Should we suppress the Irish language.. ?

radioactiveman wrote: »

I would say start by having placenames on signs in Irish, on top, then English on bottom but would that be supported? I'm guessing not at the moment anyway.

Just turn the signs upside down.

JaysusMacfeck wrote: »

Irish is an inferior language (which has been drilled into us by British occupation in Ireland for many a year

On the contrary, British occupation is what destroyed the language. It has been very advantageous for Irish people to have English in terms of travelling and being able to emigrate, doing business with other nations. Having English has helped us in a huge amount of ways, but we should never lose the Irish language. Even if you can't speak it, it is all around you, in all sorts of ways. There are all sorts of little things that the Irish language has influenced. Now I can't stand over all of these, but I have seen mention of some common words actually originating from Irish, so here goes:

Shanty town = sean tí (old house)
longshore man (for dockworker) = Liongseoir (sea man)
galore = go leir (plenty)
Mucker (common expression for "friend" or "mate") - from "mo chara" - my friend.
"muck" came from the Irish word for pig, which is muc (sounds like "muck"). So a muck savage is calling him piglike. There is a mountain in Donegal called Muckish so called because it supposedly looks like a pig's back.
Smashing (as in that's smashing or very good) Is maith sin (thats very good) Irish via Liverpool to the world!

Here's an interesting book, not based on hard evidence, but plausible:
How the Irish Invented Slang: The Secret Language of the Crossroads (Counterpunch) (Paperback)


We have other things like our placenames. As most people know, Dublin comes from "Dubh Linn" meaning Black Pool. The common name Átha Cliath, actually referred to another nearby village. These two places grew up into one larger place with Dubh Linn being anglicised to become Dublin and with Átha Cliath also being retained. All around Ireland we have placenames that are direct translations, anglicised versions, or completely different, like Dublin's names. We have Baile becoming Bally, Cill becoming Kill or Kil and many others. Ros, Dun, Derry and lots of other parts of names come from Irish. Dún Laoghaire is of course the Fort of Leary.

We have many everyday Irish words that we use without thinking about it. We don't have a Prime Minister in Ireland any more than Britain has a Taoiseach. We could try to get rid of the Irish language, but in doing so we'd take away a lot from the English that we use. Even for those that deny it or don't have a good grasp of it, like myself, the Irish language is very much part of what we are, in a myriad of ways. So we should do something to preserve it. Lots of countries look at us and wonder why we don't do more to preserve it.

ExoduS 18.11 wrote: »

I dont agree with some of your statement. Well in this case it was a sort of a two versus one situation don't you think. I mean change would of come alot easier for the poor if they didnt have their landlords AND the british to overcome dont you think. Also did the british take over ireland to embrace or exploit it?

Your original statement was that the famine was all the fault of those evil Brits with their genocidal potato blight plan. Your current re-appraisal merely reinforces my earlier point that, as with a lot of Irish history, the "hate the Brits" agenda (supported by the teaching of history in our schools) far outweighs any interest people might have in factual information. Why listen to inconvenient documentary evidence when you can rant, red faced in the pub about those evil brits and sing a rebel ballad afterward?

Why did the British take over Ireland?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laudabiliter

They were invited in as part of a local power struggle?
The pope wanted them to?
The invading forces were Norman (who had just conquered the English don't forget) and the Evil Strongbow's troops were Welsh?


But again, don't let a few inconvenient facts get in the way of your anti-british ranting.

No my lack of interest in the subject in secondary school is to blame. More a science guy me.

So your lack of ability in English is your fault, but your lack of ability in Irish is the Government's fault? I maintain that the teaching of Irish is no worse, and in most cases is significantly better, than the teaching of other subjects in Irish schools. (Irish schoolchildren are surrounded by Irish all day long from their first day in school, and learn it before they're taught reading and writing.)

kickoutthejams wrote: »

You aren't defined by your geography and language, but I do hold store in what my family and relatives did to ensure I didn't have an identity forced on me by others.

An attitude that fits in well with the "force everyone to learn Irish" system we have now.

ExoduS 18.11 wrote: »

"I mean, its not their fault a few thousand of our ancestors died while being oppressed by a foreign country..."
The rod's out, but nothings biting on that statement anyways.

ExoduS 18.11 wrote: »

where exactly have i been bashing brits? when throughout my posts is merely an appraisal of the irish as a language and how it would be a shame if it was lost?

Your grasp of your own post history isn't great either is it?

You're the person going over board, blowing peoples statements out of proportion? If i like the irish language, it doesnt mean i hate brits. I would have thought that was clear.

My original post, that you responded to, was a clear, and rational refutation of the OP's borderline-fanatical gibbering. All I did was point out (amongst other things) that contrary to what we are taught in school about the famine, the Evil Brits were not sitting around the fireside planning on ways to exterminate the Irish by means of multiple crop failures. Starvation, and the famine as a whole, could have been easily avoided if the landowners (native catholic Irish included) had simply used some of the export surplus. They chose to profit instead. Yet this simple fact doesn't even get glossed over in history lessons - it gets buried. And given the choice between aiming invective at the Government of the time (whose official policy in all matters was not to get involved, the ultimate in "small government"), or the profiteers who bore responsibility for the artificial famine, invariably the Brits get it in the neck. That's an interesting observation no matter which side of the fence you're on. I don't take offence at it - but I do enjoy pointing it out.
I also take great enjoyment from not speaking, reading, or listening to any Irish, especially the vitriol or accusations of unpatriotic behaviour that that tends to engender in its supporters.

Well i've never had any complaints of people not being able to understand me to be honest. How do i have a lack of ability in english?

The post I quoted contains more than enough examples, but that's not the point I was making. The point I was making was this:
The failure of Irish people to speak the language is landed at the feet of the education system and the government. However, the failure of the same school students to reach reasonable competency in other subjects is either ignored or blamed on the student.
"Blame the teachers" is a cop-out on the part of the Irish fundamentalists. The fact is that people didn't learn Irish in school just like they didn't learn French - the difference is that teaching Irish lasted for 14 years, not the quality of the teaching.