nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Status Of Irish.

deise go deo

With the current government on its way out and a FG - Labour government almost a certainty, I would like to see what change people think should be made to the teaching of the Irish Language.

Fine Gael is as far as I know working on a new education policy. In their old education policy they famously (or infamously depending on your point of view)proposed dropping the Compulsory status of Irish in the last two years of secondary school. The claim being that if Children were free to choose Irish they would learn it, and do so more successfully due to love for the language.

Here is an analysis of that proposal by the Former President of Conradh na Gaeilge, Maolsheachlainn Ó Caollaí,
He explains why it would be an act of cultural and national vandalism to dismiss the Irish language from the core curriculum for the Leaving Cert.

The reason why

Fine Gael does not and cannot show any evidence that a significant
percentage of speakers of the highest status language in the world
can be motivated by ‘love’ to learn a lower status language.

He also shows how the dropping of compulsion for language learning in England had disastrous results.

In 2002 when it became clear that in two years time
languages would no longer be required, a landslide began. In 2001,
before the announcement, 78% of pupils aged 14 to 16 were
learning languages. By 2008, that figure had dropped to 44%

So What do you think, Should Irish be made optional?
Personally I believe the proposal for reform of Irish language education put forward by Conradh na Gaeilge would be the best and most successful way forward.

Beartas Oideachais

Summary.

- All trainee teachers should be taught through Irish in an all-Irish environment, learning through and about immersion education in Irish, for the equivalent of one academic year of their training course, divided over the total length of their course and including the vital first few weeks. Students to be given the option to complete the entire course through Irish if they so wish;
- One subject, as well as Irish, should be through the medium of Irish to all primary pupils, initially on a pilot basis with the necessary support and training;
-Two syllabi should be developed for Irish at second level with two different examination papers for the Leaving Certificate and the Junior Certificate exams, Teanga na Gaeilge, or Irish Language to be taught to every student and Litríocht na Gaeilge, or Irish Language Literature for higher level students only.

Find more posts tagged with

irish

Quick Links

Comments

Cú Giobach

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

That is so rich. The majority do not speak Irish, yet the Irish Language Lobby want to make it the common language of Ireland....ignoring the will of the majority.

That's because you've run out of rational arguments justifying compelling people to speak Irish.

See those comments are why I don't bother with you any more.
The majority of people want to see Irish (apparently) to remain compulsory up to JC (why don't you comment on that?) and you just come up with the same old stuff you have been coming up for months now, over and over and over again.
You are like the proverbial dog with a bone.

cyclopath2001

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Just accept the will of the majority won't you.

That is so rich. The majority do not speak Irish, yet the Irish Language Lobby want to make it the common language of Ireland....ignoring the will of the majority.

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Haven't I told you before I've finished discussing this with you.

That's because you've run out of rational arguments justifying compelling people to speak Irish.

Cú Giobach

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Irish is not at all essential to the majority of children. Why not make it optional all the way?

Haven't I told you before I've finished discussing this with you.
Just accept the will of the majority won't you.

cyclopath2001

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Personally I feel it should remain compulsory until JC (as per the [seeming] majority).[/SIZE]

Irish is not at all essential to the majority of children. Why not make it optional all the way?

Cú Giobach

Interesting survey this.
In one question regarding the adequacy placed on fostering the Irish language and culture 34% say too little, 51% just right and 9% say too much, (7% DN).*
Then we have, 67% saying they find the proposal to make Irish optional after JC Important/V Important, and 29% no importance/unimportant (4%DN)
Choose your weapons statistics please.

Personally I feel it should remain compulsory until JC (as per the [seeming] majority).

*(=101% obviously rounded figures)

Lord TSC

To further compaq's post, that info can be found in Table 21 on page 36. 4th row from bottom.

At this stage, I think I'll exit all other discussions until that post above is addressed with an answer that is not "but people are open..."

compaqlaptop1

I'm still waiting on a reply to this post deise go deo. You were using this survey to prove that the Irish public were happy with Irish being compulsory, now that it has been shown to say the opposite I presume you will agree it should be optional?

compaqlaptop1 wrote: »

This survey you referred to on several occasions - http://www.erc.ie/documents/views_of_irish_public_on_education_2004_survey.pdf

1. The one you say backs you up in your view that Irish should be compulsory - Well this survey in on section actually asked t
he specific question 'Make Irish an optional subject after the Junior Certificate Examination'. And the results were strongly in favour of making it optional.

34% said it was very important to make it optional
32.8% said it was important
13.3% said it was neither unimportant or important
10.7% said it was unimportant
5.2% said it was very unimportant
3.9% had no opinion

You have been citing this report as evidence that Irish people would like Irish to remain a compulsory subject when it clearly states they want it optional. So please no explain to me how you can justify forcing everybody to learn Irish when there is clear evidence that the public don't want it to be compulsory.

2. Also you have constantly referred to Irish being the language that is most useful to a person getting a job in Ireland. And when challenged on this, that these jobs are state subsidized and economically unviable, you never disagreed, you simply said from the students point of view it doesn't matter how the job comes about as long as they can get a job.

Well if you want to use your logic, and forgot about the overall economic effect and just look at the situation through the eyes of the student do you not realise that if a student is fluent in either French or German or Spanish they are now able to enter the absolutely enormous job markets in the multitude of countries that speak these languages. There are well over half a billion people speaking these languages, that means a way way bigger job market than is available to someone who can speak Irish and who is only eligible for some state subsidised jobs in Ireland. You can't argue that 'these are foreign jobs, what good are they to the Irish economy' - as you yourself said we should just be considering the situation of solely from the student's point of view where 'a job's a job'. So please tell me now why Irish is more valuable to a student that French, German or Spanish?

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

The offical languages act has nothing to do with forging people to use Irish, It gives people the option of using Irish with the state.

It forces state bodies to provide services in Irish, whether they are necesary or not.

deise go deo wrote: »

Not to mention that these laws were enacted by a democratically elected government, not cnag.

It's not the first time that the public have had expensive white elephant projects foisted on them as a result of vote-buying by the government in response to pressure from small sectional-interest lobby groups.

deise go deo wrote: »

You have an interesting idea of what the word dictatorial means.

CnaG favours laws compelling people to speak Irish.

deise go deo wrote: »

The human cost to the Irish people? What is this human cost?

If you cannot recognise the harm that is caused by forcing people to learn and speak a language that they do not wish to speak, I do not know what kind of human being this makes you.

deise go deo wrote: »

It as an organisation has constantly promoted the Irish language, that is its aim, What is wrong with that?

There is nothing illegal about what CnAG does, but it pursues its goal of replacing English with Irish without any concern for the cost or for the people impacted by its policies. I find this selfish behaviour to be deplorable and objectionable.

deise go deo wrote: »

Well considering that I have yet to see you make a single positive comment about the Irish language after at least 200+ posts on the topic, you will understand if I take that with a pinch of salt.

Ah, the old "Why do you Hate Irish" tactic, yet again, it's like a comfort blanket for you.

Let's keep to the political issues involved:

1: Forcing people to speak Irish.
2: Waste of scarce resources.

Oasis_Dublin

astrofool wrote: »

This is a private board, and the moderators can do what they want, if I remember correctly, they expect people to contribute in the language of that forum, Irish for teach na ngealt and english for most other fora, Scofflaw, or one of the politics mods can correct me here.

Exactly, hence, "I won't stop using the language on here until such time." I can't see it becoming an issue however as I continue to post in English (over 99% of my words are English ones I'd reckon!)

astrofool

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

If the moderators feel it necessary to ban me for using a constitutional right of an Irish national on an Irish website then so be it. I won't stop using the language on here until such time.

This is a private board, and the moderators can do what they want, if I remember correctly, they expect people to contribute in the language of that forum, Irish for teach na ngealt and english for most other fora, Scofflaw, or one of the politics mods can correct me here.

Oasis_Dublin

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

You claim it's about a D4 stereotype, yet you can't resist the petty nationalism, hiding behind the D4 accent instead.

If you make a statement, have a spine and be ready to stand by it, or else withdraw it.

Do you think people don't see through this?

D4 has nothing to do with it.
It was the blatant attack on Non-Irish speakers, using a lame stereotype based on petty nationalism.

In the interest of clarity, assume for example, I conjured up a stereotype about Irish speakers being intellectually limited, backward & bog dwelling, isolationist, terrorist supporting, socialist parasites & close minded nationalists who Irish dance at the crossroads between bouts of fighting and alcoholism and demanding their entitlements, & anyone who disagrees is a moronic bar stool Republican .............. but I happen to write it in a D4 accent.

That would be a spineless, sly attack on a group of people over the language they choose to speak, not a humorous jibe about the D4 mentality or accent.

But within the confines of this forum, we are expected to use the English language, so you should probably tell it to the mod:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69584580&postcount=623

I absolutely will not withdraw the original comment.

Petty attack on non-Irish speakers? What an outrageously stupid statement to make. I wasn't using any sort of advanced level of Irish, I used some very basic terms which I learned at national school and secondary school. Assuming you are Irish and attended one of the aforementioned institutions, it is not too much to expect you to understand them. As has also been mentioned, nothing said as gaeilge (sorry, sorry, that means "in Irish":rolleyes:) was in any way offensive to anyone. I don't know what your assertion that I was being a petty nationalist is even supposed to mean. Explain, s'il-vous plait?

If the moderators feel it necessary to ban me for using a constitutional right of an Irish national on an Irish website then so be it. I won't stop using the language on here until such time.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

CnaG championed the OLA and favours compulsory teaching of the Irish language to English speaking children. This is dictatorial. They are laws and people are being forced to comply.

The offical languages act has nothing to do with forging people to use Irish, It gives people the option of using Irish with the state.

Are people/organisations who support compulsory English and maths also Dictatorial?

Not to mention that these laws were enacted by a democratically elected government, not cnag. You have an interesting idea of what the word dictatorial means.

Its is an organisation that single mindedly pursues its agenda of cultural change without regard to the human and financial costs to the Irish people.

The human cost to the Irish people? What is this human cost? It as an organisation has constantly promoted the Irish language, that is its aim, What is wrong with that?

Ah yes, the old "Why do you hate Irish?" line.

Actually, I think Irish is nice. I just don't like CnaG for the reasons I have given.

Well considering that I have yet to see you make a single positive comment about the Irish language after at least 200+ posts on the topic, you will understand if I take that with a pinch of salt.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

Cyclopath, Where are you getting this dictated nonsense from? I proposed CnaG's policy as the best way forward for

CnaG championed the OLA and favours compulsory teaching of the Irish language to English speaking children. This is dictatorial. They are laws and people are being forced to comply.

deise go deo wrote:

What is your problem with CnaG

Its is an organisation that single mindedly pursues its agenda of cultural change without regard to the human and financial costs to the Irish people.

deise go deo wrote:

and the Irish language in general?

Ah yes, the old "Why do you hate Irish?" line.

Actually, I think Irish is nice. I just don't like CnaG for the reasons I have given.

deise go deo

RandomName2 wrote: »

This post doesn't bear any relevance to the discussion. In fairness, neither did cyclopath's because thee is a little bit too much of a logical gap to bridge to directly tie the OP to nationalistic sentiment (as opposed to a post which, let's say, goes something like 'yah we bettler learn Irish cuz the Brits are bastards!' which would be kinda easy to point out... waste of time, but easy nonetheless)

Deise, whether he is bitter or not is irrelevant. Dictate is the correct word in the context.

How? CnaG is promoting its policy, but it neither has the power nor the desire to dictate to anyone.

Would you see a students union opposing the rise in fees as dictating?

RandomName2

deise go deo wrote: »

Cyclopath, Where are you getting this dictated nonsense from? I proposed CnaG's policy as the best way forward for Irish in the education system, Neither they nor I are dictating to anyone.

What about it is dictated? Is an organisation coming up with its own idea of what the best policy the government should adopt the same thing as dictating?

What is your problem with CnaG and the Irish language in general? I dont get it, why are you so bitter about it?

This post doesn't bear any relevance to the discussion. In fairness, neither did cyclopath's because thee is a little bit too much of a logical gap to bridge to directly tie the OP to nationalistic sentiment (as opposed to a post which, let's say, goes something like 'yah we bettler learn Irish cuz the Brits are bastards!' which would be kinda easy to point out... waste of time, but easy nonetheless)

Deise, whether he is bitter or not is irrelevant. Dictate is the correct word in the context.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

This is a bit rich. You're the one who started the discussion asking opinions on:

1: Compulsory Irish language lessons for English-speakers.

2: Changing the curriculum to one dictated by CnaG.

Now, you want to derail your own thread.

Cyclopath, Where are you getting this dictated nonsense from? I proposed CnaG's policy as the best way forward for Irish in the education system, Neither they nor I are dictating to anyone.

What about it is dictated? Is an organisation coming up with its own idea of what the best policy the government should adopt the same thing as dictating?

What is your problem with CnaG and the Irish language in general? I dont get it, why are you so bitter about it?

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

Now at least we can get to a relevant issue. Nationalism is not the founding stone of this discussion, The Irish language and Nationalism are not the same thing.

This is a bit rich. You're the one who started the discussion asking opinions on:

1: Compulsory Irish language lessons for English-speakers.

2: Changing the curriculum to one dictated by CnaG.

Now, you want to derail your own thread.

RandomName2

deise go deo wrote: »

Now at least we can get to a relevant issue. Nationalism is not the founding stone of this discussion, The Irish language and Nationalism are not the same thing.

Have nationalists used the Irish language for political purposes? Yes,
but that dosent mean that anyone in favor of the language is a nationalist or that the language its self is a nationalist thing.

Before nationalists 'took over' the language in the late 19 hundreds it was used by people in all sectors or Irish society, not just 'Nationalists'

Some of the great advocates of the Irish language at the time had nothing to do with nationalism, Duglas Hyde being the obvious example, but there were others including grand masters of the Orange Order,

Did you know?

The Irish language is not mono identity, it is not only of the nationalist catholic etc community, I dont support it because of some 'Nationalist' fantasy, It belongs to all Irish people no matter what their religion or politics.

If your interested, Irish language organisations like the Cultúrlans in NI,(one of which is based in a former Loyal Orange Lodge) activly try to engage with the orange community in their local areas.

There were organisations in Belfast that argued that Irish language and Culture was as much the property of the unionist community as the nationalist, these were unionists, not nationalists.

So you can think that the Irish language and nationalism are the same thing, but dont assume everyone else is working off the same notion.

Well, yeah, the basis for most of these nationalisms (some people bizarely refuse to see nationislm at the heart of ulster unionism

) is entirely flimsy (from their chosen perspective of uniqueness of culture, creed, colour, etc.)

Of course the unionists called themselves Irish Unionists for a long time; until such a time that they reaslised that they were setting their goals way way too high and that ulster would be the very most that they could manage (in a pinch).

Anyway, if you you use any introspection you should be able to see that nationalism (or subjective interpretation of nationalism) underpins the whole compulsory argument. :pac:

--
For the record I don't actually think nationalism is wrong per se; it should just take heed of what actually constitutes the nation, and why certain aspects of the nation are beneficial, and what is just inherited dross (Irish doesn't actually fall into the latter category, but neither does it fall into the former category either!).

Focalbhach

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Furthermore, I’d argue a board like that seems a good place to ask since you’re getting a diverse selection of people voting. You’re not canvassing a particular group.

This not actually true - or at least, it's far from being shown that it's true, which amounts to the same thing in this context. The group canvassed is a self-selected group of people who voluntarily and enthusiastically spend their free time on the internet arguing with strangers. That's a very particular subsample of the general population.

Without knowing what particular forum the question was posted in, I can still reasonably assume that that would be another stratifying factor - I'm sure the question would receive varying answers dependent on whether it was posted in the Irish forum, the Leaving Cert forum, the Politics forum, After Hours, Travel, the East regional forum, the West regional forum, the TCD forum, the Consumer Affairs forum, the Food & Drink forum, and so on ad nauseum. There was dozens of fora here and many people, including myself, tend to check on the same few regularly, and different fora will attract people with different characteristics.

deise go deo

RandomName2 wrote: »

Ah come on now.

I was talking about the general case, more than the specific. And, in the general case, my characterisation was indeed correct; the founding stone of nationalism is what the whole discussion is about.

All this stuff about broadening peoples' cultural horizons is baloney in attempting to fame this debate.

So, too, is the the insistence in calling Irish the language of the people of the whole of Ireland, the majority of Ireland, the east of Ireland, the south of Ireland, the north of Ireland (or Northern Ireland), or even large swathes of the west of Ireland. It is more relevant to call Polish the language of the people of Ireland (notwithstanding that most people speaking Polish in Ireland are non-nationals).

So, not only is the debate entirely formulated upon Irish as an identifier for Irish nationalism, it is also a false one. It is false both presently, and historically, as are most aspects of any country's national mythos. But, myths of nationalism are no bad thing in-of themselves, give me Cú Chulainn defending the pass of the north any day, or whatever you're having yourself. It's only when nationalism is either (a) used as an excuse to arbitrarily take up arms or (b) given legal clout that one should take notice. And when nationalism is given legal might, yet does not reflect the nation it is meant to represent there is something wrong.

Now at least we can get to a relevant issue. Nationalism is not the founding stone of this discussion, The Irish language and Nationalism are not the same thing.

Have nationalists used the Irish language for political purposes? Yes,
but that dosent mean that anyone in favor of the language is a nationalist or that the language its self is a nationalist thing.

Before nationalists 'took over' the language in the late 19 hundreds it was used by people in all sectors or Irish society, not just 'Nationalists'

Some of the great advocates of the Irish language at the time had nothing to do with nationalism, Duglas Hyde being the obvious example, but there were others including grand masters of the Orange Order,

Did you know?

That a County Grand Master of Belfast was a great advocate of Irish Language and culture?
Rev. Dr. Richard Routledge Kane (1841-1898), Rector Christ Church (Church of Ireland) in Belfast was not only a great advocate of the Irish language but was, along with Dr. Buick the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland and Dr. Welland the Church of Ireland Bishop of Down, Connor and Dromore, a patron of the Belfast Gaelic League which had been founded in 1895. It is also said that he signed the Minutes of Lodge meetings in Irish. He was County Grand Master of Belfast 1885-1898.

The Irish language is not mono identity, it is not only of the nationalist catholic etc community, I dont support it because of some 'Nationalist' fantasy, It belongs to all Irish people no matter what their religion or politics.

If your interested, Irish language organisations like the Cultúrlans in NI,(one of which is based in a former Loyal Orange Lodge) activly try to engage with the orange community in their local areas.

There were organisations in Belfast that argued that Irish language and Culture was as much the property of the unionist community as the nationalist, these were unionists, not nationalists.

So you can think that the Irish language and nationalism are the same thing, but dont assume everyone else is working off the same notion.

You do need to brush up slightly on your Bearla as well, but that's a bit separate to the discussion.

Lord TSC

I did ask that question, I have been taking part in debats like this one for some time, one of the more annoying parts of them is the often repeated put down, 'Irish is a dead language', Made more annoying by the fact that i know Irish isent a dead language. I started the thread in AH to see just how many people actually think Irish is dead.

As for using the results for my own agenda?

Dont be silly, what kind of evidence is a poll in AH
If I wanted to use a meaningless poll on a forum to back up my arguments i would use this one. P.ie

The funny thing is it’s the first time there’s been a direct question that isn’t loaded; it was a simple yes/no question. Furthermore, I’d argue a board like that seems a good place to ask since you’re getting a diverse selection of people voting. You’re not canvassing a particular group. You’re getting a variety of people from different social, cultural and geographical backgrounds.

Again, I agree it’s not a dead language. But the fact the majority seem to consider it one shows what a lot of people think. It may not be dead but it is certainly dying.

How exactly am I supposed to be open to the results of the poll in AH, I know that Irish is not a dead language, Am I supposed to deny fact based on a poll in AH?

As for my question at the start of this thread, It was to encourage people to put forward their opinions, I dont see whats wrong with that.

Encourage all you want. My problem comes with the fact you are obviously not open to a lot of things yourself, top of the list being that there are those who think the language should be optional. You asked a question that, let’s face it, you were never going to find answers which would sway you. You asked a question that you knew would get a particular answer and a particular reaction out of people and then proceeded to use the same statements over and over, outright refusing to take other people’s opinions on board. You, in effect, asked people what their opinions were and then proceeded to tell them how wrong they were with your fingers in your ears.

I'm not saying you're trolling, cause it's obvious you're not. You are just passionate about the topic at hand. But your actions are bordering on trolling and straddling the line at times...

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

God, the sheer aragonce in this post is shocking.

There is no arrogance there at all. There is no implication of criminality relating to Irish, you've misconstrued the intended meaning.

deise go deo wrote: »

Show me what I have cowered from?

You've ignored, dodged and evaded the contradiction between claiming to be against forcing people to speak Irish while at the same time being earnestly, steadfastly and persistantly in favour of compulsory Irish language lessons for English speakers. Some might consider that to be arrogant.

RandomName2

deise go deo wrote: »

I suppose I was foolish to hope for a higher standard of discussion than this.:(

You have completely and unfairly misrepresented me, I reject what you have said. I have never said, nor suggested anything even close to what you have accused me of.

Ah come on now.

I was talking about the general case, more than the specific. And, in the general case, my characterisation was indeed correct; the founding stone of nationalism is what the whole discussion is about.

All this stuff about broadening peoples' cultural horizons is baloney in attempting to fame this debate.

So, too, is the the insistence in calling Irish the language of the people of the whole of Ireland, the majority of Ireland, the east of Ireland, the south of Ireland, the north of Ireland (or Northern Ireland), or even large swathes of the west of Ireland. It is more relevant to call Polish the language of the people of Ireland (notwithstanding that most people speaking Polish in Ireland are non-nationals).

So, not only is the debate entirely formulated upon Irish as an identifier for Irish nationalism, it is also a false one. It is false both presently, and historically, as are most aspects of any country's national mythos. But, myths of nationalism are no bad thing in-of themselves, give me Cú Chulainn defending the pass of the north any day, or whatever you're having yourself. It's only when nationalism is either (a) used as an excuse to arbitrarily take up arms or (b) given legal clout that one should take notice. And when nationalism is given legal might, yet does not reflect the nation it is meant to represent there is something wrong.

You do need to brush up slightly on your Bearla as well, but that's a bit separate to the discussion.

deise go deo

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Grand, tell you what -> why don't you and your 'chosen' pals have a nice discussion here as Gaeilge about compulsory Irish, and us untermensch will go off and find something productive to do.

So now you are resorting to godwining the thread:rolleyes:

I would have thought that inexorable disingenuous misunderstanding to avoid points and cower from arguments put to you would be beneath you.
Evidently, it is not.

Show me what I have cowered from?

I never made that equation, Strawman argument.

If you're understanding of the broken window theory genuinely is limited to 'Criminality', then I'm afraid there is little I can do to help you.
I don't have time to spoonfeed you points and break them down to the LCD for your ingestion.

God, the sheer aragonce in this post is shocking.

Oiche Maith a Cara, Slán:rolleyes:

RandomName2

deise go deo wrote: »

I apologize, apparantly my sarcasm went over your head.:rolleyes:

There was a non sequitur

Dannyboy83

deise go deo wrote: »

There isent anything in this forums charter about only posting in English.

Grand, tell you what -> why don't you and your 'chosen' pals have a nice discussion here as Gaeilge about compulsory Irish, and us untermensch will go off and find something productive to do.

I would have tought such a sentiment would be beneath you dannyboy, alas, you dont seem to be very fair minded when it comes to this issue,
What you percieve as my English Comprehension skills are not the Issue of debate, and if you think that an effective way to argue your case is a cheap shot like that then I dont know why I am wasting my time with you.

I would have thought that inexorable disingenuous misunderstanding to avoid points and cower from arguments put to you would be beneath you.
Evidently, it is not.

That you equate the Irish language with Criminality is disturbing, Ie you put the use of Irish in the place of criminality, something that must be prevented, while a 'well ordered condition' is one that is English only.

The notion that a theory on criminality apply s to Language use is laughable.

I never made that equation, Strawman argument.

If you're understanding of the broken window theory genuinely is limited to 'Criminality', then I'm afraid there is little I can do to help you.
I don't have time to spoonfeed you points and break them down to the LCD for your ingestion.

deise go deo

RandomName2 wrote: »

Sorry to answer cyclopath's question for him but you said:

'but thats [sic] just me'

and he said:

'indeed it is'

So... [insert logical connection concerning interpretation of the English language here]

I apologize, apparantly my sarcasm went over your head.:rolleyes:

deise go deo

RandomName2 wrote: »

Yes, but your nationality is Irish. Anything else is foreign...

So your not being able to understand him is rude!

When in Rome; do as the Romans (or at least what the Romans should do). So when in Rome speak Latin... even when everyone in Rome actually speaks Italian.

Remember the dictat:

Why Irish?
Nationalism!
Sure nationalism has been the millstone this island has had around its neck for the last 100 years. Get rid of one ill (colonialism) and usher in a new one, eh?
The Celtic Tiger did away with most of the last vestiges of national ethos (apart from Gaeilge which was left as a sacred cow) only to replace latter day ecclesiastical obsession with property obsession. Out with one millstone, in with the new.

I suppose I was foolish to hope for a higher standard of discussion than this.:(

You have completely and unfairly misrepresented me, I reject what you have said. I have never said, nor suggested anything even close to what you have accused me of.

I have never suggested that there is anything rude or other wise about a poster not being able to understand Irish, Several times over the past few months you and others have attributed such feelings to me, I have been accused of looking down on non Irish speakers, or thinking of them as less Irish etc. These claims were then and remain now baseless.

But within the confines of this forum, we are expected to use the English language

There isent anything in this forums charter about only posting in English.

I find your insistence of compulsory Irish amusing when your English comprehension skills are clearly inadequate.

I would have tought such a sentiment would be beneath you dannyboy, alas, you dont seem to be very fair minded when it comes to this issue,
What you percieve as my English Comprehension skills are not the Issue of debate, and if you think that an effective way to argue your case is a cheap shot like that then I dont know why I am wasting my time with you.

How did you extrapolate criminal implications in the field of linguistics from the Broken Window theory?

Broken windows theory is a criminological theory of the normsetting and signalling effects of urban disorder and vandalism on additional crime and anti-social behavior. The theory states that monitoring and maintaining urban environments in a well-ordered condition may prevent further vandalism as well as an escalation into more serious crime.

That you equate the Irish language with Criminality is disturbing, Ie you put the use of Irish in the place of criminality, something that must be prevented, while a 'well ordered condition' is one that is English only.

The notion that a theory on criminality apply s to Language use is laughable.

RandomName2

deise go deo wrote: »

Im surprised cyclopath, you think that languages other than English should be allowed on the forum, And that its not rude to speak Irish?

Sorry to answer cyclopath's question for him but you said:

'but thats [sic] just me'

and he said:

'indeed it is'

So... [insert logical connection concerning interpretation of the English language here]

RandomName2

Laisurg wrote: »

My opinion on the teaching of it is that it should be given as an option but not compulsory for the leaving cert, i wouldn't be too pushed on the junior cert since it doesn't mean much.

At the moment irish is taught extremely badly in primary schools and that is the main reason why i was never any good at it, this really should be looked into and fixed as its to blame for a lot of the bad results in irish in the leaving cert.

Yeh; even though it's useless as a working language, it is still really necessary to have it as a subject option.

I found not ever learning the rules of Irish made it very hard to get to grips with it (more vocab, but still with no base). It is easier in secondary school because you can skirt around it a bit more and take certain levels in it; and besides which it is useless in every other subject (unlike let's say English or Maths) so doing badly in it wont overly affect your other grades (unless you have to spend extra time on it to ensure you don't completely flunk it in the long-run).