P. Breathnach wrote: » I don't think an ability to speak Irish should be a core requirement for any political office. But it is a welcome bonus when our senior politicians have the ability, and use the language appropriately. CelticRambler's point is a good one: the use of the language can mark for people in other countries that we we have a heritage of our own, and are not merely detached Brits. [Some of our own people might also need that reminder.] If we set aside for the moment the very important political questions that rightly dominate the agenda, I think it is pleasing that so many of our senior politicians speak Irish well.
Eliot Rosewater wrote: » I think the Dail proceedings should be accessible to all. When a TD gives a speech in Irish myself and about 90% of other viewers can't understand it, especially because the Irish in use will be a little more complex than "An bhfuil cead agam dul go dtí an leithreas?" On the other hand, there is probably no citizen of this country who can't understand English. Conducting parliament in English is the only surefire way of ensuring that the people it represents can understand what is happening and thus hold it accountable.
deise go deo wrote: » The effect of that would be to make Irish a second class language in Ireland
deise go deo wrote: » Its true that many people cannot understand Irish, It is a minority language here, but I think we should be promoting our minority language not shuning and hiding it
deise go deo wrote: » When someone is speaking Irish in the Dáil it would be a very simple matter for Subtitles to be provided, No problem with transparency/accountibility then.
RDM_83 again wrote: » Also considering the present ROI as a whole there is/was a significant ethnic/social/religious group in the New English and the Anglo-Normans of the Pale that would never have been Irish speakers why is their tradition and culture not important, if Ireland was reunified today (I hope) nobody would expect the Protestant people or their children to have to learn Irish, yet in the ROI the same group has to where is the logic and equality of that. [/INDENT]
Iwasfrozen wrote: » Why does that even focus on the radar? Are we really so culturally insecure that "not being briitish" is a good enough reason to drag up the odd cupla focal whenever the "chief" is giving a speech on something even though a tiny percent of us actually speak it?
Patser wrote: » I'm not using immigrants against the language, I'm just saying that blanket requirements for a language that the majority still connot speak fluently will build resentment against the language and place barriers for the majority (immigrants were the obvious example).
P. Breathnach wrote: » Despite all the bad stuff that has happened in the past few years, I still quite like the idea of being Irish. It is a different cultural heritage from any other (with its downside as well as its upside). At an anecdotal level, I can tell you that when I travel outside the country, I often make the effort to let people know I am Irish, and it seems to have a good effect on how I am regarded. Please accept my assurance that I am not in any way anti-British. It's simply a fact that I am not British, and I prefer not to be perceived wrongly. Our habitual use of English can give the impression to many people that we are part of a British cultural unit (not the best terminology, but I can't immediately find a better way to express it). The Irish language is one indicator of how we should be regarded as a bit different and unique. The disparaging tone in which you dismiss the use of Irish, and the reasons why I think it a good thing, suggest that there is some basis for my parenthetical comment that some of our own people might also need that reminder.
Eliot Rosewater wrote: » Irish is already a second class language because only a tiny minority actually speak it. People should start dealing with this reality.
I'm not suggesting we hide it. I'm saying that it's inappropriate for a parliamentarian to intentionally make a speech in the Dail in a language that the majority of the people he or she represents don't understand. It inhibits the ability of citizens to hold parliamentarians accountable.
Ignoring the difficulties in translation and such, this would still be a major inconvenience. And given that the inconvenience is being proposed only to feed the hobby horse of one special interest group in society, I think it an inconvenience without justification.
Dannyboy83 wrote: » People who are concerned about us marking ourselves out from the Brits need to start reading the International media. We are the fcuking laughing stock of Europe.
Requiring politicians to speak in Irish is another branch of parish pump politics.
How about we concern ourselves with POLICY??? Instead of IMAGE???:rolleyes:
Iwasfrozen wrote: » I quite like being Irish as well but I would never go out of my way to let a passing foreigner know I was Irish when in another country. Unless said passing foreigner is racist there really isn't a point.
Any way it's not like us and the Brits are the only english speakers around. There are also the Americans, Australians, Canadians, South Africans and hell even Falkland Islanders.
P. Breathnach wrote: » My experience has been that I am regularly taken as being English (which for most people in continental Europe seems synonymous with British). It seems to me that relatively few people confuse us with English-speakers from more distant places.
P. Breathnach wrote: » Don't overstate things.
Yes, our image has suffered greatly in the bast couple of years, but outside political and financial circles, most people are not that interested in our travails.
In any event, I have no wish to hide. If I visit France (as I often do) and somebody I meet there wants me to discuss what went wrong in Ireland, I am quite willing to converse about it.
I don't support a requirement that our politicians speak Irish. My position is that I see it as a bonus if they can.
Yet you opened your argument by expressing a concern about how we are perceived: image.
Yes, of course it is vitally important that we get some good policy and practice in place. But that does not exclude image, because having a good image is part of the package.
Dannyboy83 wrote: » If you have any family living abroad, I suggest you ask them for their opinions. If it's anything like the stories I've heard, you'll see that I'm not overstating anything. Our reputation is in tatters. I'm sorry but you are deluded if you believe this, this is simply not true. Ordinary people in all walks of life have plenty to say about Ireland and many of them are very angry with us, others just think we are morons.
Precisely. A disturbingly large amount of people note and praise the fact that Cowen can ramble a few words as gaeilge, yet the vast majority of people take little notice of the fact that Bruton is a qualified economist or Ruairi Quinn has a great track record etc.
A small minority of people in Ireland give a damn about the perception that a politician can utter a few words of Irish. It's irrelevant. The overwhelming majority of people inside and outside Ireland care about the image of the politician as competent and non-corrupt first and foremost.
deise go deo wrote: » People wanting competent and non-corupt politicions is a given, I dont see why you are even bringing it up in this debate. Unless you have the view that the two things as somehow in compition with each other?
Dannyboy83 wrote: » My view is that, we've as good as been through a war in Ireland for the last 3 years, and the 2 nasty ones are coming up. After everything this country has been through in the last 3 years, it's borderline infantile to suggest that their ability to speak Irish even matters in the slightest, any more than their ability to cook boiled eggs.
What is it going to take to get people to accept only a tiny minority actually speak or care about the Irish language?
Evidience? I have been asking for evidience on this from you and other's for quite some time now, I have provided several piecies of evidience that show that people do suport the language, Now I will ask again, You claim that people dont care about the language, Where is your evidience?
deise go deo wrote: » It matters to quite a few people, That the vast majority of party leaders actually do speak Irish well shows that they feel there is a need to.
That was my experience too, I remember a piticularly annoying waiter in Paris asked me what part of England I was from, When I said I was Irish he just said, Its the same thing isent it.
deise go deo wrote: » That was my experience too, I remember a piticularly annoying waiter in Paris asked me what part of England I was from, When I said I was Irish he just said, Its the same thing isent it. Ah if only I had as much Irish then as I do now.:cool:
CelticRambler wrote: » On the contrary - if politicians are answering questions in a language in which they are not entirely fluent, they are more likely to say exactly what they mean, rather than using subtle nuances to talk for twenty minutes yet avoid saying anything.
deise go deo wrote: » Irish is, as I have said, a minority language, But you need to deal with the reality that minority languages are to be promoted not shunned as second class languages.
deise go deo wrote: » I have already stated that this can easily be gotten around, The vast majority of Irish citizens can read English can they not, now given that the vast majority of political speeches will have a written text prepared beforhand, then providing subtitles in English can easily be done, There is no issue with Accountably.
Eliot Rosewater wrote: » ... I'm not suggesting we shun Irish. I'm merely arguing that the Dail is one particular place where the use of Irish is not very appropriate....
CelticRambler wrote: » ...he would be showing a willingness to go beyond the quick-and-easy option.