Is it no really time to assess how much the irish language costs us all?

will21 · 16-10-2009 01:16PM

Maybe im wrong but lets jus say about 10% of people speak fluent irish,so if thousands complete the leaving every year and still only about 10% of the country speaking fluent,why not let students choose if they want to study irish.If you had a better choice of languages in school maybe you could learn a language that would be spoken by millions instead of thousands.There would still be about 20-30% of students picking irish and learning it better as they would not be in a class with people who dont want to learn,increasing the standard and letting people have a choice that could benefit their future plans.The percentage of people speaking will not fall.In my own case irish didnt benefit me much.I learned it for 12 years in school and only know the basics,i have done some travelling and if i had of done french or spanish it would have been more beneficial to me.

PaulieD · 16-10-2009 01:33PM

Rebelheart wrote: »

"Bloody Irish", is it? This sums up so much about the sort of people on Boards.ie who want want to remove any semblance of status and power from the Irish language in Ireland.

Amazing how so many of the people who are willing (if not keen, in some cases) to have taxpayers' money spent on integrating tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of foreigners in Ireland get all up in arms when a bit of money, a tiny bit of money in comparison, is spent on ensuring that Irish people who speak Irish have at least some of the same rights as English speakers in this country.

How much money has been ploughed into giving English classes in this country to immigrants - free English classes? Classes which are, overwhelmingly, an absurd waste of taxpayers' money as the majority of the people in them only attend as they have to be recorded as present in order to get a work permit. The media doesn't pick on this - it wouldn't be pc - but anybody who has taught English in a language school will attest to this massive waste. This promotion of the English language every day of the week at a far greater cost is acceptable to all these ""practical" people on Boards.ie.

Oh, and how much did the English language version cost to produce? How much have my taxes subsidised the 190 people who have purchased it? To put this story in the bitter (atavistic?) framework of certain people here: how much have English speakers cost me?

The anti-Irish lobby like the above poster are petty beyond words. Narrow, selective, bitter and, at heart, hostile to Irish culture. Were you not hostile, you would see the far, far greater abuses of public finances that occur as a result of the state of Ireland "promoting" the English language in this state. Just to reiterate: the immigrants in question are forced to attend English language classes or else they can be deported/refused permission to stay; English is "rammed" down their throats (to use the emotive language of the anti-Irish brigade), in other words, and my taxes are paying for it.

Well said. It costs 126 million euro per annum to teach foreign kids English.

Non-national students should be segregated until they can speak English as the current €126m annual spend on support teachers isn't working, according to the Opposition.
Assistance to foreign national children who don't speak English in our schools has cost the Irish taxpayer almost €300m in the past three years alone, new figures obtained by the Sunday Independent reveal.

http://www.independent.ie/education/latest-news/cost-of-teaching-english-to-immigrants-exceeds-8364126m-1372313.html

whatdoicare · 16-10-2009 01:37PM

will21 wrote: »

In my own case irish didnt benefit me much.I learned it for 12 years in school and only know the basics,i have done some travelling and if i had of done french or spanish it would have been more beneficial to me.

Same here, studied Irish for 14 years and french for six and can't even string a basic sentence together in either language - whereas I bantered Spanish with my dad on the way to school from what we learned on a cd that came with a newspaper and I actually speak Spanish rather confidently- came in very handy when I lived in Spain and a few times with my current job it's saved the day!
Goes to show how rubbish the teaching system is.

LordSutch · 16-10-2009 02:28PM

I just wish my daughter could opt out of Irish lessons in school, 'she' along with every other pupil in this State will now spend the next seventeen or eighteen years being force fed 'Irish', but to what purpose? all will leave school with a bit of the 'cupla focal' which they will keep for life, but only 3% will absorb the language and go on to speak it fluently on a daily basis

Compulsory Irish & its translation is a massive financial drain on this country, and 'dare I say' a massive waste of time for our little ones who spend their whole school life learing something (cupla focal) which is of little value when they enter the big wide world.

Maddening, really maddening :mad:

Joey the lips · 16-10-2009 02:28PM

You have a poor knowledge of history to call my post nonsense. In fact your post is complete and utter waffle. The austian and swiss nations came from the old german nation you know the one that was broken up after ww1`

as for the americans. The native american spoke indian and in a mass genocide was wiped out by the white man. A bit like the national socialists you discuss attempted to do below

So i put it back that it you who speaks utter waffle!

SeanW wrote: »

I'm sorry but this is nonsense. Many countries have no language of their own (and thusly, are not trying to force an artificial language down their people's throats) and it doesn't make them any less unique or nationalistic.

The U.S( Natural lanuage is indian - Wiped out by the white man). & Austria( Was orig part of the old prussian empire only formed this centry) have no national languages yet they have uniqiue identities - you don't think Vienna is in Southern Germany - and most of Switzerland's languages are foreign. Yet they all have very strong identities.

As an example, try telling an American, who drives a pickup truck, has a zillion American flags on his lawn, and just bought another Country & Western CD in WalMart, just coming home from a baseball game, has a family member in the military, that he's in any way less American because he speaks English - I guarantee you that you will get a very short answer.

Switzerland (Was orig part or the same prussian empire)- a large portion of the Swiss population speaks German, but while Germany elected the National Socialists in the 1930s and they later pursued a programme of "reunification" with other German speaking peoples - which were often embraced in the foreign territories - the Nazi party of Switzerland recieved 2% or less of the vote in any election they contested. Switzerland also managed to stay out of WWII despite its perilous location because of their large military, and their united-ness as a people even though most of them spoke "foreign" languages including German.

Ireland is much the same. we could do very well without our so called "language" which was primarily a leftover of DeVelera's vision of an agrarian nation controlled by the Church, comely maidens dancing at the crossroads and all the rest of it.
Indeed, in practice, most of us who don't know the language or care too much about it, don't seem to think we're missing much.

Hmm ... looks like I've just described tobacco smoking!

Soldie · 16-10-2009 02:32PM

Joey the lips wrote: »

The austian and swiss nations came from the old german nation you know the one that was broken up after ww1`

:eek:

daithicarr · 16-10-2009 02:40PM

Joey the lips wrote: »

You have a poor knowledge of history to call my post nonsense. In fact your post is complete and utter waffle. The austian and swiss nations came from the old german nation you know the one that was broken up after ww1`
!

seems like history teaching could also do with a revamp.

or perhaps just scrap it, sure its of little use too, and music as well

thebman · 16-10-2009 03:01PM

Oh and quick post to people going on about an anti-Irish lobby. No such thing exists.

There are people lobbying for Irish language being pushed and that is fine but logic has to come into consideration at some point.

There is no anti-Irish lobby, only people that look at something and think well that makes no sense. I'd say the same thing for any other language that got this amount of money spent on it when it wasn't spoken by the majority of the nation.

Anti-Irish language lobby, give me a break. Its a classic if your not with me, your against me attitude that causes that which usually means the person is unwilling to listen to reason and anyone arguing with them is wasting their own time.

murphaph · 16-10-2009 03:02PM

Joey the lips wrote: »

You have a poor knowledge of history to call my post nonsense. In fact your post is complete and utter waffle. The austian and swiss nations came from the old german nation you know the one that was broken up after ww1

`
Lol. Good one. Ever heard of the Austro-Hungarian Empire Joey?

Joey the lips wrote: »

as for the americans. The native american spoke indian and in a mass genocide was wiped out by the white man. A bit like the national socialists you discuss attempted to do below

They spoke 'indian' did they? I wasn't aware such a language existed. For your information, the tribes across the continent spoke/speak their own unique languages. It's like saying people in Portugal and Estonia speak 'European' lol!

Joey the lips wrote: »

So i put it back that it you who speaks utter waffle!

Erm, see above.

daithicarr · 16-10-2009 03:09PM

thebman wrote: »

Anti-Irish language lobby, give me a break. Its a classic if your not with me, your against me attitude that causes that which usually means the person is unwilling to listen to reason and anyone arguing with them is wasting their own time.

works both ways, there is a proportion of people who are against the use of public money to teach/promote irish. They too can be acused of being unwilling to listen. branding those who support moves to promote the irish langauage reactionary gaeilgeoirs , implying that they are some sort of language fanatic rather than some one who supports and speaks the language.

reminds me somewhat of right wing americans using the word a liberal, as if its a bad thing

SeanW · 16-10-2009 04:22PM

Joey the lips wrote: »

The austian

Been a long time since you've been in history class? As the poster above said, you've never heard of the Austro-Hungarian Empire? I suggest you do some reading about WW1

Swiss nations came from the old german nation you know the one that was broken up after ww1

You're funny. It took me all of about 2 minutes to demolish this nonsense

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

Switzerland has a history of unity in various degress since the first half of the last Millenium, and has been a Federal State since 1848!

as for the americans. The native american spoke indian and in a mass genocide was wiped out by the white man.

Yes, but the white man now has a very firm American identity. Like I said, find the stereotypical American in that post, and tell him he's not American because he does not speak "Indian" lol and see what answer you get!

So i put it back that it you who speaks utter waffle!

Quoted for comic effect

:D:D

MikeC101 · 16-10-2009 04:40PM

Joey the lips wrote: »

You have a poor knowledge of history to call my post nonsense.... The austian and swiss nations came from the old german nation you know the one that was broken up after ww1`

The sheer irony that you make that statement about the Austrian and Swiss nations in the same paragraph as telling someone else their knowledge of history is poor....

How, and why, do you believe this?

Perhaps you refer to the German Confederation, in regards to Austria, so that's a little more understandable.

But for Switzerland??

Joey the lips · 16-10-2009 04:52PM

murphaph wrote: »

`
Lol. Good one. Ever heard of the Austro-Hungarian Empire Joey?

They spoke 'indian' did they? I wasn't aware such a language existed. For your information, the tribes across the continent spoke/speak their own unique languages. It's like saying people in Portugal and Estonia speak 'European' lol!

Erm, see above.

Indian as a collective term for siox cheyanne but you can be it was not hillbillie!

SeanW wrote: »

Been a long time since you've been in history class? As the poster above said, you've never heard of the Austro-Hungarian Empire? I suggest you do some reading about WW1

You're funny. It took me all of about 2 minutes to demolish this nonsense

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

Switzerland has a history of unity in various degress since the first half of the last Millenium, and has been a Federal State since 1848!

Yes, but the white man now has a very firm American identity. Like I said, find the stereotypical American in that post, and tell him he's not American because he does not speak "Indian" lol and see what answer you get!

Quoted for comic effect :D:D

The austro hungarian empaire lasted 51 years. It did not last a centary. How could it develop culture. Did you actually read the swiss link. You too would then understand why they have no culture other than a collective

MikeC101 wrote: »

The sheer irony that you make that statement about the Austrian and Swiss nations in the same paragraph as telling someone else their knowledge of history is poor....

How, and why, do you believe this?

Perhaps you refer to the German Confederation, in regards to Austria, so that's a little more understandable.

But for Switzerland??

Your on the same bandwagon.

All your arguements are poor and murph you nerver answered my question

There is no justifiable bases in any of your arguements for the end of the irish language.

MikeC101 · 16-10-2009 05:05PM

Joey the lips wrote: »

Your on the same bandwagon.

That'd be the bandwagon with actual historical fact on it then.

Look: you made a silly mistake in your reference to the Swiss and Austrian nations. You're wrong. That's why so many people have picked up on it. When you say something that's completely incorrect, you're going to have it pointed out to you. Deal with it.

Joey the lips wrote: »

All your arguements are poor

Ah, that's the level of debate then. Never mind.

I wish I'd had a choice to study Irish or not for Leaving Cert. It was, for me, a waste of time, given that I never had any interest in it, or use for it now. How much of that is the way it's taught, I'm not sure.

Joey the lips · 16-10-2009 05:11PM

MikeC101 wrote: »

That'd be the bandwagon with actual historical fact on it then.

Look: you made a silly mistake in your reference to the Swiss and Austrian nations. You're wrong. That's why so many people have picked up on it. Deal with it.

Ah, that's the level of debate then. Never mind.

I have no problem with being wrong the problem is that examples quoted are not right. The reason we should not have irish is because the Austrians dont. A pile i would say! The americans dont another pile.

Everything we do as a country is english. Its not even european. The only thing european about ireland is civil rights and the influence of aldi and lidl.

Then to top matters examples of why we should not have irish are based on european examples and yet we are influenced by england;

EVERYONE has failed to see that Wales and scotland has its own particular language to set it aside from the english. Collectivly they are brits but its there language and not the scottish road signs that set them apart!

MikeC101 · 16-10-2009 05:22PM

Joey the lips wrote: »

I have no problem with being wrong the problem is that examples quoted are not right. The reason we should not have irish is because the Austrians dont. A pile i would say! The americans dont another pile.

I think the point being made is that culture is not exclusively defined by a shared language, in that the Swiss and Austrians have their own culture - though, like all cultures, it's influenced by their neighbours. But given your strange beliefs about the origins of said countries, perhaps it's not surprising you think they have no cultural identity of their own.

Joey the lips wrote: »

Everything we do as a country is english. Its not even european. The only thing european about ireland is civil rights and the influence of aldi and lidl.

So all of our cultural heritage - our literature, our religious heritage, our music, mythology, traditions - they're all English? That's an absolute crock.

Joey the lips wrote: »

Then to top matters examples of why we should not have irish are based on european examples and yet we are influenced by england;

It's an example of how a culture can be distinct without needing a different language.

Joey the lips wrote: »

EVERYONE has failed to see that Wales and scotland has its own particular language to set it aside from the english. Collectivly they are brits but its there language and not the scottish road signs that set them apart!

And how many Scots don't speak English?

Wales, I understand, has had something of a revival of Welsh.

dlofnep · 16-10-2009 06:21PM

RedPlanet wrote: »

Actually i think the phrase your looking for is: it's Anglo-normative.
Yes i'm coining that phrase.
But seriously, i agree with the naysayers on this one, the Irish language needs to be taken off life-support. You can't suspend a language in time, either it grows and evolves or it dies or it morphs into something else.

Do you accept that minority languages exist, through hardship or not in a vast array of countries around the world and are supported by their respected governments? I dispute the term "life support". The language is doing well, and is getting stronger. Support for a language does not constitute as life support.

desertcircus · 16-10-2009 06:22PM

Two further points as responses:

To the person who thinks spending money on translations into Polish is anti-Irish - get real. The reason we do that is because a significant proportion of Polish arrivals in Ireland have difficulty with English, and providing translations enables them to manage while they get used to the language. There's no comparable need for Irish speakers, the vast majority of whom speak Irish - and at any rate, I doubt anyone has a problem with translating useful information into Irish. It's the translating of absolutely everything at an insane cost which is the problem. Get off your high horse, accept that there isn't a cabal of Irish-haters controlling public discourse, and try to realise that we fund translations that help us as a society. Translations of every single piece of EU law and county council plans don't help us, and neither does spending tens of thousands on subsidies for books that literally nobody wants to read. Culture isn't advanced if NOBODY READS THE BOOKS. Seriously, how can something be a part of our culture if nobody's actually bought a copy of the dam thing?

To Joey: Two things. One, recognise when your arguments have been shredded and don't try to patch them back up when they're clearly beyond repair. Two, for the love of God learn to spell and punctuate. I cannot stress this enough. I can live with the odd "definately" or failure to capitalise, but I lost count of the number of errors in the first post alone. It makes it almost impossible to figure out what you're arguing, and it jaundices how your arguments are taken.

mike65 · 16-10-2009 06:29PM

Cuckoo clocks spring to mind

cyclopath2001 · 16-10-2009 06:36PM

dlofnep wrote: »

There should be a proportional amount of funding towards the Irish language, but we will never agree on what the amount is .

Because the Irish lobby's demands are for unlimited funding.

Would you agree to the repeal of the provisions of the OLA that mandate documents and services to be provided in Irish? That would be a good concession to the times we are in.

Joey the lips · 16-10-2009 06:37PM

desertcircus wrote: »

To Joey: Two things. One, recognise when your arguments have been shredded and don't try to patch them back up when they're clearly beyond repair. Two, for the love of God learn to spell and punctuate. I cannot stress this enough. I can live with the odd "definately" or failure to capitalise, but I lost count of the number of errors in the first post alone. It makes it almost impossible to figure out what you're arguing, and it jaundices how your arguments are taken.

If you have the ability to correct me you have the ability to understand me and bar my parents nobody has the write to correct me. I am speaking a foreign language afterall.

My arguements have not been shredded as you put it,.

dlofnep · 16-10-2009 06:40PM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Because the Irish lobby's demands are for unlimited funding.

No they are not, evidence for this please?

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Would you agree to the repeal of the provisions of the OLA that mandate documents and services to be provided in Irish? That would be a good concession to the times we are in.

No, I would not agree. I'm quite happy with the fact that services are offered to Irish speakers to use their native language, which is an official language in this country. Just because people have the ability to speak English, does not mean that they should be forced to use English services - it further dilutes Irish in society and is detriment to the language. It might serve you well to research a little into minority languages and into what the biggest issues that exist for them are. Joshua Fishman did a great study on the issue (http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED385145&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED385145).

desertcircus · 16-10-2009 06:54PM

Joey the lips wrote: »

If you have the ability to correct me you have the ability to understand me and bar my parents nobody has the write to correct me. I am speaking a foreign language afterall.

I didn't correct you, I pointed out that your errors make it difficult to follow your arguments. I'm trying to help here.

Incidentally, though, the idea that nobody but your parents has the right to correct you is simply wrong. If you honestly think that, then I respectfully suggest avoiding internet message boards.

cyclopath2001 · 16-10-2009 07:04PM

dlofnep wrote: »

No they are not, evidence for this please?

Because there is no budget cap at all, no llmit? The OLA is a blank cheque.

dlofnep wrote: »

No, I would not agree. I'm quite happy with the fact that services are offered to Irish speakers to use their native language,

You may be happy to have services being provided at great cost in your chosen language, but is it cost-effective to do so? Can we justify such courtesies? Would it not be be better value for money (from and economic point of view) for Irish speakers to accept government services in the English language and leave more funds to be spent on urgent needs? I think the majority English-speaking community would appreciate such a generous concession from the Irish cadre.

I am quite sure that the Irish language is capable of thriving based on less state intervention and the continued enthusiasm of its enthusiasts. In fact, I think that once the state crutches are removed, the language will better learn to stand on its own feet.

dlofnep · 16-10-2009 07:10PM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Because there is no budget cap at all, no llmit? The OLA is a blank cheque.

Incorrect.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You may be happy to have services being provided at great cost in your chosen language,

I am.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

but is it cost-effective to do so?

It is. The cost of the service, costs what the service costs. Therefore, it is cost effective.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Can we justify such courtesies?

Yes, we can. Like every other bilingual nation in the world that offers texts in multiple languages. Perhaps you cannot justify it. It's subjective, is it not?

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Would it not be be better value for money (from and economic point of view) for Irish speakers to accept government services in the English language and leave more funds to be spent on urgent needs?

No, it would not. Using English services is detrimental to Irish speakers. I advise you to read Joshua Fishman's study on the topic.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

I think the majority English-speaking community would appreciate such a generous concession from the Irish cadre.

The same majority that has yet to call for a referendum on the issue? They surely can't be that bothered about it - otherwise, something would have occured.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

I am quite sure that the Irish language is capable of thriving based on less state intervention and the continued enthusiasm of its enthusiasts. In fact, I think that once the state crutches are removed, the language will better learn to stand on its own feet.

It will survive with the help of enthusiasts, but without education and state support - it would not survive. Once again, I refer you to Joshua Fishman's study.

Joey the lips · 16-10-2009 07:11PM

desertcircus wrote: »

I didn't correct you, I pointed out that your errors make it difficult to follow your arguments. I'm trying to help here.

Incidentally, though, the idea that nobody but your parents has the right to correct you is simply wrong. If you honestly think that, then I respectfully suggest avoiding internet message boards.

and now you have just contradicted yourself. May I actually take the oppertunity and ask have you anything to contribute or is sarcasim and wit the order of the day.

Herbal Deity · 16-10-2009 07:14PM

Sleepy wrote: »

Well, that and a virtual guarantee of 100 free points for the exams that matriculate Irish students for university places...

WTF?

The ABSOLUTE MAX extra points available is 60, and that would only ever occur in very exceptional circumstances (not counting English or Irish for points and getting 89% in 6 subjects).

The average student will only get about 10 points extra, and with the difficulty involved in obtaining Irish language learning resources, having to learn through a language which is probably not your mother tongue etc., its justified as it demonstrates superior academic ability to someone who sat the exam in English and got the same result.

Camelot wrote: »

a massive waste of time for our little ones who spend their whole school life learing something (cupla focal) which is of little value when they enter the big wide world.

What value is an in depth knowledge of Shakespeare or linear algebra in the "big wide world"?

Secondary school is about a broad education, learning loads of random things which broaden the mind.

cyclopath2001 · 16-10-2009 07:43PM

dlofnep wrote: »

Incorrect.

So there is a limit on the spending on Irish langauge services? How much is that limit? From what I can tell, the cost will mount in the future as many departments have not yet fully complied with your lobby's demands.

dlofnep wrote: »

It is. The cost of the service, costs what the service costs. Therefore, it is cost effective.

Very funny.

dlofnep wrote: »

Yes, we can. Like every other bilingual nation in the world that offers texts in multiple languages. Perhaps you cannot justify it. It's subjective, is it not?

We are not a bilingual nation. This is not Canada.

dlofnep wrote: »

No, it would not. Using English services is detrimental to Irish speakers.

Of course it would detrimental, the state has been very generous to you with the Celtic Tiger's bounty. but we all have to accept cuts. We're not rich anymore.

dlofnep wrote: »

The same majority that has yet to call for a referendum on the issue? They surely can't be that bothered about it - otherwise, something would have occured.

No need for a referendum. Just pass a law and abolish Mr O'Cuiv's expensive department and repeal the OLA.

dlofnep wrote: »

It will survive with the help of enthusiasts, but without education and state support - it would not survive.

But how much state support? Could you not make some concessions to the rest if us and accept less?

Think of the number of sick children you could save if you put aside your pride and accepted services in English.

thebman · 16-10-2009 08:12PM

daithicarr wrote: »

works both ways, there is a proportion of people who are against the use of public money to teach/promote irish. They too can be acused of being unwilling to listen. branding those who support moves to promote the irish langauage reactionary gaeilgeoirs , implying that they are some sort of language fanatic rather than some one who supports and speaks the language.

reminds me somewhat of right wing americans using the word a liberal, as if its a bad thing

Only one sdie are actual lobby groups though, the other are ordinary people asking why should we? I mean are there actual dedicated lobby groups to eradicating the Irish language. I doubt it.

I'm not politically affiliated with any group and I don't think it makes a bit of sense.

starbelgrade · 16-10-2009 08:28PM

Joey the lips wrote: »

Everything we do as a country is english.

Apart from having a president, being a republic, playing gaelic games & eating coddle.

Is it no really time to assess how much the irish language costs us all?

Comments