The Irish language is failing.

Dughorm

Shep_Dog wrote: »

There is a difference between educating children in the rich heritage of their native English language and forcing them to learn another, alien language.

Since when is Irish in Ireland an "alien" language?

I happen to agree that students should learn the rich heritage of the English language but their horizons should be broadened to include their rich Irish language heritage also.

Shep_Dog wrote: »

Ethics are a core part of a Liberal arts education, a subject Irish enthusiasts have little experience of, if we judge by their actions in the past 80 years.

Are you suggesting Irish enthusiasts lack ethics?

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Yeah, it's back there where you posted next week's winning lotto numbers and the third secret of Fatima.
Nice try. You never told us.

You could go back and read my earlier posts if you wanted to...

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

You could go back and read my earlier posts if you wanted to...

No, my memory is working fine thanks. You just never told us.
Instead of insisting you've told us already for the next 10 pages you could just, you know, tell us?

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

We should have some state Polish media and force feed every kid in the country Polish too, right?

If this is a genuine suggestion there could be some merit in it given our need to embrace minority groups in this increasingly multi-cultural society of ours. Polish is a very interesting language with a fascinating literary past. But Polish isn't one of our national language so, at present, I think it is reasonable as it currently stands.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

No, my memory is working fine thanks. You just never told us.
Instead of insisting you've told us already for the next 10 pages you could just, you know, tell us?

As is mine - I explained my philosophy at length in the first 100 pages of this thread if you feel like reading it again!

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

If this is a genuine suggestion there could be some merit in it given our need to embrace minority groups in this increasingly multi-cultural society of ours. Polish is a very interesting language with a fascinating literary past. But Polish isn't one of our national language so, at present, I think it is reasonable as it currently stands.

This is cart before horse stuff again. Why is something a "national" language when less people speak it than another language which isn't "national"? Either they both should be or they both shouldn't be.

Dughorm wrote: »

As is mine - I explained my philosophy at length in the first 100 pages of this thread if you feel like reading it again!

As predicted, 10 pages of "I already answered" instead of answering. You said what kind of education philosophy you believed in and said this included compulsory Irish.
No, you never told us why you believe in this philosophy or why compulsory Irish needs to be a part of it.
Of course I know this, you know this, everyone knows this, but your stalling is entertaining TBH.

Shep_Dog

Dughorm wrote: »

Since when is Irish in Ireland an "alien" language?

Since over 100 years ago, for most people.

Dughorm wrote: »

I happen to agree that students should learn the rich heritage of the English language but their horizons should be broadened to include their rich Irish language heritage also.

Irish should be available but choice is an important aspect of a liberal education.

Dughorm wrote: »

Are you suggesting Irish enthusiasts lack ethics?

Yes.

Dughorm

Shep_Dog wrote: »

Since over 100 years ago, for most people.
Irish should be available but choice is an important aspect of a liberal education.

Yes.

Thank you Shep_Dog for your refreshing straightforward reply.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Why is something a "national" language when less people speak it than another language which isn't "national"? Either they both should be or they both shouldn't be.

Why isnt Turkish a national language in Germany because there are so many Turkish nationals there? Sorbian is a national minority language despite having fewer speakers. I think you know the answer Dan.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

As predicted, 10 pages of "I already answered" instead of answering. You said what kind of education philosophy you believed in and said this included compulsory Irish.
No, you never told us why you believe in this philosophy or why compulsory Irish needs to be a part of it.
Of course I know this, you know this, everyone knows this, but your stalling is entertaining TBH.

Not only do I have to re-explain my philosophy I now have to re-explain why I believe in it? Go re-read it I'm not doing a repeat of my first 100 page contribution to this!

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

Why isnt Turkish a national language in Germany because there are so many Turkish nationals there? Sorbian is a national minority language despite having fewer speakers. I think you know the answer Dan.

Is Sorbian a mandatory subject for all German students even though 99% of them will never use it again, the way Irish is here? Is a national minority language the same as having a language that pretty much nobody speaks as the basic language of a country's constitution?
I think you know the answers to those Dug.

Dughorm wrote: »

Not only do I have to re-explain my philosophy I now have to re-explain why I believe in it? Go re-read it I'm not doing a repeat of my first 100 page contribution to this!

Blah blah blah. Stay predictable. You wrote 100 pages explaining your philosophy of education and WHY mandatory Irish was a part of it?
Ya know what? You didn't. We all know if you've explained why you could just link to your explanation. Didn't happen.

Gael Mire

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Have you got any data you would care to present otherwise?

Nope, that article does not support your claim that less than 1% of Irish people use Irish outside of the education system either. Yet you continue to make it. Why?
I don't have to provide evidence to disprove a claim that you have never supported in the first place.

But I will anyway. The census (2011) tells us that over 800,000 people speak Irish outside the education system, which clearly disproves your claims in relation to the '99%' who refuse to do so.
As for regularity, just about 187,000 people speak Irish outside the education system on a weekly basis or more often.

So the next time you feel the need to talk about the '99%' who refuse to speak Irish, or the 'less than 1%' who do so with any regularity, just remember the source for those figures is Dan_Solo's hole, not the census.

DyldeBrill

Dan_Solo wrote: »

This is cart before horse stuff again. Why is something a "national" language when less people speak it than another language which isn't "national"? Either they both should be or they both shouldn't be.
As predicted, 10 pages of "I already answered" instead of answering. You said what kind of education philosophy you believed in and said this included compulsory Irish.
No, you never told us why you believe in this philosophy or why compulsory Irish needs to be a part of it.
Of course I know this, you know this, everyone knows this, but your stalling is entertaining TBH.

Just like you never told us why you didn't wanted the Irish language to die...

Its seems like you pick and choose your arguments.

Dan_Solo

Gael Mire wrote: »

So the next time you feel the need to talk about the '99%' who refuse to speak Irish, or the 'less than 1%' who do so with any regularity, just remember the source for those figures is Dan_Solo's hole, not the census.

And the fact that you have to split hairs over 1% v 1.5% (and falling) of people speaking it daily, while surreally claiming someone who speaks Irish once a week is an Irish speaker, tells us everything we need to know about the desperation of the average Gaeilgeban footsoldier.

Faith+1

I'd love to be able to speak Irish. Spent 12 years of my life 'learning' it in school only to take foundation level in 6th year.

I'm not blaming anyone only myself, I'm a complete and utter idiot.

whisky_galore

Gael Mire wrote: »

But I will anyway. The census (2011) tells us that over 800,000 people speak Irish outside the education system,

I wonder how many of that figure can actually hold a conversation as opposed to a smattering of random words and broken schoolboy Irish?

Paramite Pie

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Why is something a "national" language when less people speak it than another language which isn't "national"? Either they both should be or they both shouldn't be.

Because Polish people aren't Nationals.

Even if Irish is never spoken again, it's still part of our Nation's history and therefore part of our National Heritage. Our culture predates the modern era and just because we don't use something doesn't mean it's not our heritage.

Shep_Dog wrote: »

There is a difference between educating children in the rich heritage of their native English language and forcing them to learn another, alien language.

That rich English heritage doesn't go that far back for us. Shakespeare isn't my heritage even though I speak English. Neither is Hemingway. While I enjoyed these in school and see value in learning it there's on thing that bothers me -- there's vast volumes of Irish epics and poems that we can't read.

Beowulf is still taught in English speaking countries despite it being unintelligible to modern English speakers.. Why? Because it's their heritage.

Surely we could manage the Táin. Considering it's later influence on our great writers like Yeats -- it's a shame that there's little focus on it. Our understanding our English written heritage could be strengthened.

Carlos Orange

Paramite Pie wrote: »

Shakespeare isn't my heritage even though I speak English. Neither is Hemingway. While I enjoyed these in school and see value in learning it there's on thing that bothers me -- there's vast volumes of Irish epics and poems that we can't read.

Shakespeare is part of any native English speakers cultural heritage.

Dan_Solo

Paramite Pie wrote: »

Even if Irish is never spoken again, it's still part of our Nation's history and therefore part of our National Heritage. Our culture predates the modern era and just because we don't use something doesn't mean it's not our heritage.

Slavery and fines for murder are also part of Ireland's rich heritage.
Time for a revival I'm sure you'll agree?
Or, heavens forbid, maybe we could just learn about our heritage rather than insisting on re-enacting it?

feargale

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Quality? Was there something you couldn't understand? There's English classes available for your level I'm sure?
You insist I scored several points... I know, I already said thanks for admitting this.
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?

Grow up for heaven's sake.

DyldeBrill

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Slavery and fines for murder are also part of Ireland's rich heritage.
Time for a revival I'm sure you'll agree?
Or, heavens forbid, maybe we could just learn about our heritage rather than insisting on re-enacting it?

What exactly is your point here? You obviously cannot not stick to the issue in hand, and you've failed to do this throughout this thread, instead, going off on a tangent.

What you have to respect is that there are people who disagree with your stance on the Irish language. What you have to respect is that some people do accept it as part of their heritage. As I've stated previously I think the education system has been completely flawed, but lets scrap the education system here and focus on the language itself for a minute.

What has been of benefit to the language is that of its use in other countries. Canada, America, Australia, France, Germany and so on. If you have an interest in language history its very interesting to see the similarities between some words in Irish and German. This could of course would have something to do with Germanic tribes settling here in Ireland.

In the 2007 American Community Survey 22,279 people said they spoke Irish at home. It has also done good to our tourism in which people have traveled to Ireland to improve their Irish.

Place names as well. Every county and town name was Anglicised, whereas the Irish version is the one that will make sense, and can tell you a lot about the area in which you live.

We've established that our government made a complete balls of the language in terms of teaching it but you can't brand the language as absolutely useless.

You said you didn't want to see the Irish language die and I'm still waiting for an answer from you. I've put this in bold because you've successfully skipped past it each and every time. I simply can't understand why you said that because you've completely contradicted your statement in most of your other comments about the Irish language.

LordSutch

psinno wrote: »

Shakespeare is part of any native English speakers cultural heritage.

An old aunt of mine used to recall when Irish first came into the school curriculum, and Shakespeare, Science & cookery classes went out! (Much to the dismay of pupils and parents alike).

Some time in the late 1920s, early 1930s I guess?

Reiver

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Slavery and fines for murder are also part of Ireland's rich heritage.
Time for a revival I'm sure you'll agree?
Or, heavens forbid, maybe we could just learn about our heritage rather than insisting on re-enacting it?

Well the Brehon law seemed much more considerate of women than the English law brought in circa 1500/1600s. So while our ancestors liked chopping off heads and enslaving people, they weren't all bad.

fear le solas

Personally, I believe parents are just as responsible as teachers. Everyone knows it's easy to teach a willing student so obviously the same phrase can be said vice versa.
My mother loved Irish and it translated through to my siblings and I. They ended up going to a Gaelscoil and loved it unfortunately it wasn't possible for me to join at the time but I was jealous!

If children are not encouraged outside of school to speak a little Irish then of course there's a less chance they will learn it,want to learn it,and will want to pass it on to their own children in years to come.

I've seen some kids ask their parents very basic questions in Irish whilst struggling with homework and the parents not only can't help, but hardly even bother, stating it's just a dead language and it's useless.

See how the cycle continues???

Bottom line, take responsibility and teach by example.

Dan_Solo

feargale wrote: »

Grow up for heaven's sake.

Can't even begin to counter an argument? Go straight to the personal insult and see if anybody notices!

Dan_Solo

fear le solas wrote: »

I've seen some kids ask their parents very basic questions in Irish whilst struggling with homework and the parents not only can't help, but hardly even bother, stating it's just a dead language and it's useless.

See how the cycle continues???

This is entirely true if the objective is to resurrect an almost dead language. I just have no idea why this should be an objective. There is equally a cycle of: forced to learn Irish -> hate Irish -> rubs off on kids to hate Irish.

Dan_Solo

Reiver wrote: »

Well the Brehon law seemed much more considerate of women than the English law brought in circa 1500/1600s. So while our ancestors liked chopping off heads and enslaving people, they weren't all bad.

That is irrelevant to the point and you pretty much know it I'm sure.
Why do we need to re-enact parts of our heritage (the Irish language) and not other parts (slavery, fines for murders)? How is this better than just teaching us about it in school?

Reiver

Dan_Solo wrote: »

That is irrelevant to the point and you pretty much know it I'm sure.
Why do we need to re-enact parts of our heritage (the Irish language) and not other parts (slavery, fines for murders)? How is this better than just teaching us about it in school?

You start going on about fines for murder and slavery and then call me irrelevant?

Carlos Orange

fear le solas wrote: »

Bottom line, take responsibility and teach by example.

They are. They just aren't teaching what you want them to.

Dan_Solo

Reiver wrote: »

You start going on about fines for murder and slavery and then call me irrelevant?

They're not irrelevant in a discussion about reviving Irish culture. Unless you are denying they were part of Irish culture? Or that there is currently an attempt to revive the Irish language which was (yes almost entirely was) part of Irish culture.
Tell me why it is irrelevant. I think the word you're struggling for is "inconvenient".

Shep_Dog

fear le solas wrote: »

Personally, I believe parents are just as responsible as teachers. ..Bottom line, take responsibility and teach by example.

Perhaps the parents don't agree to cooperate with the compulsory Irish policy?

fear le solas

Dan_Solo wrote: »

This is entirely true if the objective is to resurrect an almost dead language. I just have no idea why this should be an objective. There is equally a cycle of: forced to learn Irish -> hate Irish -> rubs off on kids to hate Irish.

If your attitude is that we are forced to learn Irish, I take it your parents were forced too. Hence the negativity towards it continues... Remember what I said earlier about taking responsibility to break the cycle?

Remember,at one stage we were forced to NOT to speak it and this is one of the reasons I believe it will never truly die, as true Irishmen will not let this happen. The survival of our heritage and culture is surely enough of an objective?

Look at America. If you left a joghurt out for 500 years it would have more culture.