The creeping prominence of the Irish language

Hey - Im no educational scientist - I have no idea how to do it, but that doesn't make it impossible.

The alternative is that we're putting every child through 14 years of mandtory Irish KNOWING they have no chance to make it interesting or useful to them - and that the fuction of said undertaking it to "to demonstrate the parity of English and Irish in the education system as a political statement" then I'd argue that it's not even trying to be educational and just using the means to labour an agenda. And this does not serve the kids (but then it's not supposed to and they can't NOT do it, so why change anything?)

Actually, now that I read that back it sounds extremly likely.

Fvck....

This depends - do you see it as more important as public health? Serurity and policing?

What a hurler on the ditch answer. Pleading the fifth without even a suggestion, I'm surprised.

If you won't suggest something practical about the solution, go on then, tell me what parts of the syllabus are "not even trying to be educational and just using the means to labour an agenda"?

When would you say the "idealistic" goal of 1922 the schools creating an Irish speaking population died? Was it in the economic hardship of the thirties? Was it in the sixties when teaching unions complained about Irish medium instruction and the primary cert was abolished? Was it in the seventies when the requirement to pass Irish to "pass" your inter/leaving cert was abolished?

Whenever it died, that "idealistic" goal is long long gone. Instead the more realistic goal of parity of English and Irish is what has been happening in practice.

As to "success", well let's look at what "one hour a day" has typically acheived in 99 years.

• First, no one speaks of the East v West language split in Ireland anymore. The vast, vast majority in every county accepts Irish as the national language, albeit one they don't /can't use.
• Second, everyone has awareness from primary school of basic Irish songs, rhymes, phrases, names. There is cultural awareness that Irish music, literature exists, albeit one they don't/can't engage with.
• Third, Irish has credibility as an academic subject. Everyone respects that Irish is a fully formed language, with a vocabulary, grammar etc... albeit one that many don't like / can't master.
• Fourth, Irish native speakers have language rights. The majority accept that Irish native speakers exist, that they have equal standing and status to native English speakers, their language is our language so their rights deserve recognation vis-a-vis state services and that Irish can also be a language of opportunity not poverty.
• Fifth, Irish language connects Irish people within Ireland and around the diaspora. An outlook like this is commonplace “My father’s from Kerry and my mother’s from Laois - and they both believed passionately in the importance of our language. It is part of who we are. I think if you are not líofa (fluent) it doesn’t mean you should be afraid to speak it."

These are all very positive and worthwhile, cultural and political successes in my view. I don't think this would have been achieved without everyone learning Irish in school. Without the pragmatic choice to continue with Irish instruction when the "dream" died, Irish would simply have the same fate as regional languages in France for example. Cultural relics with no opportunities. We would have a nationally approved "You can do it if you want, but leave us out of it" attitude which kills any language at its root.

To repeat, (a maximum of) one hour a day is not going to acheive a lot more. Who remembers watching the simpsons or neighbours or friends or whatever show one hour a day during their school days? Would you be "fluent" enough to take a mastermind challenge on that TV show now?

I find the "waste of money" angle such a lazy argument. It costs the state the same amount to teach that "hour a day" of Irish as it does for the "hour a day" to teach English. 99% of kids come into school as fluent English speakers these days, yet you never hear any scrutiny of their language progression, or how much potential is "wasted". Shakespeare is never put through the mill or brought into question and how many speak Shakespearean English?!

The parts that SHOULD do all those things in the first two paragraphs but demonstably fails.

In any case, you have no interest in any of this. You proved this when you answered my question about what you wanted to see as the goal of educational Irish:

... demonstrating the parity of English and Irish in the education system as a political statement ...

A political statement.

Nothing to do with basic grounding of a language, or cultural outputs, or indeed anything educational, don't bullshit me - just a political Statement.

You can deny it all you want, but those are your own words.

You used the word "political" because you can't stomach seeing English as the dominant language and demand to see Irish on the same level of importance as English (creeping or otherwise) and you don't care whose childhood or education you have to sacrifice in order to achieve it, do you?

I see we're about to engage in the "lifeskills" argument, take two here.

One word "political" and the "mask has slipped", it turns out he was a Dev-worshipping, child-sacrificing, Oceanian after all!!!

Have a look at post #1335 if you want to know what "political statement" means to me.

Yeah, you can take the outlandish insults to a different conversation and no amount of twisting the definition changes anything you're written before.

Political means refering to the state and in this context, the constitutional status of the language. If that's not whatyou meant, you used the wrong word.

But I believe you know and meant exactly that.

I really don't get the sinister aspects you're attributing to me in this argument. I know what political means and I now know the word political is a trigger word for you! Political = oppressive in your lexicon it would appear? Political = democratic in mine.

If what I write is "twisting" and you intepreted my last post as "outlandish insults", then I don't think we have much commonground to continue the discussion? If you change your mind I point you to post #1335 again.

I never referenced any 'acquaintance', som Im not sure why you have that in quotes, I referenced parents of the actual children in the schools in question and in the neighbouring schools. How you can 'debunk' the views of the actual people involved Im not sure. Are you in these schools yourself or something? Even if you are, how can you speak for others?

Re these artistic, craft jobs - what exactly are they? Where are they? How many do they need? What is the rate of pay? Because all you have offered is painfully vague generalised suggestions. Same with 'social media' jobs - where are these exactly? Food - why would anyone need irish to do anything with food? Irish language entrepreneurs? So they are selling the irish language too? That phrase is nonsensical.

Do you not realise that any translation that would be required for these jobs, would just be outsourced? Outside of education, which i already highlighted myself anyway, you have suggested zero genuine professions where irish is going to be the main driving force of income generation. Irish teachers and a small few translators. Thats it...

The "billions cost of Irish in the education system" is the classic chestnut, the critics always ignore it's the same cost of teaching English in school.

This is a good point; another point would be that - to build on an argument that the anti-Irish brigade makes much of - most of the money spent on teaching English is completely wasted because "we all speak English already".

Now I'm not saying I agree with that argument, but it is certainly an argument that could be made, and with at least a much justification as the anti-Írish argument. After all, beyond basic literacy, surely all education in English is a waste of time - the poetry, the drama, the prose ... just let kids get on with Tiktok which at least gives them a grounding in IT!!!

You know @PeadarCo when I see posts such as yours it makes me so glad the Irish has kept its place as a "proper" academic subject much to the chagrin of more idealistic posters such as PBH.

Let's go back to one of my 5 "successes" of the current system from post #1335:

• Third, Irish has credibility as an academic subject. Everyone respects that Irish is a fully formed language, with a vocabulary, grammar etc... albeit one that many don't like / can't master.

Think about your biases here for a second. Have you ever asked the question "French as a school subject in Ireland, how do you evaluate success when it comes to teaching it?" If you haven't, why not?

Evaluation of non-native language learning is all about these skills isn't it - reading, writing, listening, speaking? And here is the shocking point, Irish is evaluated the same way! The only major difference is that the French syllabus sixty years ago still had literature like Henri Bosco's L'enfant et la Rivière on it. Funny that the literature got dropped from the French exam a long time ago, I think there is a clue there, don't you think?

But to come back to your question the Evaluation of "success" for Irish in an exam context is done by professional educators like it is done for every other subject. Published marking schemes are available, there isn't a mystery about it. Posters like PBH would in fact argue there is too much focus on evaluation regarding Irish in the school system.