Lack of Enthusiasm in the Irish Language Revival

samai · 18-04-2012 12:05pm

interesting post déise go deo, i did indeed watch scéal na gaeilge ar tg4 it was very informative, interesting and funny. I guess you are getting into the root cause of exactly why the Irish turned their back on their language, I do like the theory earlier in the thread though that there as never a strong cultural connection to the language to begin with, as has been pointed out other systems have collapsed but the people didnt change their language, and you point out some very good reasons exactly why the Irish did give up Irish.

I think we also have to put ourselves in their shoes (if they had any), this wasn't a lofty society and they didn't have the benefit of sitting in their central heated house drinking coffee thinking about the language and their culture, like ye have been saying there has been hunger, emigration, cultural dominance, economics and poverty that have all had effects on why Irish was abandoned.

While some of those factors continued into the mid 1900's, I don't think it adequately explains why the Irish people haven't revived the native language. I also think its appropriate to talk about the 2nd revival that has been happening slowly but surely in the last 15 years, where people have set up Gaelscoileanna, TG4 has come, economic growth has led to wealth and luxuries & a general conversationalist attitude around the world has led to languages being cherished, perhaps we have moved past a point where language revival can be an acquisition of luxury not a necessity of economics/ poverty etc?

The general attitude is still very indifferent though, and as we have discussed deep rooted, but is there hope in a slow revolution of the people? The census shows modest growth in usage and speakers, but is it too slow? is it like pissing against the wind? and has it reached tipping point where the Gaeltachtaí are always going to naturally decline. And although there has been an urban revival outside the Gaeltachtaí, will the majority of people always remain indifferent? or is their hope through Gaelscoileanna of normalising the language slowly in communities and gradually changing attitudes?

Interest in History · 18-04-2012 12:05pm

Enkidu wrote: »

You can't really conclude anything by analogy in this case. If Ukranian speakers didn't feel shame, but just felt like they were fitting in, in 1920s New York, that doesn't really tell you anything about what Irish speakers around Connemara felt in Galway city. The fact is they did feel ashamed and embarrassed, the word being used to describe it in most texts is "náire", meaning a shame. I recommend reading some of the English writings of Mairtín Ó Cadhain or any interview with Irish speakers who would have lived in the 150s/1960s in Connemara. They consistently say the felt ashamed and embarrassed to speak Irish.

I have no personal experience of the association of shame with the speaking of Irish. But I'll follow your line of inquiry.

So: what then is the origen of that sense of shame in a person speaking Irish? Generally it is said that the language is associated with poverty and the speaker does not want to be seen as impoverished. But that can't be true now and can't have been true for a very long time. To-day Irish is associated particularly with state legitimacy and with state employment (teaching, some civil servants, and role models in TV) and with public approval.

I do experience people switching from Irish to English when they are in an English-speaking environment, which is usually the case of course. But that's for functional reasons, not out of shame.

Interest in History · 18-04-2012 12:10pm

samai wrote: »

I also think its appropriate to talk about the 2nd revival that has been happening slowly but surely in the last 15 years, where people have set up Gaelscoileanna, TG4 has come, economic growth has led to wealth and luxuries & a general conversationalist attitude around the world has led to languages being cherished, perhaps we have moved past a point where language revival is an acquisition of luxury not a necessity of economics/ poverty etc?

A good point!

Interest in History · 18-04-2012 12:13pm

samai wrote: »

......... I think we also have to put ourselves in their shoes (if they had any), this wasn't a lofty society and they didn't have the benefit of sitting in their central heated house drinking coffee thinking about the language and their culture, like ye have been saying there has been hunger, emigration, cultural dominance, economics and poverty that have all had effects on why Irish was abandoned.

While some of those factors continued into the mid 1900's, I don't think it adequately explains why the Irish people haven't revived the native language.

Are we not overlooking the obvious? People don't adopt Irish because they don't need to.

samai · 18-04-2012 12:26pm

Yeah thats a good point, they dont need to, and apparently dont want to. But should they want to? we gained independence, absolutely that means doing what the hell we like so thats their democratic right, but a heavy emphasis was placed on Irish identity in the 30 years preceding independence (by the elite; lawyers, teachers, politicians), with language being a core part of that. The people bought into that with their votes, but did nothing about it largely and that intrigues me.

I am sure there are other examples of language shift that was not reveresed following independence? I cant quote any specific cases but many African countries still speak French & English (although I am sure they generally coexist with their native tongues better than Irish and English). I know in India English is used a lot in government, public services and in business, but I'm sure its a happy coexistence, not one over the other. I guess native American languages are an example closer to Irish, even with their limited sovereignty most of the languages have still died, with the exemption of a few which have seen growth.

slowburner · 18-04-2012 12:52pm

samai wrote: »

While some of those factors continued into the mid 1900's, I don't think it adequately explains why the Irish people haven't revived the native language. I also think its appropriate to talk about the 2nd revival that has been happening slowly but surely in the last 15 years, where people have set up Gaelscoileanna, TG4 has come, economic growth has led to wealth and luxuries & a general conversationalist attitude around the world has led to languages being cherished, perhaps we have moved past a point where language revival can be an acquisition of luxury not a necessity of economics/ poverty etc?

The general attitude is still very indifferent though, and as we have discussed deep rooted, but is there hope in a slow revolution of the people? The census shows modest growth in usage and speakers, but is it too slow? is it like pissing against the wind? and has it reached tipping point where the Gaeltachtaí are always going to naturally decline. And although there has been an urban revival outside the Gaeltachtaí, will the majority of people always remain indifferent? or is their hope through Gaelscoileanna of normalising the language slowly in communities and gradually changing attitudes?

Wibbs alluded to it previously

Wibbs wrote: »

Growing up in the 70's and 80's in Dublin Irish for me was associated with Blasket islanders, School, TV programmes I never watched, a certain type of rural mindset, 2nd generation types of that rural mindset, more rabid nationalism and men with unruly beards sitting in darkened pubs chanting about dead fishermen washed from currachs. Oh and Fainne wearing pseuds.

and I tried to, in my go brónach post above.

Irish has suffered from its association with the self appointed keepers of the language over the past 80 years or so.
The language became a complete and utter turn off while under their jurisdiction. How these keepers of the language managed to make it so unsexy is a whole other matter. I think it this unsexiness was probably a product of a combined Catholic/nationalistic bitterness. A fair amount of that negative association lingers in folks of my generation.
As to a contemporary revival: well that's going to be an uphill struggle and I have no doubt that Irish will never be spoken by the majority.
That said, TG4 are doing a fine job of associating the language with a sexier social group and by admirably original programming.

Interest in History · 18-04-2012 1:00pm

samai wrote: »

Yeah thats a good point, they dont need to, and apparently dont want to. But should they want to? ....
The people bought into that with their votes, but did nothing about it largely and that intrigues me.

Well? Why should they want to?

One key to the weird situation (pretended desire for language change) is given by Tom Garvin ("Preventing the Future") when he refers to the Revival being the project of the political elite that took power in 1922 and in the years following and had little to do with the people in general. So: the attitude of indifference by the population at large is not the strange element in our situation. It is the political elite continuing the pretence that is strange.

(I use the word "elite" to mean the class of people who benefit from the situation and are comfortable with it. Not in any sense that they are of a higher order of talent or virtue!)

deise go deo · 18-04-2012 2:24pm

Wibbs wrote: »

OK but that doesn't quite explain why the Irish diaspora from those very areas abandoned the language in not much more than a generation, in lands that didn't have issues or the baggage with the native language. Certainly other diasporas, equally poor and often oppressed or looked down upon within their countries of origin held onto their languages for far longer. One example would be Sicilian, an Italian dialect, mostly of dirt poor emigres and one looked down upon by "official" Italian jurisdictions over the years. To this day the Sicilian diaspora in the US and elsewhere speaks the language way more than the Irish diaspora. Other examples would be various Chinese and Jewish dialects. Maybe we just fitted in more? So the language wasn't required among ourselves as we were less socially isolated than other groups and cultures? We do seem to stand out in this regard though(along with the Polish immigrants).

I think the main difference between Italian speaking imigrents for example to the US and Irish speaking imigreants to the US is that the Irish speakers came from a country where English was already a widely used/dominant language, even if they were not fluent before they left they would have come in contact with it far more than the Italian speaker.

The Italian speaker would have no shame built up around their Language Italy(or the Kingdom of Napels before that I think in the case of Sicillians) did not have a policy of margenilising the Italian language in Italy, while the people may have been marganilised, language was never an aspect of that marganilisation, so for the Italian speaker, the idea that speaking your own language was a bad thing would not have come up to nearly the same extent an in Irish communities.

Finally, because English already had a foothold in Ireland, and for emigrants after the Famine had become the Dominant language in the country, all Irish immigriant communities would have included Irish people who did not speak Irish from the outset, something not true of the other communities you speak of.

deise go deo · 18-04-2012 2:41pm

samai wrote: »

interesting post déise go deo, i did indeed watch scéal na gaeilge ar tg4 it was very informative, interesting and funny. I guess you are getting into the root cause of exactly why the Irish turned their back on their language, I do like the theory earlier in the thread though that there as never a strong cultural connection to the language to begin with, as has been pointed out other systems have collapsed but the people didnt change their language, and you point out some very good reasons exactly why the Irish did give up Irish.

I think we also have to put ourselves in their shoes (if they had any), this wasn't a lofty society and they didn't have the benefit of sitting in their central heated house drinking coffee thinking about the language and their culture, like ye have been saying there has been hunger, emigration, cultural dominance, economics and poverty that have all had effects on why Irish was abandoned.

While some of those factors continued into the mid 1900's, I don't think it adequately explains why the Irish people haven't revived the native language. I also think its appropriate to talk about the 2nd revival that has been happening slowly but surely in the last 15 years, where people have set up Gaelscoileanna, TG4 has come, economic growth has led to wealth and luxuries & a general conversationalist attitude around the world has led to languages being cherished, perhaps we have moved past a point where language revival can be an acquisition of luxury not a necessity of economics/ poverty etc?

The general attitude is still very indifferent though, and as we have discussed deep rooted, but is there hope in a slow revolution of the people? The census shows modest growth in usage and speakers, but is it too slow? is it like pissing against the wind? and has it reached tipping point where the Gaeltachtaí are always going to naturally decline. And although there has been an urban revival outside the Gaeltachtaí, will the majority of people always remain indifferent? or is their hope through Gaelscoileanna of normalising the language slowly in communities and gradually changing attitudes?

I doubt the average Irish person in the 1800s had any greater attachment to Irish than the average Irish person has to English now, take French people, they dont need a great attachment to French language or culture to speak French, it does'nt need to be cool or sexy, its just their language, if it became a barrier to them for some reason, it would start to decline in use.

The general attitude is still indifferent, but thats not necessialiry a bad thing, there is still plenty of scope for the language to grow among the part of the population that actually does care. By the time it has grown into that space, it starts becoming more relevant for people out side that group because it is more widely spoken.
The challenge now is creating oppertunities for those who will actually use the language to do so outside school, as I said this is still in its infancey, but it is progressing none the less.

samai · 18-04-2012 3:23pm

yeah I think thats a sensible conclusion déise go deo. Good point about the relevance of English to Irish people today v the important of Irish to Irish people in the 1800s. Actually though, I think the French are very involved with their language they strongly resist English, but generally I take the point.

Your right about the gradual growth among people who want to speak Irish, we can co-exist, but perhaps the government should butt out harming the language? Whether thats forcing it on people who don't want it in school, or spending tax payers money on translating documents when the money could be spent on building schools for all the gaelscoileanna in prefabs. Those are a couple of issues affecting the taxpayers when it comes to Irish, why continue when we ourselves in the language community aren't getting any benefits from it?

Interest in History · 18-04-2012 5:43pm

samai wrote: »

....but perhaps the government should butt out harming the language? Whether thats forcing it on people who don't want it in school, or spending tax payers money on translating documents when the money could be spent on building schools for all the gaelscoileanna in prefabs. ...?

The point about translating those documents is that it preserves expertise in using the language and provides a career in the language to a certain number of competent people. Ditto TG4. Nobody needs to hear the news in Irish but the station provides roles and incomes to a good number of people connected with the use of the language. If the Revival is state policy then those are the ways that the officials need to use to sustain the policy. If any TV station had an allocation of €80m then it can do as well in English as in Irish. But that is not the purpose.

I agree that Irish should not be continuously forced on people in school, after they raech an age to judge for themselves.

samai · 18-04-2012 6:00pm

Fair point on the maintaining of expertise, but I am just not sure its worth it given hardly anyone accesses the English documents let alone the Irish documents, and with little incentive to use the language outside school would the money not be more worthwhile investing in after school clubs etc?

Practically it might keep translators in a job and thats great for them, but I dont see the policy doing anything practically for the growth of the language.

Anyway thats all getting off topic, but I do think that these matters annoy most of the indifferent public and may help enforce an already negative attitude towards the language from those who have been tramatised via the education system.

TG4 is practical in my eyes, the point is Irish yes but it produces quality popular media which lends weight to the cultural aspect of Irish. And to trot it out again, it helps make Irish cool which has had a good effect on attitudes, I dont think translations of documents does this. If the money were spent somewhere else on promoting the use of Irish, perhaps in time there will be a natural demand for these documents.

Interest in History · 19-04-2012 6:58am

samai wrote: »

Fair point on the maintaining of expertise, but I am just not sure its worth it given hardly anyone accesses the English documents let alone the Irish documents, and with little incentive to use the language outside school would the money not be more worthwhile investing in after school clubs etc?

Practically it might keep translators in a job and thats great for them, but I dont see the policy doing anything practically for the growth of the language.

Anyway thats all getting off topic, but I do think that these matters annoy most of the indifferent public and may help enforce an already negative attitude towards the language from those who have been tramatised via the education system.

TG4 is practical in my eyes, the point is Irish yes but it produces quality popular media which lends weight to the cultural aspect of Irish. And to trot it out again, it helps make Irish cool which has had a good effect on attitudes, I dont think translations of documents does this. If the money were spent somewhere else on promoting the use of Irish, perhaps in time there will be a natural demand for these documents.

Points well made. I thought your comment worth quoting again in full.

The points you make are related closely enough to the original question about the people's indifference to Irish. All these measures that have to be enacted by state officials are because of that indifference. If the population wanted Irish the measures would not be needed.

The ultimate purpose that the measures serve is another matter, and obviously not one of language-change since the officials are themselves all natural-born English-speakers too.

deise go deo · 23-04-2012 12:28am

Interest in History wrote: »

Points well made. I thought your comment worth quoting again in full.

The points you make are related closely enough to the original question about the people's indifference to Irish. All these measures that have to be enacted by state officials are because of that indifference. If the population wanted Irish the measures would not be needed.

The ultimate purpose that the measures serve is another matter, and obviously not one of language-change since the officials are themselves all natural-born English-speakers too.

What you are touching on here is motivation to learn a second language, most research I have read on the subject of language learning would not support your suggestion.
What actually seems to be the case is that love of a language has little to do with it actually being taken up by a population, ie a population could be largely indifferent to a language in terms of cultural attachment yet still pick it up, while another population could have high cultural regard for a language, yet never pick it up.

According to Professor Christina Bratt Paulston, University of Pittsburgh, when talking of the motivations which lead a population to learn and use a language other than their first language, economic life goals are of prime importance. She wrote that there are two major incentives: ‘(1) Economic advantage, primarily in the form of source of income, and (2) Social prestige’.

According to her, what causes masses of people to learn another language or maintain it in use ‘…is always for reasons other than appreciation of the language per se.’2

Professor Mackey, a founder director of the International Centre for Research on Bilingualism, University of Laval, Quebec had this to say on the motivations of large numbers of people to learn and use a second language:

‘In a bilingual state, who becomes bilingual? That often depends on whose language one has to learn. While low status speakers learn high status languages, high status speakers rarely learn low status languages. In Canada, more than 96% of English speakers know only that language, while 30% of the French speakers also know English which has the higher status in most of the country.'

In Ireland, only a very small % of the Native English speaking population become fluent Irish speakers, whereas the entire native Irish speaking population become fluent in English, it is clear that English is the dominant language and has a much higher 'status' than Irish in this country. The word status refers to the position of a language in a given society in comparison to the position of a competing language in that society as perceived by the people. The social status of a language can be measured by the extent to which ability and skill in the language is seen by the people to be essential in their everyday lives and in achievement of their immediate and long-term life goals.

Some people will learn and use a language out of cultural attachment 'grá don teanga' as they say, but the motivations of lovers of the minority language will not be the ones which, in the long run, will drive the majority whose language behaviour is motivated, primarily, by the comparative status of the languages.
If you want to motivate large numbers of people to learn a second language, then for the vast majority appealing to cultural attachment will not work, while they may be attached to the language, may like the idea of becoming fluent in it, and may want the country to become bilingual, this on its own is not enough to motivate them to learn and use a second language.

What you have to do is increase the 'status' of the language, Creating jobs that require knowledge of the language is one of the most effective ways of doing this, according to Professor Paulston: ' ‘…jobs select language learning strategies, which is to say, wherever there are jobs available that demand knowledge of a certain language, people will learn it.'
Other factors that can be targeted to increase the status of a language are: the constitutional and legal standing of the language, the social prestige of the people who habitually use the language, the numbers of those who use it frequently, the degree to which it is seen to be essential in education and in all the other domains of social life, the extent of its use in government and public administration, its visibility and presence in public communication, particularly mass media, its literature and in general, the very important measure of the social functions which are or can be performed through the language.

If you want to revive Irish, you have to try to increase its status at every level, in every area of public and social life. TG4 making the language look 'cool' is one aspect of this, being able to access state services and read state documents in Irish is another. Being able to use Facebook in Irish, or use social media dedicated to the Irish language like Abairleat is another, each has its role to play in normalising the use of the language.

Interest in History · 23-04-2012 8:31am

deise go deo wrote: »

............

According to Professor Christina Bratt Paulston, University of Pittsburgh, when talking of the motivations which lead a population to learn and use a language other than their first language, economic life goals are of prime importance. She wrote that there are two major incentives: ‘(1) Economic advantage, primarily in the form of source of income, and (2) Social prestige’.

‘In Ireland, only a very small % of the Native English speaking population become fluent Irish speakers, whereas the entire native Irish speaking population become fluent in English, it is clear that English is the dominant language and has a much higher 'status' than Irish in this country. ......

What you have to do is increase the 'status' of the language, Creating jobs that require knowledge of the language is one of the most effective ways of doing this, according to Professor Paulston: ' ‘…jobs select language learning strategies, which is to say, wherever there are jobs available that demand knowledge of a certain language, people will learn it.' ........

.

You sum up the situation accurately.

The Revivalists have always asserted the necessity of providing jobs that require Irish, at least as a test for entry, to provide an incentive for people to learn Irish. Of course, in the nature of things, such jobs could only be state-provided jobs and for fifty or sixty years after 1922 nearly all state jobs required candidates to pass a test in Irish. (After entry, the works was carried out in English.)

To-day the provision of state jobs connected to knowing and using Irish are in state TV and radio, the regulatory translation services, and the teaching profession. These posts serve now just to sustain the quality of language among the post-holders and are not remotely sufficient to form a linguistic strand throughout the community as a whole or to bring about any degree of language shift in the community as a whole.

It's a fascinating residue of the old policy of the early decades of independendence. A sort of 'bunker' phase I guess that to-day throws more light on our politics than on any lignuistic aspect of our society.

deise go deo · 23-04-2012 3:01pm

Interest in History wrote: »

You sum up the situation accurately.

The Revivalists have always asserted the necessity of providing jobs that require Irish, at least as a test for entry, to provide an incentive for people to learn Irish. Of course, in the nature of things, such jobs could only be state-provided jobs and for fifty or sixty years after 1922 nearly all state jobs required candidates to pass a test in Irish. (After entry, the works was carried out in English.)

To-day the provision of state jobs connected to knowing and using Irish are in state TV and radio, the regulatory translation services, and the teaching profession. These posts serve now just to sustain the quality of language among the post-holders and are not remotely sufficient to form a linguistic strand throughout the community as a whole or to bring about any degree of language shift in the community as a whole.

It's a fascinating residue of the old policy of the early decades of independendence. A sort of 'bunker' phase I guess that to-day throws more light on our politics than on any lignuistic aspect of our society.

I would disagree, in the education sector, knowing Irish is a real economic benefit, not just because you can get a job as an Irish teacher, but because the Gaelscoil movement is growing so fast, there is a real demand for highly competent Irish speakers to take primary teaching posts, and the growth of the Gaelcholaistí(second level) means that competence in Irish is an economic advantage for someone studying to be a teacher no matter what their chosen subject is, Personally I am currently studying to be a secondry school metalwork teacher, and have applied to do my teaching practice in the Gaeltacht, these options are open to everyone now because there are jobs, and a growing number of jobs at that, available that require that skill set. When it comes to finding a job when I leave Uni, I will have more options than my non-Irish seaking classmates.

The media is another area where fluency in Irish is a real advantage, it is much easier to make your way up the ranks through Irish language media and then break out into English media than it is to work your way up through English media because there is much less competition for the places available in the Irish language sector. Just look at how many of RTÉ's current presenters started out through Irish.

As for translating state services into Irish, if you don't do that then we are back to the same old situation where the state requires you to learn Irish when your in school, but won't let you use it when you leave.

Interest in History · 23-04-2012 6:03pm

deise go deo wrote: »

I would disagree, in the education sector, knowing Irish is a real economic benefit, ....The media is another area where fluency in Irish is a real advantage.... As for translating state services into Irish, if you don't do that then we are back to the same old situation where the state requires you to learn Irish when your in school, but won't let you use it when you leave.

But we are in full agreement. Those are the three areas where there is preferential state-provided employment involving a qualification in Irish.

My previous point was only that those arenas of employment don't provide the critical mass for a general communal language shift. But they do serve to preserve and protect the language, as in a 'bunker'. Thus they achieve the policy aim of the government.

But the jobs are role-specific and end at the point that the role ends. After all, when you leave your classroom in the future to go home, you will re-enter the English speaking world and function in English, as will all your pupils when they leave the school environs.

deise go deo · 23-04-2012 10:01pm

Interest in History wrote: »

But we are in full agreement. Those are the three areas where there is preferential state-provided employment involving a qualification in Irish.

The Irish Language media sector goes well beyond jobs directly provided by the state, while you have TG4 which is state funded, providing jobs for Irish speakers, the existence of TG4 and the demand for Irish Language material it provides creates further indirect employment for Irish speakers in companies like Nematon.

My previous point was only that those arenas of employment don't provide the critical mass for a general communal language shift. But they do serve to preserve and protect the language, as in a 'bunker'. Thus they achieve the policy aim of the government.

Language shift is a process carried out over generations, it is not a leap by the majority of the population but rather a gradual trend that sees a language grow or decline relative to another, Irish is no longer in decline, and there is good reason to believe that it has begun a resurgance that will become more and more apparant over the next 10-15 years.
Employment provided by the state is an aspect that has a role to play in that, it is not the only factor, but it is having an influence.

But the jobs are role-specific and end at the point that the role ends. After all, when you leave your classroom in the future to go home, you will re-enter the English speaking world and function in English, as will all your pupils when they leave the school environs.

The jobs are jobs, just like any other job, but the availability of jobs in Irish means that there will be employment oppertunities for the children of families where Irish is the first language, which countrary to what you think, is what I intend my home to be.
Its easy to think that people who promote Irish, people who send their kids to Gaelscoils, people who work through Irish etc don't use the language at home, and many don't, but many do and in my opinion, as the Gaelscoil movement spreads and parents who themselves went to a Gaelscoil come to send their own kids to a Gaelscoil, language communities will coalesce and Irish will start to become the language of the home and social life for many people around the country. This process can already in areas with long established Gaelscoils like Ballymun.

Interest in History · 24-04-2012 9:27am

deise go deo wrote: »

...(1)...Its easy to think that people who promote Irish, people who send their kids to Gaelscoils, people who work through Irish etc don't use the language at home, and many don't, but many do and in my opinion,

...(2)...as the Gaelscoil movement spreads and parents who themselves went to a Gaelscoil come to send their own kids to a Gaelscoil, language communities will coalesce and Irish will start to become the language of the home and social life for many people around the country. This process can already in areas with long established Gaelscoils like Ballymun.

Point (1): I acccept that you know the scene in a way that I don't. But I did see a representative of the Foras Pátrúnachta speaking to the Committee on School Patronage a few months ago. He said then that the home language of 98% of the children in gaescoileanna was English. All the analysts that I have read emphasise that in each new generation the new Irish-speakers have to be taught from scratch. That there is very little passing-on of the language as a living language in families.

Point (2): Your hopes for Irish will be fulfilled on the small scale that the government support system sustains. But I doubt if there will ever be a community-wide revival. But whatever: who knows which of us will prove right. "A New View of the Irish language" edited by Caoilfhionn Nic Pháidín has a collection of articles that cover a full range of data and views, and they allow one to draw support for either your opinion or mine.

Enkidu · 06-05-2012 8:10pm

Wibbs wrote: »

Just a thought, likely a mad one E... Is there any evidence that the Aristocratic language was different to the common/"peasant" language? Beyond possible vocab deficiencies arising from a lack of schooling in the language. A two tier language as it were. Are the earliest examples of the common tongue very similar to modern Irish and different to late bardic Irish?

It was "beyond posh" to the average person. We don't have that level of register in English. Imagine if the British aristocracy actually spoke like Shakespeare today and not in a fake put on way, they genuinely said ist, art, e.t.c.

The first examples of everyday speech are quite close to modern Irish, in fact anybody who can read modern Irish could read it with a day's worth of explanations to point out some small details. Late Bardic would take a month or two.

As an example of what I was saying earlier we have the story of Tadhg Mac Dáire Mac Bruaideadha. One of the last bards, Cromwell elected to possess his lands and offered them to a loyal solider in his army, a local Irish man. When the local man came to take his land, Tadhg greeted him out front ready to argue his case, even though he was a frail man over eighty years in age. The man simple picked Tadhg up and threw him over the cliff into the sea and apparently shouted over the cliff edge at him "Abair do rann anois, a fhir bhig"*

*Say your verse now, little man.

JoePdw · 23-07-2012 12:24am

I encourage your interest in Irish language. I don't think I should diapear, those that speak Irish will speak it. Once you learn something you can't forget it, especialy language.

Interest in History · 23-07-2012 8:33am

JoePdw wrote: »

I encourage your interest in Irish language. I don't think I should diapear, those that speak Irish will speak it. Once you learn something you can't forget it, especialy language.

I think that the problem lies in the "learning" part of this.

The great majority of the pupils who sit Irish in the Leaving Certificate have acquired just the minimum knowledge that is needed to pass the lower level exam. This is the inevitable outcome of making Irish compulsory for everybody. That is a politically-based rule and not an educationally-based one. So most pupils just aim to acquire the amount of Irish that will get them a pass in the exam. They don't aim to acquire Irish as a functional language. After the exam they never think of it again.

dubhthach · 01-08-2012 11:28am

Interest in History wrote: »

I think that the problem lies in the "learning" part of this.

The great majority of the pupils who sit Irish in the Leaving Certificate have acquired just the minimum knowledge that is needed to pass the lower level exam. This is the inevitable outcome of making Irish compulsory for everybody. That is a politically-based rule and not an educationally-based one. So most pupils just aim to acquire the amount of Irish that will get them a pass in the exam. They don't aim to acquire Irish as a functional language. After the exam they never think of it again.

The education system is a major issue here with regards to language acquistion, here's a rehash of an old post of mine from another thread:

----
In Primary schools Irish is thought 3.5 hours a week over the course of 8 years this adds up to about 936 hours. The total average over secondary school is: 452 hours. This adds up to 1,388 hours over 13 years.

To put this into context

For example, in 1977, the Ontario Ministry of Education in Canada set down three basic levels of competence which may be achieved from second language programmes (Swain, 1981: 490). The ‘basic’ level of competence is considered to be achievable in 1,200 hours, a ‘middle’ level in 2,100 hours and a ‘top’ level in 5,000 hours.
A ‘basic’ level indicates that a learner has acquired “a fundamental knowledge of the language, the ability to participate in simple conversations, the ability to read simple texts and the ability to resume the study of French in later life”. A learner who has reached the ‘middle’ level should be able “to read newspapers and books of personal interest with help from a dictionary, to understand radio and television, to participate adequately in conversation and to function reasonably well in a French-speaking community after a few months’ residence”. The ‘top’ level, should enable the learner to “continue his or her education using French as the language of instruction at the college or university level, to accept employment using French as the working language, and to participate easily in conversation”.

Students in majority of Irish schools only receive enough hours to just about get into basic level for language. As you can see above they regard this as been able to read "simple texts" etc. In comparison if you went to both an Irish medium primary/secondary school your total number of "language contact" hours is: 10,700 hours

---

Now considering the fact that your average student only gets "basic" level of exposure let the Leaving Cert paper includes literature/poetry it's no wonder there is an appaling level of language retention. I would imagine the shift to more emphasis on Oral/Aural that is currently happening will help. However personally I think the literature heavy parts should be spilt out and instead offered as an optional subject (say in Gaelchólaiste). Nothing wrong with having short-stories as part of a "standard" curriculm.

Interest in History · 01-08-2012 5:39pm

dubhthach wrote: »

The education system is a major issue here with regards to language acquistion, here's a rehash of an old post of mine from another thread:

----
In Primary schools Irish is thought 3.5 hours a week over the course of 8 years this adds up to about 936 hours. The total average over secondary school is: 452 hours. This adds up to 1,388 hours over 13 years.

To put this into context

Students in majority of Irish schools only receive enough hours to just about get into basic level for language. As you can see above they regard this as been able to read "simple texts" etc. In comparison if you went to both an Irish medium primary/secondary school your total number of "language contact" hours is: 10,700 hours

---

Now considering the fact that your average student only gets "basic" level of exposure let the Leaving Cert paper includes literature/poetry it's no wonder there is an appaling level of language retention. I would imagine the shift to more emphasis on Oral/Aural that is currently happening will help. However personally I think the literature heavy parts should be spilt out and instead offered as an optional subject (say in Gaelchólaiste). Nothing wrong with having short-stories as part of a "standard" curriculm.

This is substantive information and I quote it in full.

NOW: next question. Does not everybody involved in the Revival of Irish know all of the above perfectly well? Does not everybody then also know that the Revival is a sham?

Interest in History · 01-08-2012 6:34pm

dubhthach wrote: »

The education system is a major issue here with regards to language acquistion, .....In Primary schools Irish is thought 3.5 hours a week.....Now considering the fact that your average student only gets "basic" level of exposure let the Leaving Cert paper includes literature/poetry it's no wonder there is an appaling level of language retention. I would imagine the shift to more emphasis on Oral/Aural that is currently happening will help...

Going on anecdotal evidence, in many schools Irish gets less than 3.5 hours a week and there is talk of that official number of hours being reduced if Ruairi Quinn has his way. I say this in order to reinforce your basic point.

And: I was recently involved with Pass students preparing for the irish Oral in the Leaving Cert. Educationally and linguistically it was a valueliess exercise. Ethically it was a disgusting lie, a shallow pretence by the state authorities of doing something of value, and the young people involved treated it with the scorn that it deserved.

dubhthach · 01-08-2012 9:40pm

Interest in History wrote: »

And: I was recently involved with Pass students preparing for the irish Oral in the Leaving Cert. Educationally and linguistically it was a valueliess exercise. Ethically it was a disgusting lie, a shallow pretence by the state authorities of doing something of value, and the young people involved treated it with the scorn that it deserved.

You could say the same for any pass subject to be honest, I did Pass French in the leaving Cert for example. After five years in school I had about zero French. Of course in that case it gives the "shallow pretence" of teaching a continental language. Using the figures above for Irish language contact the average Irish student only gets about 450~ hours of contact with another European language in school. This is a third of the figure recommended by the Ontario ministry of Education. However there are plenty of people who even with this "meager ration" manage to go on and learn French or German to a near Fluent level. Even aside that it's no wonder that the like of Paypal find it next to impossible to find people with any sort of language skill who is from Ireland.

Personally I think it's more of a sign of mediocrity of the Irish education system. Primary school teachers are "jack of all trades" tbh many of them have rather poor Irish. I went on a refresher course myself last year and was surprised at how many student-teachers were on it, that and the overall low standard that many of them have. If for example a continental language would be brought in as standard across all primary schools then the only way it would be viable would be to hire specialised language teachers (preferably native speakers). You already see this in private primary schools where the likes of Spanish is offered from 2nd class onwards and in such a scenario the teacher is actually from Spain.

Of course with regards to Irish it's interesting that there are some studies ongoing that seem to show that children of foreign nationals tend to do better at Irish after the age of 8 then Irish children. Perhaps because they don't have the same negative outlook on the language as alot of Irish do.

Interest in History · 02-08-2012 6:12am

dubhthach wrote: »

You could say the same for any pass subject to be honest, I did Pass French in the leaving Cert for example. After five years in school I had about zero French. Of course in that case it gives the "shallow pretence" of teaching a continental language. Using the figures above for Irish language contact the average Irish student only gets about 450~ hours of contact with another European language in school. This is a third of the figure recommended by the Ontario ministry of Education. However there are plenty of people who even with this "meager ration" manage to go on and learn French or German to a near Fluent level. Even aside that it's no wonder that the like of Paypal find it next to impossible to find people with any sort of language skill who is from Ireland.

Personally I think it's more of a sign of mediocrity of the Irish education system. Primary school teachers are "jack of all trades" tbh many of them have rather poor Irish. I went on a refresher course myself last year and was surprised at how many student-teachers were on it, that and the overall low standard that many of them have. If for example a continental language would be brought in as standard across all primary schools then the only way it would be viable would be to hire specialised language teachers (preferably native speakers). You already see this in private primary schools where the likes of Spanish is offered from 2nd class onwards and in such a scenario the teacher is actually from Spain.

Of course with regards to Irish it's interesting that there are some studies ongoing that seem to show that children of foreign nationals tend to do better at Irish after the age of 8 then Irish children. Perhaps because they don't have the same negative outlook on the language as alot of Irish do.

These are valid observations on the teaching of languages in Ireland. But the "teaching" of Irish has this special feature - that it is compulsory for all. All pupils must sit in class before teachers many of whom have very poor Irish, as you point out. So between having many pupils who don't want the subject and may have no aptitude for languages, and many (most?) teachers who don't know enough to teach it, there is no possibility of a good educational outcome for most Pass students.

I think that the teaching profession would allow reform, for example, making Irish a subject of choice in the Leaving Cert. But the idea of freedom of choice sends the politicians into a blue funk. They have a big investment in the imagery of the Revival. It connects them to Padraig Pearse and Cuchulainn and thereby authenticates them as Leaders of the Irish Nation.

dubhthach · 02-08-2012 8:52am

Interest in History wrote: »

These are valid observations on the teaching of languages in Ireland. But the "teaching" of Irish has this special feature - that it is compulsory for all. All pupils must sit in class before teachers many of whom have very poor Irish, as you point out. So between having many pupils who don't want the subject and may have no aptitude for languages, and many (most?) teachers who don't know enough to teach it, there is no possibility of a good educational outcome for most Pass students.

I think that the teaching profession would allow reform, for example, making Irish a subject of choice in the Leaving Cert. But the idea of freedom of choice sends the politicians into a blue funk. They have a big investment in the imagery of the Revival. It connects them to Padraig Pearse and Cuchulainn and thereby authenticates them as Leaders of the Irish Nation.

Well most most secondary schools a continental language is compulsory, I know I had no option but to do Pass French for the leaving cert. Even if a school was not to enforce French/German on leaving cert students it is compulsory for college matriculation.

If I had my choice I wouldn't have done either English or French for Leaving Cert. After all I fail to see the relevance of the poetry of Milton (Paradise Lost) and Macbeth (which by way I enjoyed) to my choice of degree (IT). The leaving cert system is a rote based system that is all about getting a certain score not about imparting an education. Personally I would abolish it along with all compulsion at that level.

Again given the fact that the Leaving Cert is a points race I can't imagine any of the pass curriculum actually providing any worth to anybody, other then to tick a box on some mandarin's list in the Department of Education.

Personally the rise of immersion education is the only route in my opinion. This is evident in other countries such as Canada and in Wales.

Interest in History · 02-08-2012 9:08am

dubhthach wrote: »

Well most most secondary schools a continental language is compulsory, I know I had no option but to do Pass French for the leaving cert. Even if a school was not to enforce French/German on leaving cert students it is compulsory for college matriculation.

If I had my choice I wouldn't have done either English or French for Leaving Cert. After all I fail to see the relevance of the poetry of Milton (Paradise Lost) and Macbeth (which by way I enjoyed) to my choice of degree (IT). The leaving cert system is a rote based system that is all about getting a certain score not about imparting an education. Personally I would abolish it along with all compulsion at that level.

Again given the fact that the Leaving Cert is a points race I can't imagine any of the pass curriculum actually providing any worth to anybody, other then to tick a box on some mandarin's list in the Department of Education.

Personally the rise of immersion education is the only route in my opinion. This is evident in other countries such as Canada and in Wales.

Irish is the only subject for which there is a legal requirement that everybody study it. If a school does not enrol a student for it no capitation grant is paid. Apart from that small tweak to your argument, it is impossible to disgree with anything you say.

I guess also that you and I are bookish enough to cope with the vagaries of our education system. But pity the many youths who emerge from it in a condition of near-illiteracy. For a long time the mandarins were happy to mask that fact until international comparisons startet to expose the official lies.

It will be interesting to see if Ruairi Quinn can make any impact on the system. He has promised to try, which is new. Freeloaders like Mary Hanifin didn't even try. Of course she trained as a national teacher so to her the system was hunky-dory.

dubhthach · 02-08-2012 11:59am

Well I put it down to a "one size fits all" approach or the new word-du-jour "universalism" (used with regards to child benefit).

If you look at school system in likes of Netherlands they actually stream students into three seperate streams in second level.

Even then each has multiple "Tracks", here's quoting from wiki

The vmbo (voorbereidend middelbaar beroepsonderwijs, literally, "preparatory middle-level vocational education") education is a school track in the Netherlands. It lasts four years, from the age of twelve to sixteen. It combines vocational training with theoretical education in languages, mathematics, history, arts and sciences. Sixty percent of students nationally are enrolled in vmbo. The vmbo has four different levels, in each a different mix of practical vocational training and theoretical education is combined.
Theoretical learning path (Dutch: Theoretische leerweg) is the most theoretical of the four, it prepares for middle management and vocational training in the mbo-level of tertiary education and it is needed to enter havo. It was previously known as "mavo".

Mixed learning path (Dutch: Gemengde leerweg) is in between the Theoretical and Middle Management-oriented paths.

Middle management-oriented learning path (Dutch: Kaderberoepsgerichte Leerweg) teaches theoretical education and vocational training equally. It prepares for middle management and vocational training in the mbo-level of tertiary education.

Basic profession-oriented learning path (Dutch: Basisberoepsgerichte Leerweg) emphasizes vocational training and prepares for the vocational training in the mbo-level of tertiary education.

Practical education (Dutch: Praktijkonderwijs) consists out of mainly vocational training. It is meant for pupils who would otherwise not obtain their vmbo-diplomas. After obtaining this diploma pupils can enter the job market without further training.

For all of these levels there is "learning path supporting education" (Dutch: Leerweg Ondersteunend Onderwijs), which is intended for pupils with educational or behavioural problems. These pupils are taught in small classes by specialized teachers.

The havo or hoger algemeen voortgezet onderwijs (literally: "higher general continued education") is a stream in the secondary educational system of the Netherlands. It has five grades and is generally attended from age twelve to seventeen. A havo diploma provides access to the hbo-level (polytechnic) of tertiary education.
The first three years together are called the Basisvorming (literally, "basis formation"). All pupils follow the same subjects: languages, mathematics, history, arts and sciences. In the third year pupils must choose one of four profiles. A profile is a set of different subjects that will make up for the largest part of the pupil's timetable in the fourth and fifth year, that are together called the Tweede Fase (literally, "second phase"). A profile specializes the pupil in an area, and some hbo and wo studies therefore require a specific profile. Students must also choose one to three additional subjects. Furthermore, Dutch and English, as well as some minor subjects, are compulsory. In all profiles mathematics is compulsory, but the level of difficulty differs for each profile. Pupils still have some free space for electives, which is not taken up by compulsory and profile subjects; they can pick two subjects from other profiles. Sometimes pupils choose more than two subjects, which can result in multiple profiles. In 2006 one pupil graduated cum laude in all profiles.
Cultuur en Maatschappij (literally, "culture and society") emphasizes on history, arts and foreign languages (French, German and less frequently Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Turkish and West Frisian). The mathematics classes focus on statistics and stochastics. This profile prepares for artistic and cultural training at the hbo.

Economie en Maatschappij (literally, "economy and society") emphasizes on social sciences, economy, and history. The mathematics classes focus on statistics and stochastics. This profile prepares for social science and economy training at the hbo.

Natuur en Gezondheid (literally, "nature and health") emphasizes on biology and natural sciences. The mathematics classes focus on algebra and geometry. Since 2007 pupils who choose the Nature and Health profile are free to choose Mathematics-A (Wiskunde A), which focus on statistics. This profile is necessary to attend medical training at the hbo.

Natuur en Techniek (literally, "nature and technology") emphasizes on natural sciences. The mathematics classes focus on algebra and geometry. This profile is necessary to attend technological and natural science training at the hbo.

The Havo voor Muziek en Dans is unique in providing a secondary school education in which music and dance are part of the daily curriculum. It is collocated with Codarts, the Conservatory of Music and Dance Academy, and shares the same teachers.[1]

Article on VWO here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voorbereidend_wetenschappelijk_onderwijs

Some relevant highlights:

In the Phase II, all students are required to participate in the following courses: Dutch, English, mathematics (there are four different courses in mathematics: A/B/C/D), Latin or Ancient Greek/an additional foreign language (Gymnasium students are not required to follow an additional foreign language other than English), PE (in Dutch: 'bewegingsonderwijs of lichamelijk onderwijs'), ANW (General Nature Sciences, only in the fourth/fifth class, depending on the school), CKV (a general form of culture and art education in the Atheneum stream) or KCV (classical cultural education in the Gymnasium stream, similar to CKV, except from the fact that this course focussus on the classical aspect) and "Maatschappijleer" (only in the fifth/sixth class, something like social sciences). The content of some subjects has also changed: economics has become a total subject, instead of variations between economics 1 or 2, similar to the fact that students do not longer have to choose between French 1 or 2 and German 1 or 2 but will instead follow French and German as whole subjects.
The four profiles are:
Cultuur en Maatschappij (literally, "culture and society") emphasizes history, arts, and foreign languages (French, German and less frequently Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Hebrew and Turkish). Students following this profile are required to choose between mathematics A and C. Mathematics C is a simplified version of mathematics A, focusing on stochastics and in a lesser extent on statistics. This profile prepares for artistic and cultural training at the university.

Economie en Maatschappij (literally, "economics and society") emphasizes history and economics. Students following this profile are required to choose between mathematics A and B, as mathematics C do not give access to economics classes. Mathematics B focuses on algebra and geometry, and sometimes mathematics A and B share content of the taught material, albeit mathematics A a slightly simplified version of mathematics B in these cases.

This profile prepares for economics training at university.
Students following the first two profiles are required to follow history and in the second profile economics is also required. There are more optional additional courses in the first two profiles than in the last two profiles. The number of optional additional courses vary per school. Additional languages are considered to be part of the first profile, while geography and philosophy can be applied to both profiles.
Natuur en Gezondheid (literally, "nature and health") emphasizes biology and natural sciences. You can choose between mathematics A and B, but B is recommended, as Physics and Chemistry require knowledge of this. This profile is necessary to attend medical training at university.

Natuur en Techniek (literally, "nature and technology") emphasizes natural sciences. The mathematics classes focus on algebra and geometry. This profile is necessary to attend technological and natural science training at university and to attend medical school.

Lack of Enthusiasm in the Irish Language Revival

Comments