Is Irish a Dead Language?

deise go deo wrote: »

The accepted definition of a dead language is a language with no remaining native speakers, Ie people who grew up speaking the language, Irish has tens of thousands of native speakers so is therefore not dead.:)

The accepted definition of full employment is 4% unemployment.

Was made learn that moronic language at school ,then had to leave for England for a Job, What an utter waste of time. lots of navvies came from west of Ireland and could hardly speak English. Great workers ,Great men. Ruined by the Irish education system. Practically none ever went back to Ireland as they were ignored and written out of Irish history just like the forty thousand plus who crossed the water and joined the British army in WW11. The Irish nation pretended they never existed.

Wibbs wrote: »

? How wide is their vocabulary in the language? Can they discuss more esoteric subjects and concepts in it, or is it of the "I'm going to the shops to buy bread" level?

Sure a good chunk of the population can't do that in English.

samboshy wrote: »

only about 5 people speak irish as their first language therfore it's dead.

Alright boys now that we have the figures for certain we may aswell close the thread.

samboshy wrote: »

i feel sorry for people who enjoy speaking irish

I'm sure your sympathy is what they have always hoped for in life.

Einhard wrote: »

So, I don't share your belief that a decline in language inevitably means an inexorable decline towards destruction in the culture it manifests.

I'm not certain I'd agree with you here, although I wouldn't share a view opposite to yours either.

For instance take the example of Latin, since it has been discussed. Let's say that around the 8th century Latin was no longer a native language of anybody. We can divide texts written in Latin in Europe into two separate periods: Original native Latin and Latin as the language of learning.

The latter is simple for people who have studied Latin to translate. However original native Latin is significantly more difficult. Instantly you are confronted with thousands of idioms and turns of phrase, as well as word play that becomes very difficult to understand. Even though you can translate a text literally it becomes very difficult to understand due to this.

The linguist Nicholas Ostler commonly refers to this effect as the marker of when a language has lost its native speakers. Texts written before the death become very difficult to understand. Another example is Sumerian. It was eventually replaced by Akkadian in a language shift similar to what happened in Ireland. Even though Sumerian remained the language of literature there is an obvious drop in quality, loss of idioms, e.t.c.

This goes further than people normally imagine. Different languages support different prose styles, writing styles, e.t.c.

I am rambling, but the essential point is that a decline in a language leads to the culture it supports becoming alien, a pattern you see in the death of languages across the world.

So, for example, if Irish dies there won't be anybody except for very good academics who will understand our enormous historic collection of poetry. Nobody will understand the satires, nobody will understand most of the historic literature of this island.

Of course if somebody does not care about such things then it does not really matter and it's not like people will die because the literature was lost. However I strongly disagree that nothing will be lost.

peabutler wrote: »

Alright boys now that we have the figures for certain we may aswell close the thread.

With roughly 20k people to whom Irish is their first language, the figure is actually less than 0.005%. Irish is most certainly a dead language, just one that has been kept on very extensive life support due to the fact that our constitution insists it is our first language. The language we are taught in school isn't even a real, naturally evolved language as outside of small remote pockets of the country, Irish died a long, long time ago. What is now claimed to be Irish was put together by committee in the late 19th century and is only slightly more genuine than Elvish. As Frada wrote; interesting hobby if that's what you are into but it's not noble.

And lets be honest, outside of those same small, remote pockets of the country our biological ancestry is as much Norman and Scandinavian as it is Celtic (influenced), so Irish is no more our ancestral language than French or Icelandic.

What we should give acknowledgement and respect to is the influence the Irish language has had on our spoken English. Hiberno-English can be lyrically quite beautiful and has given rise to some stand out poetry and prose. That is a naturally evolved speech pattern which is unique to our country, varied by region and has grown from our ancestors and their lives and influences. That is what we should be proud of and feel connected to our roots through. Not some zombie language that is forced on us.

Dionysus wrote: »

You two have got issues, and I'm not just alluding to your abysmal use of punctuation and syntax in the English language.

Why do I have issues? I dont want to speak the language and if my children choose not to I would like them to have the choice for themselves to not learn it in school when they are old enough to make it themselves like in 1st year. I think that is being reasonable!

It is the 21st century and I dont want something that is no benefit being rammed down my throat.

And for the joke that is TnaG, I wish there was a box on my TV licence form to tick so none of my money goes down that toilet. Why pay for something I wont use and cant understand.

And as for syntax, if that is bothering you so much, then I laugh at the fact that you say I am the one with issues. I bet you are a tweed wearing teacher!

Reminds me a bit of when DiCaprio was in the water at the end of Titanic. Some of ye are still holding the frozen fingers while the body went under a long time ago.:D:D