The Irish language is failing.

Shep_Dog

AnLonDubh wrote: »

Hyde didn't want to reinstate Irish,

Yet he founded Conradh na Gaeilge, a body whose main aim is exactly that.

Can you explain the contradiction?

As for his criticism of people's choice of reading, you're being pedantic to suggest that he would not disapprove of popular taste. What would he make of all the Man U fans in Ireland?

Dughorm

Shep_Dog wrote: »

I am not at all surprised to hear that Irish speakers are dishing out abuse.

Do you feel that Irish speakers dish out more abuse than the population at large?

dr.fuzzenstein

Dughorm wrote: »

Do you feel that Irish speakers dish out more abuse than the population at large?

If they did I wouldn't even know it!

feargale

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

If they did I wouldn't even know it!

There is no greater ignorance than pride in one's ignorance.

AnLonDubh

Shep_Dog wrote: »

Yet he founded Conradh na Gaeilge, a body whose main aim is exactly that.

Can you explain the contradiction?

Conradh na Gaeilge was reformed under Piaras Béaslaí and Eoin Mac Néill, who altered the aim of the organisation. The original founding charter under Hyde does not have reinstating Irish as the main language as one of its aims. Hyde in fact left Conradh na Gaeilge for reasons like this. It is possible for an organisations principles to change from those of its founding members, this is not some sort of logical contradiction.

This is what I never really understand on these threads. Even a cursory glance at Hyde's writings will show that you are wrong. Hyde being some sort of super-Gaelic nationalist is not even necessary for your main point, but you cannot concede being incorrect on even a minor fact, as it is necessary for the "other side" to always be wrong. (Although I'm not the other side, my opinions would be close to The Corinthian's).

Shep_Dog wrote: »

As for his criticism of people's choice of reading, you're being pedantic to suggest that he would not disapprove of popular taste. What would he make of all the Man U fans in Ireland?

No that's not what I am saying or suggesting. I know Hyde wouldn't have liked those things. Hyde wouldn't have liked Man Utd supporters, but he also wouldn't have liked the Wolfe tones. What I am saying is that it is meaningless to project current political issues back onto a man from the late-19th century. Hyde's ideal was a sort of socially aware moderate Christian who partook in mid-19th century Anglo-Irish or Gaelic culture. He was not some sort of anti-English bigot (he saw himself as English to some degree) or super-Gaelic nationalist. The absence of cricket from Irish society would have upset Hyde as well.

dr.fuzzenstein

feargale wrote: »

There is no greater ignorance than pride in one's ignorance.

Well, do you know if Germans swear more? :rolleyes:
Ich werde jetzt kein verficktes scheiss Irish lernen nur wegen den scheissdreck verdammten Schimpfwoertern!

kieranfitz

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Only all of them.

Must be a local to you thing.

Dan_Solo

feargale wrote: »

There is no greater ignorance than pride in one's ignorance.

You must feel pretty ignorant yourself then as there's 6,500 or so other languages out there you can't speak.

feargale

Dan_Solo wrote: »

You must feel pretty ignorant yourself then as there's 6,500 or so other languages out there you can't speak.

Typical of your schoolboy debating style, you miss the point. I did not equate inability to speak a language with ignorance. I equated pride in one's inability with ignorance. But don't let accuracy get in the way of scoring a puerile point.

Letree

The Irish language is failing? No.. the Irish language has failed.

Filmer Paradise

Letree wrote: »

The Irish language is failing? No.. the Irish language has failed.

No it hasn't. It's just a language like any other.

Not many speak it now mind!

It's cheerleaders have failed though. Too busy sucking at the teat to notice how much damage they've done to their 'cause'.

As long as they lie flat on their backs & let the gravy flow into their gullets, they're happy. (Govt policy has given these types free reign for many decades after all) Therefore explains the lifelong sense of entitlement that the average Galegore has.

Nose in the though like pigs for 90 years & long it may continue!

And that's all that matters to them. Fook everyone else!

Dig deep into your pockets folks & support a good cause.

Just like you've always done.

Keep your money coming to them. Gwan, keep them on their Hobbyhorse.

You know it makes sense....

GekkePrutser

Banjoxed wrote: »

Think the problems that the Irish language have are too deep seated for it to matter a damn who the minister is. Generations of us under all governments were taught the language badly and left school with no love for what was an obligation.

I think you're on to something there. Obligation of classes not necessary in regular life does not create affection but resentment.

I'm not Irish and I didn't grow up here, but in Holland I was obliged to do Dutch literature as part of secondary school. I'm a real techy/science person and while my Dutch grammar and spelling are excellent (I got a 9 out of 10 at my final exam), I didn't care for the quasi-psychological mumbo-jumbo that comes with the "high-class" literature exam. In fact I couldn't make heads or tails of it, it's just not my thing and I badly failed that exam (luckily the above score dragged my average up to a pass). Just because I did not see the same 'meaning' in these books as the Dutch intellectual community thought I should. I hated being forced to do it because I would never need these skills in my life anyway.

So, I vowed never to read Dutch literature anymore. I might read magazines and simple fiction books but never the highly-praised literal works. And I never will again.

So there you have it, if I had not been forced to do it, I may have read some of these works on my own and enjoyed them. Now I will never get the chance.

I imagine that the Irish situation is very similar. Whenever I asked Irish people about it I get answers like '12 years of misery'.. Clearly this 'forced love' approach is not working.

I personally think that pulling back this requirement from schools (and some public jobs) will actually make people like the Irish language more.

Shep_Dog

AnLonDubh wrote: »

Conradh na Gaeilge was reformed under Piaras Béaslaí and Eoin Mac Néill, who altered the aim of the organisation. The original founding charter under Hyde does not have reinstating Irish as the main language as one of its aims. Hyde in fact left Conradh na Gaeilge for reasons like this.

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I think we can agree that Hyde would disapprove of the continued existence of Conradh and the failure to de-Anglicise Ireland?

Shep_Dog

Dughorm wrote: »

Do you feel that Irish speakers dish out more abuse than the population at large?

How would one measure that?

But, it is concerning if they are using state funded media to foment this abuse and are not being held accountable for it as, being in Irish, the content might escape objective scrutiny.

Dan_Solo

feargale wrote: »

Typical of your schoolboy debating style, you miss the point. I did not equate inability to speak a language with ignorance. I equated pride in one's inability with ignorance. But don't let accuracy get in the way of scoring a puerile point.

And you equate not giving a **** about something that makes no difference whatsoever to 99% of the population's lives, other than being a pain in the hole, as pride.
So I did score a point after all? If you insist. Anyway, you must love things that you think are puerile, seeing as your beloved language is only really spoken by children.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Anyway, you must love things that you think are puerile, seeing as your beloved language is only really spoken by children.

I thought it was dead because it was only spoken by old people?

So perhaps a young generation of Irish speakers who "really" speak the language will bring a new vigour and energy to the language then?

Dughorm

Shep_Dog wrote: »

How would one measure that?

But, it is concerning if they are using state funded media to foment this abuse and are not being held accountable for it as, being in Irish, the content might escape objective scrutiny.

That would be up to you. But I think without some measure of whether Irish speakers deliver more "abuse", perhaps you shouldn't place such a focus on Irish speakers' "abuse" any more than that of the population as a whole.

5W30

It's not used at all in every day life but I'd say it's far from dying. At the end of the day kids are still being taught how to speak Irish in school so it probably will not die.

Rather than just moaning about whether it is dead or not, how about a bit of positivity and look at ways to support learners.

One thing that would help people to learn the language quite cheaply would be to use one of the "spare" saorview channels for broadcasting back to back Irish lessons, they can simply reuse the older RTE produced material at zero cost.


*each Mux had 8 channels, and all are itransmitted whether there is anything to send or otherwise

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

I thought it was dead because it was only spoken by old people?

So perhaps a young generation of Irish speakers who "really" speak the language will bring a new vigour and energy to the language then?

Another misquote. Quelle surprise.
The only people who want to speak it are old people, and not that many of those either. You seem to have a rather confused take on the meanings of the words "frequency" and "popularity".

feargale

Dan_Solo wrote: »

And you equate not giving a **** about something that makes no difference whatsoever to 99% of the population's lives, other than being a pain in the hole, as pride.

Given the quality of your vocabulary here, perhaps, rather than being obsessed with Irish, you should concentrate on the other official language of the state. In any event, it can't be good for you to devote so much of your thinking to something you hate so much, even if you enjoy that sort of thing.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

So I did score several puerile points after all. If you insist.

FYP. Yes, I insist.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Anyway, you must love things that you think are puerile, seeing as your beloved language is only really spoken by children.

The level of aggression shown by you here would befit a ten year old, or an adult of similar stature.

Reiver

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Another misquote. Quelle surprise.
The only people who want to speak it are old people, and not that many of those either. You seem to have a rather confused take on the meanings of the words "frequency" and "popularity".

And there was me at 22 thinking I was young. :eek:

Ah well next is the pension.

eviltwin

I never speak it because I never had a need to speak it and now I've forgotten it. I did French and Spanish in school and get a real pleasure out of those, maybe it's something to do with having chosen them myself. I just don't have any affection for irish. It's as relevant to me as Latin or finnish...just not a language I'd ever have any use for.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Another misquote. Quelle surprise.
The only people who want to speak it are old people, and not that many of those either. You seem to have a rather confused take on the meanings of the words "frequency" and "popularity".

You said "our beloved language is only really spoken by children" and I noted your error. No misquote there. Of course people of all ages speak the language!

And what is your evidence that "the only people who want to speak it are old people"? I'm not in that bracket yet I want to speak it....

Put away your broom and sweeping statements!

Dughorm

eviltwin wrote: »

I never speak it because I never had a need to speak it and now I've forgotten it. I did French and Spanish in school and get a real pleasure out of those, maybe it's something to do with having chosen them myself. I just don't have any affection for irish. It's as relevant to me as Latin or finnish...just not a language I'd ever have any use for.

This is such a reasonable answer. A language is such a personal choice, you enjoy French and Spanish, as do I, but I never had any time for German, it just was not a language that I liked, but of course I don't diss Germans or their lovely language, it just wasn't for me.

feargale

Reiver wrote: »

And there was me at 22 thinking I was young. :eek:

Ah well next is the pension.

dr.fuzzenstein

Reiver wrote: »

And there was me at 22 thinking I was young. :eek:

Ah well next is the pension.

I tried that already, the bastards wouldn't let me retire at 40, something about not being old enough. Frankly I think that's ageist, I'm considering bringing a case before the European court of human rights.

Dan_Solo

feargale wrote: »

Given the quality of your vocabulary here, perhaps, rather than being obsessed with Irish, you should concentrate on the other official language of the state. In any event, it can't be good for you to devote so much of your thinking to something you hate so much, even if you enjoy that sort of thing.

Quality? Was there something you couldn't understand? There's English classes available for your level I'm sure?

feargale wrote: »

FYP. Yes, I insist.

You insist I scored several points... I know, I already said thanks for admitting this.

feargale wrote: »

The level of aggression shown by you here would befit a ten year old, or an adult of similar stature.

Woah, we're through the looking glass here! So young people and short people are particularly aggressive? Was this study performed in the same bizarre non-sequitur institute where your increasing popularity of Irish study came from?

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

This is such a reasonable answer. A language is such a personal choice, you enjoy French and Spanish, as do I, but I never had any time for German, it just was not a language that I liked, but of course I don't diss Germans or their lovely language, it just wasn't for me.

But you do however insist that everyone learn the language you like. Pretty much for no other reason than you like it.

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

You said "our beloved language is only really spoken by children" and I noted your error. No misquote there. Of course people of all ages speak the language!

And what is your evidence that "the only people who want to speak it are old people"? I'm not in that bracket yet I want to speak it....

Put away your broom and sweeping statements!

Let's see... all schoolkids are forced to (try) to speak it.
Outside of school about 1% of people speak it.
So yeah, basically it's a language for children. Get over it.