Is Irish actually spoken in the Gealtachts?

HugoBradyBrown · 13-11-2011 12:59AM

Enkidu wrote: »

English is a massive international language, Irish is a small one of one nation, you have to compare like with like. Irish has a few phrases, idioms and ways of phrasing things that don't roll of the tongue at first if you're learner. However this doesn't imply that Irish is moribund. Also none of this supports the original notion that the best Irish is in Foxrock.

Oh, they speak very little of it in Foxrock, I can tell you, na daoine galánta. But down the hill a bit, towards Bakers' Corner and riding to the sea, and you will hear wisps of it, here and there, amid the baaing sound of the DART-accented English that is so widespread among the sheepish people of the area.

Moreover, I would argue that if it were possible to gather all 25 000 competent speakers of Gaelic in the land and put them in one place, say Ballinasloe, a genuine language community might be the result, since a modest critical mass of speakers and of speech acts would be created. As it is, Gaelic speakers are becoming like the giant tortoise, Lonesome George, and his fellows on the different Galapagos Islands (na Galapóigí), stranded on their separate linguistic islands, thinking furiously in Gaelic and dreaming in Gaelic, but losing the ability to generate novelty in the language for want of opportunity to engage in ideal speech acts with others.

General Michael Collins · 13-11-2011 01:03AM

Such whinging and bitching! I've never heard the like of it - between those who want nothing but what is to be a Gaeltacht, and those who want no Gaeltachtaí at all!

I'm just waiting for you to protest that you do want the good of the language, and you are being "realistic".

Let us deal with this then, for to my mind this is the greater sin to linguistic snobbery. Irish is a living language. In this thread we seem to have focussed on how it has not flourished where the government set its boundaries - (though I doubt many of the claims made by the dying language faction) but what about the language outside of these lines on a map? What is the test of a living language? If memory serves, 1.66 million people claim some standard of Irish, In the 26 counties alone.

This week, Teilifís Gaeilge celebrates fifteen years of proving the begrudgers we see in this thread wrong, as the Independent (somewhat Ironically) put it - the "Culturally Colonised", who hoped that the station would fail, and quickly too, to save them the embarrassment of having the language occupy their country much longer.

There are Radio stations - you might call Raidió na Gaeltachta a subsidised "Irish in a Zoo" station if you are so inclined, but I doubt you would ever apply the title to Raidió na Life or Raidio Fáilte. There are News outlets - Government supported Gaelscéal does fairly poorly in sales, but Foinse has a much larger readership, and Nuacht 24 is a successful operation as well. Additionally, Litríocht, the Irish book shop is a quality outfit, and whether or not it's significantly subsidised, (I genuinely don't know) it showcases the Literature still being produced by the Irish in our native tongue.

We continue to base our figures and notions on the counties under our control - we must take the 6 into account. Belfast is after all, the "Urban Gaeltacht", in some parts at least. The figures below are encouraging, and the Líofa 2015 campaign is an interesting development.

As for - The Best Irish is here, or there, or in any one place - my advice is to forget it. Irish is not the property of Conamara or Gaoth Dobhair, it's merely under their stewardship. Many areas of Dublin do have good Irish, it's true, and the opposite is also true.

To finish, I will point out that we can post maps and figures at each other all day long, but beatha an teanga í a labhairt, and therefore, I have a Fóram to run.

Saaron · 13-11-2011 01:08AM

I used to live in Corca Dhuibhne and a lot of my friends would speak Irish at home as it was their first language. If their parents phoned or anything along those lines they'd automatically speak Irish.

In school many of my friends would chat to each other in Irish as well. Often their Irish grammar would be better than their English grammar.

When you get nearer to towns like Dingle most people would speak mainly English yet they could speak Irish if they needed to.

HugoBradyBrown · 13-11-2011 01:12AM

Saaron wrote: »

I used to live in Corca Dhuibhne and a lot of my friends would speak Irish at home as it was their first language. If their parents phoned or anything along those lines they'd automatically speak Irish.

In school many of my friends would chat to each other in Irish as well. Often their Irish grammar would be better than their English grammar.

When you get nearer to towns like Dingle most people would speak mainly English yet they could speak Irish if they needed to.

But you will find that if a Gaelic speaker drops a cooking pot on her toe, even in the Gaeltacht, she will curse in English, and not in Gaelic. I think that this is a sovereign test of which comes first, which is the genuine first language. The other is often only pretending, like the people on Shop Street in Galway, speaking Gaelic so loudly you can hear them across the street.

Saaron · 13-11-2011 01:16AM

deirdremf wrote: »

You are confusing "book Irish" and "school Irish" with good Irish.
They might speak the caighdeán oifigiúil, but that's not really Irish, it's a sort of emasculated version of the language for writing official documents. Nobody in their right mind speaks like that.
Then there is the question of pronunciation: most Dublin speakers cannot get their mouths around the phonetics of Irish. They say things like "taw mé", "cúig mé", "conaic mé", and so on.
And then they do not have any of the proverbs, set phrases etc that a native speaker will have at the tip of his tongue at all times.

Absolutely agree! When I moved back to Dublin from Dingle to do my Leaving Cert I noticed a huge difference in how people from Dublin Spoke Irish in comparison to those who have grown up with it as their first language.

Book Irish just doesn't sound as natural in comparison. Good Irish just flows properly, pretty much the same way an we'd speak English from day to day.

deirdremf · 13-11-2011 01:17AM

HugoBradyBrown wrote: »

But you will find that if a Gaelic speaker drops a cooking pot on her toe, even in the Gaeltacht, she will curse in English, and not in Gaelic. I think that this is a sovereign test of which comes first, which is the genuine first language. The other is often only pretending, like the people on Shop Street in Galway, speaking Gaelic so loudly you can hear them across the street.

As likely to say "droch rath ort mar phota" as a curse in English. Probably even more likely, now that I come to think of it.
Maybe you watch Ros na Rún too often, while reading the subtitles?

deirdremf · 13-11-2011 01:18AM

Saaron wrote: »

Absolutely agree! When I moved back to Dublin from Dingle to do my Leaving Cert I noticed a huge difference in how people from Dublin Spoke Irish in comparison to those who have grown up with it as their first language.

Book Irish just doesn't sound as natural in comparison. Good Irish just flows properly, pretty much the same way an we'd speak English from day to day.

Nicely put.

Saaron · 13-11-2011 01:23AM

HugoBradyBrown wrote: »

But you will find that if a Gaelic speaker drops a cooking pot on her toe, even in the Gaeltacht, she will curse in English, and not in Gaelic. I think that this is a sovereign test of which comes first, which is the genuine first language. The other is often only pretending, like the people on Shop Street in Galway, speaking Gaelic so loudly you can hear them across the street.

Not really, having lived in the Gaeltacht I know that I would have even cursed in Irish, or that to the equivalent of cursing. A lot of the time it would be the first thing to come out of our mouths without thinking twice.

HugoBradyBrown · 13-11-2011 01:23AM

General Michael Collins wrote: »

Such whinging and bitching! I've never heard the like of it - between those who want nothing but what is to be a Gaeltacht, and those who want no Gaeltachtaí at all!

I'm just waiting for you to protest that you do want the good of the language, and you are being "realistic".

Let us deal with this then, for to my mind this is the greater sin to linguistic snobbery. Irish is a living language. In this thread we seem to have focussed on how it has not flourished where the government set its boundaries - (though I doubt many of the claims made by the dying language faction) but what about the language outside of these lines on a map? What is the test of a living language? If memory serves, 1.66 million people claim some standard of Irish, In the 26 counties alone.

Yes, I suppose I am a realist, well-disposed to the language, but not inclined to keep something alive when its own speakers, those who own it, are allowing it to die. I sense that people in Ireland will do anything for Gaelic, except speak it. And there is a sense that people are anxious to support it for others to speak it, but not to do so themselves.

More tellingly, though, is the fact that no reliance of any kind can be placed on this census-based self-reporting of competence in Gaelic. Self-reported, self-flattering data is worthless. The test is set so low that by now, applying the same advisory measure, we could all claim to speak Polish, Lithuanian and Romanian, since we all probably have enough of those languages to conduct a conversation of 30 seconds' duration.

A true, tested survey needs to be conducted by objective, non-parti pris researchers, to determine the true extent of language competence, and to estimate scientifically the extent of language use in Ireland. I feel as if the Gaelic language is now in the same kind of respected limbo that 'prayers before and after meals' always were: something half-rememebred from the national school, and excavated from the recesses of the mind if some external witness like a priest joined the family dinner table. Gaelic, too, is something dusted off if foreigners are present speaking their own language amongst us, and we get embarrassed. Otherwise, the vast bulk of the population - 4 million minus the 25 thousand Gaelic speakers - really care little for it in any meaningful way.

Sadly.

General Michael Collins · 13-11-2011 01:30AM

Where are you getting this 25,000 figure from? The Government believes there are 80, 000 people who use Irish as their vernacular language and this figure fits well with the popularity of Irish medium products, as detailed above. It is the aim of the Government to increase this to 250,000 by 2030.

Enkidu · 13-11-2011 01:34AM

General Michael Collins wrote: »

To finish, I will point out that we can post maps and figures at each other all day long, but beatha an teanga í a labhairt, and therefore, I have a Fóram to run.

Is dócha go bhfuil an fhírinne agat. Ní foláir liom teacht chun cainte le duine anois!:)

HugoBradyBrown · 13-11-2011 01:36AM

General Michael Collins wrote: »

Where are you getting this 25,000 figure from? The Government believes there are 80, 000 people who use Irish as their vernacular language and this figure fits well with the popularity of Irish medium products, as detailed above. It is the aim of the Government to increase this to 250,000 by 2030.

During the past 10 days, the Irish Daily Mail published this figure, for example, but it is the most widely disseminated and most credible figure for genuine active speakers of Gaelic. I do not doubt that there may be other potential speakers, but they are, in effect, in a Lonesome George situation, marooned among speakers of another national language. Unless the speakers can be encouraged to migrate internally, to an urban centre where they can all talk to each other, in a Gaelic reservation, the numbers will continue to fall, until, ultimately, no two speakers of Gaelic will be in direct communication one with another. That is all.

In great haste (which may have resonance for the previous poster).

Insect Overlord · 13-11-2011 01:44AM

HugoBradyBrown wrote: »

During the past 10 days, the Irish Daily Mail

And that's exactly where I stopped reading.

General Michael Collins · 13-11-2011 01:47AM

HugoBradyBrown wrote: »

During the past 10 days, the Irish Daily Mail published this figure, for example, but it is the most widely disseminated and most credible figure for genuine active speakers of Gaelic. I do not doubt that there may be other potential speakers, but they are, in effect, in a Lonesome George situation, marooned among speakers of another national language. Unless the speakers can be encouraged to migrate internally, to an urban centre where they can all talk to each other, in a Gaelic reservation, the numbers will continue to fall, until, ultimately, no two speakers of Gaelic will be in direct communication one with another. That is all.

In great haste (which may have resonance for the previous poster).

Ah, so it's "The man from the Daily Mail" situation.

I'll tell you why I think that's an awful idea, despite the disagreement on figures (which would make Irish less spoken than Scottish Gaelic, if true).

The Government had a similar idea in the 50's with all the land commission Gaeilgeoirí coming to live in county Meath, my Grandfather being one. Three De Facto Gaeltachtaí resulted - Baile Ailín, Baile Ghib, and Rath Cairn. Baile Ailín died out because it was too small, and the natives were particularly hostile towards the "Westerners", who were given no incentive to speak the language.

Rath Cairn survived, and does to this day, as a genuine Gaeltacht, but it needed a wealth of support to do this. Baile Ghib is a shadow of a Gaeltacht, though it should be more because people from almost every Irish dialect were shoved into an area together. The differences in language making life difficult, they resorted to the thing they had in common - English. Anecdotal evidence maybe, but worth your consideration, I'll warrant, before creating that Irish language zoo you were talking about.

HugoBradyBrown · 13-11-2011 01:59AM

General Michael Collins wrote: »

Ah, so it's "The man from the Daily Mail" situation.

I'll tell you why I think that's an awful idea, despite the disagreement on figures (which would make Irish less spoken than Scottish Gaelic, if true).

The Government had a similar idea in the 50's with all the land commission Gaeilgeoirí coming to live in county Meath, my Grandfather being one. Three De Facto Gaeltachtaí resulted - Baile Ailín, Baile Ghib, and Rath Cairn. Baile Ailín died out because it was too small, and the natives were particularly hostile towards the "Westerners", who were given no incentive to speak the language.

Rath Cairn survived, and does to this day, as a genuine Gaeltacht, but it needed a wealth of support to do this. Baile Ghib is a shadow of a Gaeltacht, though it should be more because people from almost every Irish dialect were shoved into an area together. The differences in language making life difficult, they resorted to the thing they had in common - English. Anecdotal evidence maybe, but worth your consideration, I'll warrant, before creating that Irish language zoo you were talking about.

No, I am not proposing linguistic cleansing myself, but if there were a voluntary move by the Gaelic speakers, some forestalling of the extinction of the language might be possible. It occurs to me this morning that some of the ghost estates of the land might be a viable proposition, if funding could be secured.

I think that the peasant model of settling people on the land is no longer viable, and runs counter to the idea of bringing people into Habermasian conversational situations with each other. Rural life can be most isolating, especially if there is the complication of a linguistic barrier, and personal, psychological and behavioural negative consequences frequently flow from the transplantation of people from the 'civilized' life of the city to a backward rural area.

If a town could be, as it were, requisitioned, and if all the Gaelic speakers in the land could be encouraged to migrate there, something could be done.

Ballinasloe suggests itself to me, since it is probably the right size for a Gaelic reservation, is fairly central, but shifted towards the western seaboard where the aboriginal speakers of Gaelic are to be found, so that their personal histories and heritage would not be excessively distant from their new town. It might even form a useful tourist attraction, to have all aspects of the necessary communications of life being conducted in the Gaelic tongue. Having had experience of some Amish villages, and having seen similar places in parts of Africa (and, indeed, in the Ainu museum town in Hokkaido), I think that this is a highly practicable and potentially profitable venture.

Hopefully.

conor.hogan.2 · 13-11-2011 02:17AM

Blackjack wrote: »

Ceathrú Thaidhg is not on the Mullet. Eachleam is where you are thinking of.

Ceathrú Thaidhg is actually 22 miles from Belmullet, and Irish is indeed alive and well there.

Yes, but parts very near to belmullet town are supposed to be gaeltachts, and they should not be and neither should a lot of eachleim either imo.

Also will be please, kindly, get the hell over the caighdeán and how it is not "real" irish it is very annoying.

General Michael Collins · 13-11-2011 02:17AM

HugoBradyBrown wrote: »

No, I am not proposing linguistic cleansing myself, but if there were a voluntary move by the Gaelic speakers, some forestalling of the extinction of the language might be possible. It occurs to me this morning that some of the ghost estates of the land might be a viable proposition, if funding could be secured.

I think that the peasant model of settling people on the land is no longer viable, and runs counter to the idea of bringing people into Habermasian conversational situations with each other. Rural life can be most isolating, especially if there is the complication of a linguistic barrier, and personal, psychological and behavioural negative consequences frequently flow from the transplantation of people from the 'civilized' life of the city to a backward rural area.

If a town could be, as it were, requisitioned, and if all the Gaelic speakers in the land could be encouraged to migrate there, something could be done.

Ballinasloe suggests itself to me, since it is probably the right size for a Gaelic reservation, is fairly central, but shifted towards the western seaboard where the aboriginal speakers of Gaelic are to be found, so that their personal histories and heritage would not be excessively distant from their new town. It might even form a useful tourist attraction, to have all aspects of the necessary communications of life being conducted in the Gaelic tongue. Having had experience of some Amish villages, and having seen similar places in parts of Africa (and, indeed, in the Ainu museum town in Hokkaido), I think that this is a highly practicable and potentially profitable venture.

Hopefully.

You would turn the language into a tourist attraction and discourage its use outside of this "Gaelbhaile", to the detriment of the language. I have seen towns along the seaboard which have been transformed from real towns into "Diddly-Feedly-eedle-idle-oh!" fake towns for the benefit of visiting americans. This Irish speaking town would not be safe from this phenomenon. The positive attitude towards Irish would be undermined by this museum exhibition - Here lieth Irish - now, let us never speak of it again image which is conjured by the thought of migrating hordes of Irish speakers from across the country - costing their native Gaeltachtaí, and basically putting all the eggs in one basket when the risk need not be taken, with far more suitable and worthwhile ventures underway for the preservation and for the good of Irish.

Consider English in the Pale : Confined to one area, it did not move outside that area from 1167 to the mid 1800's! And Even then, it was the result of a campaign to make English spoken across the land, - legal, professional, psychological. It then, as a result of this campaign, became the first language. And now, you are trying to tell me, that the way to make Irish stand on an equal footing with English again is to confine it to one area? It defies logic.

Insect Overlord · 13-11-2011 02:25AM

I do not believe that Mr.BradyBrown intends for his ideas to be taken at face-value. It's polemic writing of the Myersian school, with echoes of Miles na gCopaleen's aping of Joyce thrown in for added effect.

But, it is getting people thinking and talking about Irish. That's not a bad thing.

conor.hogan.2 · 13-11-2011 02:29AM

While others seem to be evoking Pearse with their unrealistic and idealistic view of "real" and "proper" irish that of which can only come from the glistening mouth of a poor fisherman from the whest.

General Michael Collins wrote: »

Consider English in the Pale : Confined to one area, it did not move outside that area from 1167 to the mid 1800's! And Even then, it was the result of a campaign to make English spoken across the land, - legal, professional, psychological. It then, as a result of this campaign, became the first language. And now, you are trying to tell me, that the way to make Irish stand on an equal footing with English again is to confine it to one area? It defies logic.

Em, Irish was in decline way before the famine even so English did of course move outside the Pale before 1800.

General Michael Collins · 13-11-2011 02:37AM

Em, Irish was in decline way before the famine even so English did of course move outside the Pale before 1800.

I challenge you on that. I am aware of its presence along the eastern seaboard by the late 1600's, but I discount that on the account that it was the result of further plantations and invasions - essentially the point stands. Irish did not significantly decline until the mid-1800's.

conor.hogan.2 · 13-11-2011 02:38AM

Ulster plantations much?
You can not disregard them, they happened.

If your point was that Irish was still the majority language in Ireland up to the 1800's then yes, that is correct. By the time of the famine irish was around 50% of the population, I would call that fairly serious decline still.

General Michael Collins · 13-11-2011 02:41AM

You're missing the point : Irish did not decline amongst those for whom it was the first language any time between 1167 and mid-1800's precisely because it was confined to an area.

conor.hogan.2 · 13-11-2011 02:47AM

Em, before the famine irish was teetering around 50% or even possibly lower so they were certainly not all planters.

page 15 - http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:BbJsw4nqb1gJ:www.dfa.ie/uploads/documents/embassy/Ottawa%2520EM/Famine%2520Speeches/lecture%2520at%2520st%2520michael's%2520college.pdf+irish+speakers+before+the+famine&hl=en&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShvGFOmY3cIVbOSrCDmZDw380jhiFTU_1jIrAPeo8A9WA5CGtv8PrrfHag96P7hhCjqzieb8MMquYwek48JJdGzzFbGBJJl0bEoTfFh0mM33BmIBUZqDr0HsUdGlcmMaVvonYUb&sig=AHIEtbR0JQh5X8TuhiQXOfzexInYe3dAbQ
by Éamon Ó Cúiv.

2 million speakers in 1800 out of a population of around 5million, and in 1851 it was down to around 25% of the population.

Loveless · 13-11-2011 02:52AM

I've seen Irish spoken openly three times; on the main street in Dingle, a shinner on his mobile in Kildare and two teachers in Super Valu in Kilkenny.

conor.hogan.2 · 13-11-2011 02:54AM

Loveless wrote: »

…. a shinner ...

Oh you are completely 100% un-biased.

Loveless · 13-11-2011 02:58AM

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

Oh you are completely 100% un-biased.

His girlfriend was also a member of Ógra Shinn Féin.
(I don't see how bias comes into a statement of fact)

HugoBradyBrown · 13-11-2011 03:03AM

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

Em, before the famine irish was teetering around 50% or even possibly lower so they were certainly not all planters.

page 15 - http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:BbJsw4nqb1gJ:www.dfa.ie/uploads/documents/embassy/Ottawa%2520EM/Famine%2520Speeches/lecture%2520at%2520st%2520michael's%2520college.pdf+irish+speakers+before+the+famine&hl=en&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShvGFOmY3cIVbOSrCDmZDw380jhiFTU_1jIrAPeo8A9WA5CGtv8PrrfHag96P7hhCjqzieb8MMquYwek48JJdGzzFbGBJJl0bEoTfFh0mM33BmIBUZqDr0HsUdGlcmMaVvonYUb&sig=AHIEtbR0JQh5X8TuhiQXOfzexInYe3dAbQ
by Éamon Ó Cúiv.

2 million speakers in 1800 out of a population of around 5million, and in 1851 it was down to around 25% of the population.

Yes, and I think Garret FitzGerald produced some very useful statistical analyses during the early 1980's, in his spare time while he was Taoiseach, on the status of Gaelic by barony. However, I would have considerable doubts about the validity of statistics on linguistics from official sources for Ireland before the mid-19th century. Until the late 19th century, under the influence of the international conventions, little credible statistical gathering in this arena was undertaken in most countries, save, perhaps, by the Swedes, who seemed to count everything! (1)

(1) I can provide literature references for this argument, if required by any readers.

General Michael Collins · 13-11-2011 03:05AM

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

Em, before the famine irish was teetering around 50% or even possibly lower so they were certainly not all planters.

page 15 - http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:BbJsw4nqb1gJ:www.dfa.ie/uploads/documents/embassy/Ottawa%2520EM/Famine%2520Speeches/lecture%2520at%2520st%2520michael's%2520college.pdf+irish+speakers+before+the+famine&hl=en&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShvGFOmY3cIVbOSrCDmZDw380jhiFTU_1jIrAPeo8A9WA5CGtv8PrrfHag96P7hhCjqzieb8MMquYwek48JJdGzzFbGBJJl0bEoTfFh0mM33BmIBUZqDr0HsUdGlcmMaVvonYUb&sig=AHIEtbR0JQh5X8TuhiQXOfzexInYe3dAbQ
by Éamon Ó Cúiv.

2 million speakers in 1800 out of a population of around 5million, and in 1851 it was down to around 25% of the population.

A Couple of issues, 2 million plus 1.5 million bilingual out of 5 million - ~70%.

Secondly, this info is very hard to verify because it's based on estimates - and the eastern part of the country was the most populated - Dublin alone could account for a large part of the imbalance.

Thirdly, Mr. Ó Cuív is undoubtedly an authority on these matters, but I think the telling of this issue would be the break down of sources + geographical position of the language.

All in all, I still contest the point - To my mind there can be no doubt that the vast majority of English speakers lived on the east coast up until the mid 19th century. Taking Dublin and other Urbanised areas into account, 30% of the population seems reasonable for the East Coast.

conor.hogan.2 · 13-11-2011 03:06AM

HugoBradyBrown wrote: »

Yes, and I think Garret FitzGerald produced some very useful statistical analyses during the early 1980's, in his spare time while he was Taoiseach, on the status of Gaelic by barony. However, I would have considerable doubts about the validity of statistics on linguistics from official sources for Ireland before the mid-19th century. Until the late 19th century, under the influence of the international conventions, little credible statistical gathering in this arena was undertaken in most countries, save, perhaps, by the Swedes, who seemed to count everything! (1)

(1) I can provide literature references for this argument, if required by any readers.

Yes, Garret came to similar conclusions in a very smart way too. There is no need to provide qoutes for that I am sure there is reports of it up somewhere on the internet.

General Michael Collins · 13-11-2011 03:07AM

HugoBradyBrown wrote: »

Yes, and I think Garret FitzGerald produced some very useful statistical analyses during the early 1980's, in his spare time while he was Taoiseach, on the status of Gaelic by barony. However, I would have considerable doubts about the validity of statistics on linguistics from official sources for Ireland before the mid-19th century. Until the late 19th century, under the influence of the international conventions, little credible statistical gathering in this arena was undertaken in most countries, save, perhaps, by the Swedes, who seemed to count everything! (1)

(1) I can provide literature references for this argument, if required by any readers.

Disregarding FitzGerald's work - (I haven't read it) I agree with you on this.

Is Irish actually spoken in the Gealtachts?

Comments