Acht na dTeangachta a obairt

fidero

Dia doibh lads,
Táim ag obair ar cúis beag chun an Acht na dTeangachta a obairt. Bíonn cupla bua agam go dtí seo mar sampla: Gaeilge a taispeáint 1. ag ticker RTPI Údarás Náisiúnta Iompair (agus rudaí eile nua a taispeáint air go dtí seo), 2. fógraí oibreachtaí có-siúil le timpeaill an droichead nua in aice Droichead Uí Chonaill, BÁC, 3. fógraí a raibh ag taispeáint mar comhlacht ag deanamh oibre mar Bord Gáis agus Chomhairle Cathrach Átha Chliath a athrú go dhá teanga agus 4. fógraí eile a athrú mar dhá teanga. An bhfuil suim ag daoine eile cabhair a tabhair dom chun fograí a chaithfidh comhlachtaí poiblí and Údarás a taispeáint mar dhá teanga? Beidh an Acht lán is láidre timpeall Márta 2013. Cuartaigh mé an fhóraim agus níor chonaic mé aon rud faoi duine eile ag deanamh aon rud suimiúil domsa. Beidh mé abalta treoracha píosa a tabhairt ag duine más suim agat nó agaibh.

Ádh Mhór,
Fiachra.

I am currently working on a little cause of my own to put Acht na dTeangachta to work. I have had a few wins up to now for example: getting Gaeilge displayed on 1. the National Transport Authority RTPI ticker (realtime information bus displays) (and other things displayed on it in future), 2. work signage around the new bridge near O'Connell Bridge, Dublin, 3. signage displayed by companies doing work on behalf of Bord Gáis agus Dublin City Council in both languages and 4. other signage also. Does anyone else have an interest in helping me out to get public companies and authorities to display signage in both languages? The Acht will be at fully strength around March 2013. I have searched the forum and haven't seen anyone else do anything similar to me. I will be able to offer some advice on what you or ye need to do.

An Coilean

fidero wrote: »

Dia doibh lads,
Táim ag obair ar cúis beag chun an Acht na dTeangachta a obairt. Bíonn cupla bua agam go dtí seo mar sampla: Gaeilge a taispeáint 1. ag ticker RTPI Údarás Náisiúnta Iompair (agus rudaí eile nua a taispeáint air go dtí seo), 2. fógraí oibreachtaí có-siúil le timpeaill an droichead nua in aice Droichead Uí Chonaill, BÁC, 3. fógraí a raibh ag taispeáint mar comhlacht ag deanamh oibre mar Bord Gáis agus Chomhairle Cathrach Átha Chliath a athrú go dhá teanga agus 4. fógraí eile a athrú mar dhá teanga. An bhfuil suim ag daoine eile cabhair a tabhair dom chun fograí a chaithfidh comhlachtaí poiblí and Údarás a taispeáint mar dhá teanga? Beidh an Acht lán is láidre timpeall Márta 2013. Cuartaigh mé an fhóraim agus níor chonaic mé aon rud faoi duine eile ag deanamh aon rud suimiúil domsa. Beidh mé abalta treoracha píosa a tabhairt ag duine más suim agat nó agaibh.

Ádh Mhór,
Fiachra.

I am currently working on a little cause of my own to put Acht na dTeangachta to work. I have had a few wins up to now for example: getting Gaeilge displayed on 1. the National Transport Authority RTPI ticker (realtime information bus displays) (and other things displayed on it in future), 2. work signage around the new bridge near O'Connell Bridge, Dublin, 3. signage displayed by companies doing work on behalf of Bord Gáis agus Dublin City Council in both languages and 4. other signage also. Does anyone else have an interest in helping me out to get public companies and authorities to display signage in both languages? The Acht will be at fully strength around March 2013. I have searched the forum and haven't seen anyone else do anything similar to me. I will be able to offer some advice on what you or ye need to do.

I would be happy to help out, one thing I would note though is that I have heard people say that because of the current review of the OLA, they are not really in a position to make a plan into the future because the requirements under the act may well be changed at the end of the review process. Untill it is finnished we don't know what will be required under the law into the future.

P. Breathnach

While I am in favour of promoting Irish, I am against forcing it on people. I think much of the effect of Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla has been retrograde: some of the provisions get up people's noses.

If you want to serve the cause of the language, and have lots of energy, I think you might achieve more good by seeking to improve the quality of signage in Irish rather the the quantity.

An Coilean

P. Breathnach wrote: »

While I am in favour of promoting Irish, I am against forcing it on people. I think much of the effect of Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla has been retrograde: some of the provisions get up people's noses.

If you want to serve the cause of the language, and have lots of energy, I think you might achieve more good by seeking to improve the quality of signage in Irish rather the the quantity.

There is no provision in the act to force Irish on anyone, I know this because it was said by Seán Ó Cuirreáin in answer to a question on e-mails to lecturers.

I have no interest in forcing Irish on people, are you suggesting that expecting public bodies to opperate within the law when it comes to the use of the language is the same as forcing the language on people?
I would love to hear your reasoning.
Firstly, who is having Irish forced on them?

I agree that mistakes are all to common, but there are people working on that. Increasing the quantity is a problem that also needs to be looked at.

P. Breathnach

An Coilean wrote: »

... are you suggesting that expecting public bodies to opperate within the law when it comes to the use of the language is the same as forcing the language on people? ...

Yes.

An Coilean

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Yes.

Right, would you care to expand? This is a sentemint I really can't understand.
Who is having Irish forced on them? Please answer this.

P. Breathnach

An Coilean wrote: »

Right, would you care to expand? This is a sentemint I really can't understand.
Who is having Irish forced on them? Please answer this.

I don't feel inclined to get into a lengthy debate when your basic premise is simply different from mine. I'll settle for two instances:
1. Public bodies have an obligation imposed on them to produce documents in both official languages - without regard to the level of demand for versions in Irish;
2. The denizens of many places subject to an order under S33(2) of the Act are being coerced; it's particularly onerous when the place is a popular tourist destination.

From your previous posts, I infer that you do not see this as any kind of forcing of people, so I don't expect that we can have a constructive discussion.

Grudaire

Realistically everyone on this thread has the Irish language at their hearts.

I can definitely understand why an tUasail Breathnach would avoid this type of campaign.

Forcing these organisations to use Irish is a very divisive way of encouraging the Irish Language. While I fully believe that the Irish language should have full equal status and use etc, I am not sure that this sort of campaign is the best way to get more people speaking Irish.

By forcing the use through you may:

piss some people in the organisations off (The guys who now have to do more work to get the job done)

[LIST=2]Cost the system more, giving people a crutch which they can use to bash the language[/LIST]

(I would agree of course that the money should be spent, and the eijits should have thought of this from the start)

In the case of the Real Time Bus info you can see on the thread in the commuting forum that your achievements were not so well received by all..

The biggest issue is that you are making someone else do work, for few(no) people.

In the case of the Tesco campaign by getting several people to send in complaints you show the organisation that there is a real demand for this. In the case of software it's the Irish speaking community doing the work. In these cases goodwill is earned...

P. Breathnach

Cliste wrote: »

Realistically everyone on this thread has the Irish language at their hearts.

Agreed.

I can definitely understand why an tUasail Breathnach would avoid this type of campaign.

Add in the fact that I am lazy!

An Sionnach Glic

P. Breathnach wrote: »

While I am in favour of promoting Irish, I am against forcing it on people. I think much of the effect of Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla has been retrograde: some of the provisions get up people's noses.

All the OLA aspires to do is create genuine bilingualism in the
services provided by the Irish state, as they have had in advanced countries like Canada, Belgium or Switzerland for years, something which has never been provided to any reasonable level by the state in this country (never mind Irish usurping English as the primary language.) There is still a huge section of the state service that hasn't done anything to comply with that Act, and despite some improvements, large sections of the state apparatus are still not under any legal obligation to deal with you in Irish, due to their not having ratified a language scheme under the Act. How we can promote Irish and considerate it acceptable that large sections of the state refuse to deal with citizens in Irish is beyond me.

One of the oldest chestnuts is the criticism of the amount spent on translation within government departments. The Deparment of Social Welfare, for instance, which is one of the biggest departments, spent 0.0006% of it budget on translation and Irish-language services (yes, less than 1%). If someone thinks that excessive, I'm sorry, you cannot claim to be pro-Irish language. It's laughably small. That above percentage was given in reply to a Dáil question asked by John Deasy TD, a man who repeatedly likes to make out that this Act is going to backrupt the country with the money spent on translation and Irish-language services.

http://www.gaelport.com/nuacht?NewsItemID=8377

There was also a claim a few years ago about Clare County Council spending €30,000 on the Irish translation of an report, which wasn't even true, but people presumed the worst based on a story cooked up by a journalist with an axe to grind. As Mark Twain once said, "there's lies, damn lies and statistics". The Language Commissioner clarified that it was balderdash, but it's amazing how quickly we are to believe what we read and hear without question, without examining the motives of the messenger. For more details, see at the link below under the subtitle 'Myth'.

http://www.gaelport.com/default.aspx?treeid=37&NewsItemID=5829

The plain fact is that some people's idea of "forcing Irish down our throats", is the margin visual presence or use of the language in their vicinity in any shape or form, or expenditure of any kind on it's promotion or normalisation in Irish public life.
Some people (thankfully a minority) in this country are offended by even the idea of bilingualism in which both Irish and English are on an equal footing and those people greatly resent the OLA and would love to dismantle it. Yes, it does get up their noses, because a lot of them are anti-Irish language commentators who resent every penny spent on the language! The same people who bitched that TnaG/TG4 was a waste of money when it was set up in 1996. How many people moan about that now, something which was/is a hell of a lot more expensive that translating some documents, signs and website to Irish.

If we're going to pander to those people, we might as well just shut up shop now and declare the language dead and the fact that the Irish state that was established to foster and nourish that language was the final and most guilty accomplice in its demise, with our consent.

I've never understood the determination of some no doubt well-meaning people to pander to bigots. You'd swear English speakers were a threatened minority who were being locked up in labour camps and harrassed in the street by the secret police to listen to some people in this country.

"Oh no, the Irish on this sign is the same size as the English and I have to flip this document over to read the English version!"

An Sionnach Glic

Can I also ask, do some people here actually think that getting a civil servant who is paid a full wage with benefits by the state to do his/her work to implement the laws of that state, is "forcing" them to use Irish? If so, I genuinely give up!
Maybe we should ask these guys whether they'd like to work for 20 minutes a day as well. I mean, we don't want to be "forcing" them to do a full day's work or ramming work down their throats, do we?! God knows the public service is renowned for its work ethic and efficiency as it is.

Grudaire

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

...

I'm torn by the OLA, on one hand I agree fully with everything you have said.

On the other hand I seriously get the feeling that it's not going to help the language. Will a campaign by a small few people getting signs that aren't used translated actually benefit the language? I can honestly say as a Dublin Bus user that I'll be too busy reading to pay attention to the stop announcements. And any work signage is either ignored or at best I'll look at the pictures if they're warning signs.

A large issue with it is that people don't actually use these things in English or Irish.

I would be very cautious if I was running a campaign like this that I would aim to get the organisations on bord (instead of jumping to acqusations and the commissioner), and I would try get a base of people who would join in the effort.
Think of how the boards.ie auto emailler was used to question SOPA by making it easy to ask our representitives questions.

Ba chóir go mbeidh dhualgais aistriú nuair atá éileamh ar an áis. Agus níos mó séibhísí le fáil as Gaeilge seachas rudaí nach núsáidfear a chuir ar fáil.

Grudaire

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

Can I also ask, do some people here actually think that getting a civil servant who is paid a full wage with benefits by the state to do his/her work to implement the laws of that state, is "forcing" them to use Irish? If so, I genuinely give up!
Maybe we should ask these guys whether they'd like to work for 20 minutes a day as well. I mean, we don't want to be "forcing" them to do a full day's work or ramming work down their throats, do we?! God knows the public service is renowned for its work ethic and efficiency as it is.

It's this kind of attitude that I would distance myself from in particular. Not that I disagree with the overall argument.

The tone is far too accusitiory. In the words of U2 "It gets my back up against the wall"

At the end of the day public servents are not out to get the Irish language. It's not their priority. Many people work harder than you or I, so lets not get too general with generalisations that can only turn more people against the Irish Language!

An Sionnach Glic

Cliste wrote: »

It's this kind of attitude that I would distance myself from in particular. Not that I disagree with the overall argument.

The tone is far too accusitiory. In the words of U2 "It gets my back up against the wall"

At the end of the day public servents are not out to get the Irish language. It's not their priority. Many people work harder than you or I, so lets not get too general with generalisations that can only turn more people against the Irish Language!

I'm not attacking civil servants. I'm satirising the logic that getting them to do the job they're paid to do is "forcing" them to do something they don't want to do. (By the way, the Act doesn't force anyone in the civil service to learn Irish or to use it, just that they source people who can speak/write Irish already within the civil service and utilise them to provide services in that language, and some departments provide classes to staff who wish to improve their Irish in order to provide these services and it is purely voluntary). Such as Gaelchultúr's classes here: http://www.gaelchultur.com/en/newsletters/NewsletterArticle.aspx?id=251

I think it's time to accept that there are a (noisy) minority of people in this country who will always have a problem with anything to promote Irish. Don't think you can convince them all, because you can't.

The goodwill is already there amongst the Irish people (The OLA was passed unanimously by the Dáil in 2003 and Mac Gréil's study of the attitudes of Irish people to Irish in the 2000s found over 90% of the population positively inclined towards the language). Now it has to be harnessed and as I said already, if we're scared of offending some cranks by putting up some signs, making bilingual announcements etc. we're wasting our time and might as well just admit defeat right now. We've had lip-service and pussy-footing for over 80 years and it's gotten the language nowhere. It's funny how we don't feel bad about forcing our language on the EU since it became an official language. Maybe that's because multi-lingualism is second nature to continental Europeans and they wonder why the hell we didn't ask for it to be an official language over fourty years ago when we joined the EEC. Why we need to aplogise to Irish people for using it is beyond me.

Here's a link to a summary of Mac Gréil's study on Irish people's attitudes to the Irish language. http://www.gaelport.com/default.aspx?treeid=37&NewsItemID=1995

Grudaire

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

I'm not attacking civil servants. I'm satirising the logic that getting them to do the job they're paid to do is "forcing" them to do something they don't want to do.

Subtle distinction, something that i not going to help after you've pissed some people off!

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

The good will is already there amongst the Irish people (The OLA was passed unanimously by the Dáil in 2003 and Mac Gréil's study of the attitudes of Irish people to Irish in the 2000s found over 90% of the population positively inclined towards the language). Now it has to be harnessed and as I said already, if we're scared of offending some cranks by putting up some signs, making bilingual announcements etc. we're wasting our time and might as well just admit defeat right now. We've had lip-service and pussy-footing for over 80 years and it's gotten the language nowhere.

I would be scared about annoying the 90% personally.

The noisy minority feed on stuff like this. What I'm saying is don't give them anything to use against the language.

And if you think that the translation of every random document that the state produces is anything but lip-service you are mistaken. Where is the real progress in that?

An Sionnach Glic

Cliste wrote: »

And if you think that the translation of every random document that the state produces is anything but lip-service you are mistaken. Where is the real progress in that?

It's not "every random document" and well you know it. If you read the specifics, the number of documents to be translated is very small and I'm surprised that you'd swallow that one, to be quite honest. It's one of the hoariest lies of the nay-sayers. I remember there being claims by the nay-sayers when the act was passed that ever single document within civil servant offices would be translated into Irish, even internal memos. Jesus wept!

Do you think it's lip-service to the language that I now feel confident that I can call or email certain state agencies that I deal with regularly and be confident that I will receive a reply in Irish or that documents/forms will be provided to me in Irish, where once the posibility of that was between slim and none? If that's lip-service, I'd like some more please!

Grudaire

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

It's not "every random document" and well you know it. If you read the specifics, the number of documents to be translated is very small and I'm surprised that you'd swallow that one, to be quite honest. It's one of the hoariest lies of the nay-sayers. I remember there being claims by the nay-sayers when the act was passed that ever single document within civil servant offices would be translated into Irish, even internal memos. Jesus wept!

How many annual reports have you read lately? Half these documents aren't read in English either. But pretending there is a market for everything that is produced and translated is patently wrong.

If you can't accept that the OLA is flawed then you have a blinkered opinion when it comes to the language.

I'm just trying to say that people can achieve more benefit to the language in different ways, and that certain tactics cause more trouble than benefit.

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

Do you think it's lip-service to the language that I now feel confident that I can call or email certain state agencies that I deal with regularly and be confident that I will receive a reply in Irish or that documents/forms will be provided to me in Irish, where once the posibility of that was between slim and none? If that's lip-service, I'd like some more please!

You should note that we are on the same side here...

At no point did I say that!

An Sionnach Glic

Cliste wrote: »

If you can't accept that the OLA is flawed then you have a blinkered opinion when it comes to the language.

I do think it's flawed; it's not strong enough! You forget also that much of how the Act is implemented is down to decisions made in individual departments (individual intepretation of the law is everything).
If they were to reduce the amount of stuff published in both languages, such as annual reports, I wouldn't mind at all, but you have to admit that this issue only became a problem for the nay-sayers when it was published in Irish, not when it was published in English alone ( I don't remember anyone claiming that publishing these documents in English was a waste before this, but the arguments against the "waste" on Irish-language version started as soon as the Act was passed. There wasn't a peep out of them when they were publishing documents people supposedly don't read in English.
I'm all for cutting waste, but it's interesting how these documents only become a waste problem when they're published in Irish and that's because the argument is often based on hypocrisy. To many of these people, anything spent on Irish is a "waste", but the cover of "efficiency" and "cost-cutting" are handy facades for attacking the Irish language and any money spent on it.

Cliste wrote: »

At no point did I say that!

I'd didn't claim you said anything. I asked you a question. Read the post again.

Cliste wrote: »

You should note that we are on the same side here...

I do. Does that mean we can't disagree? Have I been insulting to you in any way? Don't confuse strong disagreement for rudeness.

Grudaire

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

I do think it's flawed; it's not strong enough! You forget also that much of how the Act is implemented is down to decisions made in individual departments (individual intepretation of the law is everything).
If they were to reduce the amount of stuff published in both languages, such as annual reports, I wouldn't mind at all, but you have to admit that this issue only became a problem for the nay-sayers when it was published in Irish, not when it was published in English alone ( I don't remember anyone claiming that publishing these documents in English was a waste before this, but the arguments against the "waste" on Irish-language version started as soon as the Act was passed. There wasn't a peep out of them when they were publishing documents people supposedly don't read in English.
I'm all for cutting waste, but it's interesting how these documents only become a waste problem when they're published in Irish and that's because the argument is often based on hypocrisy. To many of these people, anything spent on Irish is a "waste", but the cover of "efficiency" and "cost-cutting" are handy facades for attacking the Irish language and any money spent on it.

Two wrongs don't make a right. And I don't think that focusing on trivial signage in Dublin is going to do anything for the language.
It's ceart agus cóir that it would be bilingual, but it's actually an issue that actually affects Irish Speakers, and it won't promote Irish either.

Trust me in saying that I have and will make the same arguments to people outside this forum, but as Irish enthusiasts I do think that the language can be promoted better.

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

I'd didn't claim you said anything. I asked you a question. Read the post again.

I do. Does that mean we can't disagree? Have I been insulting to you in any way? Don't confuse strong disagreement for rudeness.

To me the question is completely seperate to what I'm saying, and my answer should be obvious as a Gaelgeoir.
But I feel it's the equivalent of me saying "I think beating kids is bad and it's great that people are no longer allowed - what do you think?" Utterly retorical question on a quite seperate topic.

An Sionnach Glic

Cliste wrote: »

Two wrongs don't make a right. And I don't think that focusing on trivial signage in Dublin is going to do anything for the language.
It's ceart agus cóir that it would be bilingual, but it's actually an issue that actually affects Irish Speakers, and it won't promote Irish either.

Trust me in saying that I have and will make the same arguments to people outside this forum, but as Irish enthusiasts I do think that the language can be promoted better.

I don't think anyone is trying to claim that bus signage in Dublin is going to be a make or break issue for the language, but that doesn't mean that it should be ignored or that Dublin Bus should be allowed to pick and choose how they implement their mandate to serving the public throughout their company (be it due to indifference or lack of foresight or anything else).

Inconsistency and lack of overall language planning throughout this country is what has choked the viability of the language since the foundation of the state and sloppy implementation by state bodies of their mandate is a problem, whether it's bus signs, or Gardaí in the Gaeltacht who can't even speak Irish, or anything else. Many tiny raindrops make a mighty river.

I hope you're not basing your whole impression of dissatifaction with the bilingual signs on Dublin buses just on opinions you've read on boards.ie This place is full of cranks and loolas (and I include myself in that description, though I don't try to represent myself as public opinion on the internet, as some do) and is not representative of the general opinions of the public.
I don't think most people in Dublin even noticed that the signs were now bilingual. The ones who did and who had a chip on their shoulder about it, already had a chip on their shoulder about Irish anyway. Again, getting back to my point that you have to realise that some people will be offended by all efforts to promote Irish and you're better off realising that and acting accordingly. Stopping documents being translated under the OLA tomorrow will not suddenly make these people pro-Irish and so it's pointless to be hand-wringing over them.

Cliste wrote: »

To me the question is completely seperate to what I'm saying, and my answer should be obvious as a Gaelgeoir.
But I feel it's the equivalent of me saying "I think beating kids is bad and it's great that people are no longer allowed - what do you think?" Utterly retorical question on a quite seperate topic.

Actually, I was just trying to find out the specifics of what parts of the Act you think are good and what parts are bad (and I cited examples of its implementation)? Is it just the translation of documents and bilingual electronic bus signage that bothers you? (I'm asking a genuine question).

An Coilean

Cliste wrote: »

I'm torn by the OLA, on one hand I agree fully with everything you have said.

On the other hand I seriously get the feeling that it's not going to help the language. Will a campaign by a small few people getting signs that aren't used translated actually benefit the language?

I would take issue with this, what is aimed for is a bilingual country. Go to any bilingual country, you will see that the signage is bilingual. Its a small issue and a routine procedure in those countries that signage is bilingual, nobody bats an eyelid about it.
To put it in more specific terms, existing bilingual countries have bilingual physical infastructure, signage is bilingual, announcements are bilingual, things like atms are bilingual.
It may be seen as a small issue, but the creation of a bilingual enviroment is a necessary foundation for a bilingual society to emerge. It should not be ignored, especially when the tools to make progress are readly available.

I would be very cautious if I was running a campaign like this that I would aim to get the organisations on bord (instead of jumping to acqusations and the commissioner), and I would try get a base of people who would join in the effort.

I think the need for caution is vastly exagerated to be honnest, there are people for whom the very existance of the language is offencive, worrying about getting up their noses is not only pointless, but counter productive.

Personally I would be of the mind that if someone has a problem with the concept of signage being bilingual, worrying about what they think of any campaign to promote the language is unlikely to be fruitfull, regardless of what it is, they will oppose it.


It is a valid concern that those who may not have a problem with the language per sé, might be put out by the way someone goes about a campaign.
At this point however we have already come to the conclusion that such a campaign is acceptable, so with this in mind we must consider what kind of a campaign it is to be.

The need for caution here can be exagerated. If the Welsh Language Society has shown anything it is that no matter how excessive and often simply rude you are, it does not mean you can't get what you want if you apply enough pressure.

I personally would not propose a campaign along the lines of what the Welsh language Society has done, and continues to do, but their success time and again does suggest that a strong campaign will bring results.

Personally I would suggest that any campaign should seek to pressurise public bodies to fullfill their obligations under the act, it should be carried out politely, and should not be unrealistic in its demands, specifically while it might be tempting to try to force a public body to fulfill all its obligations under the act in the short term, it may be better to seek a compromise where the body improves its performance in some areas over the medium term. These are in my opinion the two options available to the language movement, I don't think doing nothing is an option if the language is to secure its future.
I think it must be bourn in mind that the civil service as an institution is bound by inertia, and trying to get something done, no matter how reasonable or insignificant is going to be met with resistance, this is not a reason not to try, it just means you have to push harder.

An Sionnach Glic

Coilean, I would certainly agree that Irish speakers are far too polite and passive in seeking to acquire basic language rights from a state that supposedly had their interests as one of its founding principles.
But unwillingness to complain or to call the powers that be to task when they mess up is a large problem in this country, amongst English speakers as much as anyone and it's half the reason we have so much of the "Sure it'll be grand!" attitude in how the country operates.

An Coilean

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

Coilean, I would certainly agree that Irish speakers are far too polite and passive in seeking to acquire basic language rights from a state that supposedly had their interests as one of its founding principles.
But unwillingness to complain or to call the powers that be to task when they mess up is a large problem in this country, amongst English speakers as much as anyone and it's half the reason we have so much of the "Sure it'll be grand!" attitude in how the country operates.

I think its a lack of self confidence, people don't want to speak up for their language rights for fear of being ridiculed and shouted down.
What is needed is a group of people who are not worried what others think to go and campaign for these services.
I think the Facebook group '5 nóiméad ar son na Gaeilge' is a great idea, but I would like to see small groups on the ground with the same mentality take on those issues in their own area in person.

Grudaire

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

I hope you're not basing your whole impression of dissatifaction with the bilingual signs on Dublin buses just on opinions you've read on boards.ie

Have you never met anyone who has had a bad experience with someone demanding their right to use the Irish language?



And Coilean I disagree about the soft approach to pushing the agenda. If every single step to bilingualism needs to be forced through then we're not making real progress. What we will get is exactly what the legislation demands and no more.

What I would like to see is a campaign that gets these organisations to buy into the Irish language cause. So that they will actively encourage the language within the organisation, and improve their own provision of the services.

I agree with the target of what you all want to achieve, I just think the method could be done better.

An Coilean

Cliste wrote: »

Have you never met anyone who has had a bad experience with someone demanding their right to use the Irish language?

No, but what that bad experiance is needs to be looked at, If someone has been obnoxious and insulting in demanding their rights, then that is a problem and does more harm than good, if however they simply demanded their rights firmly but polietly, and thae person who had the bad experiance was in fact put out by someone not simply backing down and using English, then I can not accept that this is something we can seriously consider accomodating if we want to promote the language.

And Coilean I disagree about the soft approach to pushing the agenda. If every single step to bilingualism needs to be forced through then we're not making real progress. What we will get is exactly what the legislation demands and no more.

The Welsh Language Society have taken the forceful approch (To an extreme) and they have done quite well out of it.

The simple fact of the matter is that currently no 'real' progress is being made, if it takes something being forced through for it to happen, then that is better than nothing, regardless of weather some would consider it 'real progress' or not.

What I would like to see is a campaign that gets these organisations to buy into the Irish language cause. So that they will actively encourage the language within the organisation, and improve their own provision of the services.

Thats all well and good, and any campaign worth its salt would seek a co-operative aproach first, but this will not always work, and when it does'nt, you don't simply give up, you adopt firmer measures.

Grudaire

An Coilean wrote: »

No, but what that bad experiance is needs to be looked at, If someone has been obnoxious and insulting in demanding their rights, then that is a problem and does more harm than good, if however they simply demanded their rights firmly but polietly, and thae person who had the bad experiance was in fact put out by someone not simply backing down and using English, then I can not accept that this is something we can seriously consider accomodating if we want to promote the language.

I think we're just saying the same thing at each other!

I fully agree that people should be allowed to demand their rights politely but firmly. In reality however I get the feeling that many people in demanding their rights are more on the obnoxious side. (With a few muppets being insulting, but that's the exeption). That's my experience from people I know.

An Coilean wrote: »

The simple fact of the matter is that currently no 'real' progress is being made, if it takes something being forced through for it to happen, then that is better than nothing, regardless of weather some would consider it 'real progress' or not.

We should probably start in this thread for a bit of bilinguaism tbh!

An fhaca tú 'an Gaeilgeoir Nocht'? Tá an saghas meon fíréigneach sin luaithe thús!

An Coilean wrote: »

Thats all well and good, and any campaign worth its salt would seek a co-operative aproach first, but this will not always work, and when it does'nt, you don't simply give up, you adopt firmer measures.

I agree, if you take a soft but firm approach they will either yield or trip themselves up by refusing.
I think that many people who take it upon themselves to get their rights may jump to firmer measures however.

An Coilean

Cliste wrote: »

I think we're just saying the same thing at each other!

I fully agree that people should be allowed to demand their rights politely but firmly. In reality however I get the feeling that many people in demanding their rights are more on the obnoxious side. (With a few muppets being insulting, but that's the exeption). That's my experience from people I know.

That depends on the people in question, being obnoxious does'nt help, but there are people would would consider people who politely but firmely demand to excercise their language rights to be obnoxious simply for using Irish and expecting to be accomodated in doing so.

I don't know the people you have dealt with, but concern for steping on peoples toes can be over emphisesed.

We should probably start in this thread for a bit of bilinguaism tbh!

An fhaca tú 'an Gaeilgeoir Nocht'? Tá an saghas meon fíréigneach sin luaithe
thús!

Chonaic, ach níl aon duine ag caint faoi daoine a mharú nó áiteanna a dó go talamh.

I agree, if you take a soft but firm approach they will either yield or trip themselves up by refusing.
I think that many people who take it upon themselves to get their rights may jump to firmer measures however.

When the legislative imperative is there to provide these things, it often seems convienient to simply make an official complaint to An Comisinéir, but there is not much more an individual can do, that it the official structure that has been put in place to deal with these issues. Its the same structure that is in operation across the rest of the public service, if you have a problem that is non-Irish Language related, you make a complaint to the Ombudsman, no one expects people to work on their own behalf with the organisation in question to seek a compromise in those cases, they just make a complaint to the ombudsman, no one villifies the complainent as being obnoxious or excessive in non-Irish Language cases, I don't see why Irish Language cases should be treated any differently.

However, I take your point that in the context of a campaign to expand the availability of these services it is preferable to seek a co-operative relationship first, and a group of individuals acting as part of a wider campaign would have greater scope to seek co-operation with the organisation in question, but if that approch is rejected, then stronger measures are needed.

Grudaire

An Coilean wrote: »

Chonaic, ach níl aon duine ag caint faoi daoine a mharú nó áiteanna a dó go talamh.

Nach bhfuil sé sin atá i gceist agat le haigh na 'stronger measures' ? :P

An Coilean wrote: »

However, I take your point that in the context of a campaign to expand the availability of these services it is preferable to seek a co-operative relationship first, and a group of individuals acting as part of a wider campaign would have greater scope to seek co-operation with the organisation in question, but if that approch is rejected, then stronger measures are needed.

I think we're on the same page overall really, but I would just be more cautious in how I approached it all.

Best of luck to anyone who gets involved with a campaign like this, let us know how it goes - although I'm sure we'll see the benefits around!

An Coilean

Cliste wrote: »

Nach bhfuil sé sin atá i gceist agat le haigh na 'stronger measures' ? :P

Sshhhh, Court Cases Pending :pac:

I think we're on the same page overall really, but I would just be more cautious in how I approached it all.

Best of luck to anyone who gets involved with a campaign like this, let us know how it goes - although I'm sure we'll see the benefits around!

Unfortunatly there is not much like this going on at the moment except at an individual level.

Grudaire

An Coilean wrote: »

Sshhhh, Court Cases Pending :pac:

Unfortunatly there is not much like this going on at the moment except at an individual level.

Haha,

Well I suppose everything needs someone to organise it!

An Coilean

Cliste wrote: »

Haha,

Well I suppose everything needs someone to organise it!

As it happens, It seems something is hapening after all. Though it seems it is more at the radical end of the scale (Not necessarly a bad thing imo)


http://www.facebook.com/#!/misneach2012

One concern I would have is that they seem to be taking a political left wing stance, I would prefer something like this to be apolitical.