aside from the native language of English) for most of it, and there lies the problem. Irish is taught at the expense of all other languages. At least up until secondary level, and even at that level, it's compulsory status siphons off time that could be devoted to learning modern European languages.

languagenerd

Carson10 wrote: »

My view has nothing to do with financializing anything.

But to an extent you are financialising school because you're basing your subject choices on the economy. You're entitled to your opinion that Irish is "pointless", but you're mainly basing this decision on its usefulness to the economy, are you not?

Doubt there is much demand for an Irish Gaelic speaking translator anywhere in the world, the only suitation i could think there would be need for an Irish translator would be if there was some organic hippy arressted for prostesting about fracking or somthing and he demand his rights to be read in Irish, just to be different and awkward.

Incorrect: Irish is an official E.U. language (has been since 2007), meaning that the majority of E.U. documents, treaties and laws must be translated into Irish, and there are Irish interpreters at the E.U. Parliament etc.

Also i think training kids in Information Technology would massively outway teaching them a pointless subject like Irish. Technology is used in every single job now. Even someone hired to clean an office prob has to be able to use a computer to check emails from their employer. Id say out of every 500'000 kids in Ireland trained in Irish only about 5 would actually get an adult real job.

Why does it have to be an "either/or" decision? Can they not study both subjects?

I'm currently doing a degree in modern languages and translation. I do not use Irish, Maths, Accounting or Chemistry, all of which I also did at higher level in the LC. I don't use them, but I'm not sorry I learned them! They each taught me different skills, different ways of looking at things, different experiences that I can apply to various situations. Plus at 15 I had no idea what I wanted to do, or even what I was good at. There's a lot to be said for general education! I also learned a bit of I.T. at school (did the MOS exam in TY), and I agree that it has indeed proved useful. But that doesn't mean I would want it to replace another subject. Can we not do both?

Scuid Mhór

how can there be so many debates about this. i'm someone who hated irish (to extremes, wrote posts on blogs about why it should be abolished etc), then i went to the gaeltacht. came back, recognised its cultural importance and how damn great it is. the problem is that it kids aren't taught that it's fun. it should be fun. that's what it comes down to

GaryIrv93

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

It is not keeping it alive. It is teaching it in schools in Ireland.

Just like how we teach other languages in PE with do all sports (Irish ones included)

PE is compulsory pretty much.

… is to do what the vast vast majority of people are in favour of doing and that is continued use of Irish in education along with English, Maths and several other subjects.

Therefore it's reason for teaching is to try to keep it alive.

PE is compulsory, and rightfully so - it takes some of the boredom out of everyday school life for an hour or two and lets in a bit a bit of activity. It makes sure that students aren't sitting on their arses all week. It's beneficial, relieves stress and contributes into keeping kids fit. A lot more emphasis should be placed on it IMO.

No one's saying (at least I'm not) that Irish should be removed from schools completely, but less importance should be placed on it as it's not relevant enough to people's lives to justify it being compulsory. Students, including myself, would like to have a bit more freedom in our own education - it's your education at the end of the day, no one should get to decide for you. That suits everyone - in the case that if I don't want to learn Irish, then I'm not being forced, and I can do a subject that i see more relevant to me, wheras people who do, can do so. I'll follow my own interests and you'll follow yours. Education systems need to be more personality based. Then everyone's happy.

Dammo

Natasha_95 wrote: »

I think it should be made optional in schools. If a persons feels like that chose to learn it then they might be more enthusiastic about learning it. We're forced to learn it from a young age so we develop a strong dislike towards it and we put a mental bloke on learning it.

Or we could import alot of those Americans that are learning it. It's meant to be a very big language over there.. Very popular..

Or we could just let it die out.. it's not that nice of a language anyway (:

There's the problem right there I reckon;)

ViveLaVie

Carson10 wrote: »

My view has nothing to do with financializing anything. Doubt there is much demand for an Irish Gaelic speaking translator anywhere in the world, the only suitation i could think there would be need for an Irish translator would be if there was some organic hippy arressted for prostesting about fracking or somthing and he demand his rights to be read in Irish, just to be different and awkward.

Well you need three languages to work for the E.U. and Irish qualifies as one of those languages. This makes it much easier for Irish people who can speak Irish to get jobs within these structures as they don't have to go off and learn a fourth language. Translators are needed to translate official documents into Irish as it is a requirement under law in Ireland that every official document is recorded in both English and Irish. Learning a language is hugely beneficial and actually increases intelligence, so learning Irish in school is somewhat beneficial regardless of the limited options for using it outside of that.

Jess16 wrote: »

Another thinly veiled teacher bashing thread :rolleyes:

Languages are learned through immersion and retained through use -not the incredibly limited number of hours permitted to teachers by the curriculum that they're supposed to work miracles with.

But hey, don't let that stop you from blaming teachers because you haven't bothered your barney to put in an ounce of effort outside of the 45 minutes a day you chose to sleep through at school and expect to come out fluent.

Taithí a dhéanann máistreacht!

Yeah, but that's true of learning any language. Yet after only six years of being taught the European languages, the majority of students have a firmer grasp and are more competent in French or German than they are in Irish. They're certainly not being immersed in the culture. So why is this? It's because the European languages are taught in a very different manner to Irish. You don't learn off essays that analyse literature by rote with little understanding of what you're actually saying. You are taught to construct your own sentences. You don't waste time being introduced to French literature, as it would be far too advanced. Instead you're taught practical French that you could use in a basic conversation.

desertcircus wrote: »

Good God, there's some ridiculous nonsense being spouted on this thread.

Irish is of heavily limited use; German, French, Spanish, Mandarin and Cantonese would all be better bets in terms of usefulness. Its cultural relevance is incredibly limited - Ulysses, Godot, Father Ted, The Joshua Tree, the work of almost every significant artist of the past hundred years was written in English. It's possible to get an encyclopaedic understanding of Irish culture without knowing any more Irish than what's required to recognise when someone's reciting "an bhfuil cead agam dul go dti an leithreas?". Its connection to Irishness itself is far weaker than Irish history, which is an optional subject at Leaving Cert level. We'd have been better off if the state had decided all those years ago to make it compulsory to learn another European language. Irrespective of the merits of the teaching of Irish, I simply don't see the case for it in the first place.

I assume you're talking about 'Irish' contributions to the arts in the last 100 years when you say that everything significant has been in English? Because otherwise you'd be ignoring oh just you know every other active language and culture in the world! The older variants of modern languages and their literature are still studied in thousands of course all over the world. This is because there is huge cultural significance. Shakespeare is still incredibly culturally relevant to the Western world but he wrote five centuries ago. Should we stop studying him and his works? After all, as you clarified, everything culturally significant was written in English in the last 100 years. That's not really a sound argument for giving up on Irish. My medieval English professor in college often groaned about how many fantastic old Irish legends, tales and myths heavily influenced early and middle English stories but that they weren't studied enough or were lost over time. Irish is one of the oldest languages in Europe and has a wealth of cultural heritage, it's just not exploited often enough. That said, I do think in this day and age, it is more useful to learn a European language. Interesting that you mention Father Ted in the same sentence as Ulysses...

golden lane

if everybody in doing eu business spoke english.......the saving would eliminate the deficits........

and most do at present...wisely!!!!!

of course jobs for boys!!!....a gravy train that just keeps on picking up passengers in first class....

languagenerd

desertcircus wrote: »

Irish is of heavily limited use; German, French, Spanish, Mandarin and Cantonese would all be better bets in terms of usefulness. Its cultural relevance is incredibly limited - Ulysses, Godot, Father Ted, The Joshua Tree, the work of almost every significant artist of the past hundred years was written in English. .

Waiting for Godot was actually written in French, as En Attendant Godot :P. Beckett then translated it to English himself.

Wibbs

Ms.M wrote: »

Ok so. Irish can be reduced to a "cultural hobby"apparently. Lovely.

With some. You may notice I broke the different types up. As the Sesame Street song went "one of these things is not like the other".

I detect no bigotry there.

How in gods name is it bigotry? The usual emotive stuff from the lobby and it makes little sense.

Sure we all hate "that lot." You're Irish, I'm Oirish, thank you for educating me. I guess you're just culturally superior to me.

Wut?

I think this is the jist of most of the arguments on this Wibbs so I don't mean to criticise you personally.

... only paraphrasing the "I hope you don't mind me being honest but.." line of debate. Personally I don't mind if you criticise me, but I prefer people being honest about it.

You referred in another foram to growing up in Dublin and seeing Irish as being for culchies etc.

Again I was referring to part of the image it had.

I grew up in working class Dublin and my experience was similar. Your comments reflect an aspect of Irish culture that I do not like and don't buy into. My culture is just as valid as yours. Accept this or state "I believe my culture is more important than yours". Stop making pseudo-points.

Good god woman, what are you typing? "Pseudo points"? Where did I say one culture was more important. I would respectfully suggest taking off the personal worldview spectacles and reading again.

E O'Cuiv is a native speaker.

O'Cuiv is a plastic Culshie, born and bred in D4 Dublin, so god alone knows where he got his current accent, he's the scion of a powerful faux cultural clan, a cultural and political opportunist who learned well at the feet of his forebears. Forebears who had an unhealthy influence on this nation from it's inception. For me he is the very dictionary definition of a "Gombeen man" and his recent more public pronouncements copperfasten that. This is a man who while claiming to be a democratic agent, rode roughshod over the democratic will of the people of Dingle. Oh and was gung ho for us rejoining the British commonwealth and now he wants to cosy up to Sinn Fein? Eh W.T.F? I'm quite sure they're regarding him with equal and rightful suspicion and hand covered sniggers. IMHO his type should have been run out alongside the cassock and the armalite long ago. He makes Jackie Healy Rae look direct. At least you could see him and his lot coming a mile away. By the by, he's such a native speaker that his very name is linguistically incorrect. Since when did the Irish language have a hard "V"?

Ms.M wrote: »

I hate the term "communal culture". I know it's not yours. It always sounded very Nazi-ish to me. Am I supposed to accept that I'm not really Irish? If so, what the hell am I?

Of course you're Irish, so long as you extend that definition to the rest of us who aren't Irish speakers, or don't feel it to be as culturally important as you might. Too often among your ilk, don't, either subtly or overtly. I am NOT suggesting you do, but it's a common enough meme with too many.

Take the French language from a French person. Take the Spanish language from a Spanish person. Taking the Irish language from an Irish (speaking) person is the exact same thing.

YOu see the fact you had to bracket the "speaking" part shows you're not comparing like with like.

Are you proposing that the entire world should just speak English? Sure wouldn't they be better off?

More emotive stuff, that nobody said.

Enkidu wrote: »

What? I speak Irish because my Granny and Aunt spoke/speak it and I find it really interesting. How is my speaking Irish about "Image". Also could you explain the meaning of the sentence in bold? You could say that sentence about virtually every pair of languages on the planet (and it would still be just as false or true as it is for Irish and English).

+1 I only reserve a WTF for those where it is an image/cultural/political stick to beat others with and there are sadly enough of them.

languagenerd wrote: »

Incorrect: Irish is an official E.U. language (has been since 2007), meaning that the majority of E.U. documents, treaties and laws must be translated into Irish, and there are Irish interpreters at the E.U. Parliament etc.

So what? That's a red herring as an argument. You could make Esperanto, essentially a makey up language an "official language", but it wouldn't make it so. Esperanto has more google hits than Irish, so it might make sense, if you're fond of wearing back to front bebuckled shirts in rubber rooms, but it would be daft. IN the real world, it's official status if hardly an argument. It's an invented cultural pawn and a circular one at that. "Oh it's official, so we need translators that wanted it in the first place, even though few actually read this stuff in english. Double talk masked as culture.

languagenerd

MysticalRain wrote: »

I don't think anyone is saying here that the Irish language should be erased from the school curriculum. Only that it should be made optional, and less time devoted to it. I would see the subject of Irish as being equivalent to Irish history (which I regard as being far more important in cultural terms). It's one of those subjects people should study for cultural reasons, and there should probably be about the same level of time devoted to both subjects.

Regarding learning Irish to teach other skills, like analytical thinking, logic, comparison etc...I don't really associate languages with teaching those skills, at least not in comparison with science and math. If there is some benefit, then it is a very small one.

It's true that learning one language makes it a lot easier to learn another. The problem with the Irish school curriculum is that is it basically only teaches one language (aside from the native language of English) for most of it, and there lies the problem. Irish is taught at the expense of all other languages. At least up until secondary level, and even at that level, it's compulsory status siphons off time that could be devoted to learning modern European languages.

Some people have called for it to be gotten rid of completely. I accept your points and I agree that making it optional might be the way to go. But I don't think any more time is devoted to Irish than any other subjects - we had 5 classes a week in every subject in 6th year (except Maths, where they upped it to 6 a week), and that wasn't enough time to cover the course. Our teacher would hold extra classes in the mornings before school and practice oral exams at lunch time.

I also think it's a pity we don't put more emphasis on European (or even Asian) languages at a younger age. But I think we could actually manage all three, if we changed our ways and did it properly. I have cousins who live in Menorca - they're already bilingual in Catalan and English (because their mother is Irish and their father is Menorquian), but their classmates speak Catalan as their native tongue, start learning Spanish in their third year of primary school (almost all native Catalan speakers on the island have fluent Spanish too) and begin learning English a couple of years later. Three languages, by age 12. It's amazing. And other countries have good models to follow too. I think we should be trying to draw on their experience!

languagenerd

Wibbs wrote: »

So what? That's a red herring as an argument. You could make Esperanto, essentially a makey up language an "official language", but it wouldn't make it so. Esperanto has more google hits than Irish, so it might make sense, if you're fond of wearing back to front bebuckled shirts in rubber rooms, but it would be daft. IN the real world, it's official status if hardly an argument. It's an invented cultural pawn and a circular one at that. "Oh it's official, so we need translators that wanted it in the first place, even though few actually read this stuff in english. Double talk masked as culture.

I was answering a post that claimed that there was no need for Irish translators, so most people studying it don't get jobs in it. I never said it was right that it was an official E.U. language (that's a whole other argument, no?); I was merely pointing out that the E.U. currently hire a large number of Irish-language translators, hence, there are currently some jobs in it and some need for Irish translators.

That wasn't an argument for or against anything - it was responding to a specific, incorrect post.

MysticalRain

languagenerd wrote: »

I also think it's a pity we don't put more emphasis on European (or even Asian) languages at a younger age. But I think we could actually manage all three, if we changed our ways and did it properly. I have cousins who live in Menorca - they're already bilingual in Catalan and English (because their mother is Irish and their father is Menorquian), but their classmates speak Catalan as their native tongue, start learning Spanish in their third year of primary school (almost all native Catalan speakers on the island have fluent Spanish too) and begin learning English a couple of years later. Three languages, by age 12. It's amazing. And other countries have good models to follow too. I think we should be trying to draw on their experience!

It's amazing when you stop to think about it. How in 2012, children at national school level still don't learn a foreign language. A modernisation effort is badly needed, and now has never been a better time to do it.

Some people have called for it to be gotten rid of completely. I accept your points and I agree that making it optional might be the way to go. But I don't think any more time is devoted to Irish than any other subjects - we had 5 classes a week in every subject in 6th year (except Maths, where they upped it to 6 a week), and that wasn't enough time to cover the course. Our teacher would hold extra classes in the mornings before school and practice oral exams at lunch time.

Well the obvious point is that Irish is compulsory up to 6th year, which is shouldn't be. A well rounded education system would make a language compulsory until 6th year, but that language wouldn't have to be Irish.

Don't get me started on national school. We spent up to a third of our time on Irish at the school I attended.