How to revive the Irish language.

opti0nal · 26-08-2012 09:09PM

Interest in History wrote: »

recalling the historical situation is only of use to us in understanding the rejection of the Revival and the Revivalists in a past era. The discussion to-day is completely different....One central difference now to the situation in the class then, which has nothing to do with Irish itself, is that corporal punishment was outlawed in 1983.

Coercion is still with us. Lack of respect for Irish-people's choice of English is also still with us. Past acts are still relevant as their consequences are still in effect.

The Irish language cannot just be just be taught, no matter how enlightened the teacher. It must be accepted by whole families or it has nowhere to thrive. There are many reasons why this has not happened and will not happen. Among these reasons are the past repressive behaviour of the Irish language's proponents juxtaposed with the social pressure to 'support the language'.

Given the deep seated resentment & fear & sense of shame (in Englsih speakers) generated by the language movement in the past, it is not surprising that adults, faced with a questionnaire from the authorities will publicly profess their support for the language while privately vowing never to learn or speak it.

indioblack · 26-08-2012 09:27PM

So we have come to a position in this thread where we have discussed government initiatives over nearly a century, coercion vs no coercion, and the transportation system in parts of the west of Ireland.
Oh, and imperialism and Kenya thrown in to boot. I'm waiting for Amritsar and the Bengal famine to come up next.
The hardline proponents of an Irish language revival should train their guns on the one section of the Irish population with the power to instigate this.
They are the majority in Ireland, and they have demonstrated by their action, or rather inaction, that they can't or won't learn Irish.

oldmangrub · 26-08-2012 09:35PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Quick question!

Why doesn't TG4 run end to end Irish language lessons during the "silent hours" rather than Euronews and the like that can be carried on any of the (now) eight Saorview channels and carry the learning resources on the TG4.ie website.

Free and unlimited access to learning material will help those who want to learn/improve their language skills, if you don't want to learn, just don't watch or go to the websites etc

I'm imagining the kind of people who'd be trying to learn a language or engage in any type of mental activity in the silent hours. Drunkards and the chemically intoxicated waking up in the morning with a cúpla focal wondering "where the f*** was I last night?"

Maybe call it "Grass agus Gaeilge" and have a bit of Pink Floyd playing in the background.

TG4 isn't directly involved in promoting Irish; their role is in entertainment and not education. Much to the annoyance of lots of school teachers I'm sure.

I presume learners make up a lot of their viewership but I think they've good reasons to avoid any of those associations. Not that they're purposefully avoiding them; it's just not anything to do with them. Their base audience wouldn't have much need for them obviously. Basically, not their role and not their focus. RTÉ's Turas Teanga was quite successful, I don't know if they'll bother producing a new show of that ilk when they're still making profits from sales though. Sharon Ní Bheoláin should do the right thing for aspiring Gaeilgeoirs and set up a youtube channel.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 26-08-2012 09:40PM

oldmangrub wrote: »

I'm imagining the kind of people who'd be trying to learn a language or engage in any type of mental activity in the silent hours. Drunkards and the chemically intoxicated waking up in the morning with a cúpla focal wondering "where the f*** was I last night?" Maybe call it "Grass agus Gaeilge" and have a bit of Pink Floyd playing in the background.

TG4 isn't directly involved in promoting Irish; their role is in entertainment and not education. Much to the annoyance of lots of school teachers I'm sure. I presume learners make up a lot of their viewership but I think they've good reasons to avoid any of those associations. Not that they're purposefully avoiding them; it's just not anything to do with them. Their base audience wouldn't have much need for them obviously. Basically, not their role and not their focus. RTÉ's Turas Teanga was quite successful, I don't know if they'll bother producing a new show of that ilk when they're still making profits from sales though. Sharon Ní Bheoláin should do the right thing for aspiring Gaeilgeoirs and set up a youtube channel.

Those of us who are insomniacs or work night shifts, to answer your question. It's how I started learning German before I moved over here.

Good question though: would it cost too much to have Euronews as gaelige?

An Coilean · 27-08-2012 12:08AM

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Those of us who are insomniacs or work night shifts, to answer your question. It's how I started learning German before I moved over here.

Good question though: would it cost too much to have Euronews as gaelige?

Who would pay for it? The makers of Euronews? I doubt it, TG4? Already has a news service.

An Coilean · 27-08-2012 12:24AM

opti0nal wrote: »

Coercion is still with us. Lack of respect for Irish-people's choice of English is also still with us. Past acts are still relevant as their consequences are still in effect.

The Irish language cannot just be just be taught, no matter how enlightened the teacher. It must be accepted by whole families or it has nowhere to thrive. There are many reasons why this has not happened and will not happen. Among these reasons are the past repressive behaviour of the Irish language's proponents juxtaposed with the social pressure to 'support the language'.

Given the deep seated resentment & fear & sense of shame (in Englsih speakers) generated by the language movement in the past, it is not surprising that adults, faced with a questionnaire from the authorities will publicly profess their support for the language while privately vowing never to learn or speak it.

Its fascinating to see how much bile an individual can spew on the topic of language promotion.

You talk of deep seated fear, resentment and shame as if they are fact, yet provide not a jot of evidence in support, you would imagine that if it was so deep seated and widespread there would be more evidence of it, the mind boggels at the leaps in logic some people are happy to make to preserve their petty hatreds.

Could you clear one thing up for me, if these people are making these vows in private, how is it that you know about it?
Maybe you talk about it in Irish Language survivor meetings?

opti0nal · 27-08-2012 06:26AM

An Coilean wrote: »

You talk of deep seated fear, resentment and shame as if they are fact, yet provide not a jot of evidence in support, you would imagine that if it was so deep seated and widespread there would be more evidence of it...

I see nothing hateful in saying that for Irish to thrive, a whole family must speak it?

The evidence of why this does not happen is all around you, but you refuse to hear it.

Interest in History · 27-08-2012 08:02AM

opti0nal wrote: »

Coercion is still with us. Lack of respect for Irish-people's choice of English is also still with us. .

Conor Bruise O'Brien wrote about this, a good while ago now. He said that the official rejection of the language we actually speak while lauding a language that we don't speak showed elements of some sort of schizophrenia. His article is on sites.google.com/site/failedrevival

27-08-2012 08:24AM

oldmangrub wrote: »

I'm imagining the kind of people who'd be trying to learn a language or engage in any type of mental activity in the silent hours. Drunkards and the chemically intoxicated waking up in the morning with a cúpla focal wondering "where the f*** was I last night?" Maybe call it "Grass agus Gaeilge" and have a bit of Pink Floyd playing in the background.

I was thinking more of people "time shifting"! the programmes to watch at a more convenient time, almost everyone has access to a video recording device of some type.

Cú Giobach · 27-08-2012 08:32AM

Grayson wrote: »

You're the one obsessed with Dublin. My point is that the transport infrastructure in the west is appalling. But you're just picking on the fact that I mentioned Dublin. You can't even be bothered looking at what i was actually saying and addressing the post. Instead you pick a little point and obsess about that. You sir, are trolling.

Accusing someone of trolling (apart from being against the charter here and reportable) is quite pathetic if they are just disagreeing with you.

It would be more like trolling to imply that the only reason the masses of British, German, American, Dutch, Irish.....etc, tourists who visit the likes of, Dingle, Dún Chaoin, The Aran Islands, Connamara, Achil, Belmullet, Gweedore or Dungloe every year are only going to learn Irish.

Grayson wrote: »

There's no reason to go there except to learn irish.

As would stating the above places have little contact with, or are hard get to from, the outside world, which is what an isolated place/community actually is, ie one isolated from the wider world, not one with dodgy roads compared to certain (not quote "any other") countries, nor one that, as you mention in every single post, is a bit of a treck fom Dublin.
Your point was not about the state of the roads so stop shifting the goalposts, your point was the above mentioned communities are isolated, the state of the roads = fucked up suspensions not isolation (Having spent 20 years driving, and 10 years before that just travelling, all over the NW, W and SW of Ireland I find your idea that the state of the roads = isolation for those places today, quite laughable).

Interest in History · 27-08-2012 08:56AM

opti0nal wrote: »

..... Lack of respect for Irish-people's choice of English is also still with us. Past acts are still relevant as their consequences are still in effect.

.

I looked up that article of Cruise O'Brien's. One part has this:

"Since we have collectively - and silently - decided to go on speaking English. we must, for the sake of our psychological health, come to terms with that decision. We must learn both to respect and to love the language we actually speak."

He was writing in 1991. I guess the atmosphere has changed a bit since then.

Cú Giobach · 27-08-2012 09:03AM

Interest in History wrote: »

I looked up that article of Cruise O'Brien's. One part has this:

"Since we have collectively - and silently - decided to go on speaking English. we must, for the sake of our psychological health, come to terms with that decision. We must learn both to respect and to love the language we actually speak."

He was writing in 1991. I guess the atmosphere has changed a bit since then.

How does the wish to revive Irish somehow imply a problem with English?

Interest in History · 27-08-2012 09:27AM

Cú Giobach wrote: »

How does the wish to revive Irish somehow imply a problem with English?

In the past it implied a heavy problem. That was when the drive behind the Revival was to achieve an actual language-shift in the population. Denigration of English was part of that.

But even contemporaneously: you would not hear a TD exhorting us to "love and cherish our beautiful native tongue" meaning that we should love and cherish English. But to-day the sting has gone out of it. To-day those speeches are dismissed as standard Dáil buffoonery, if they are noticed at all.

Cú Giobach · 27-08-2012 09:34AM

Interest in History wrote: »

In the past it implied a heavy problem. That was when the drive behind the Revival was to achieve an actual language-shift in the population. Denigration of English was part of that.

But even contemporaneously: you would not hear a TD exhorting us to "love and cherish our beautiful native tongue" meaning that we should love and cherish English. But to-day the sting has gone out of it. To-day those speeches are dismissed as standard Dáil buffoonery, if they are noticed at all.

Does the wish to revive Irish imply "revivalists" today have an issue with English?

Interest in History · 27-08-2012 09:43AM

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Does the wish to revive Irish imply "revivalists" today have an issue with English?

An issue? And attitude? It seems to vary a lot. I don't think that there's any general anti-ENGLISH language sentiment. But there is a good deal of ant-WORLD language sentiment when that sentiment is set in contrast to an image of a local language which acts as a shelter for a special local culture.

Cú Giobach · 27-08-2012 10:03AM

I didn't ask about people who express certain sentiments ie, an actual issue with World languages (which obviously includes English), but is a desire to revive Irish actually implying someone has an issue or problem with English (or even other languages)?

eddyc · 27-08-2012 10:19AM

Why have two national languages when the vast vast majority speak English? Does this in itself not imply that there is something wrong with using just English?

Cú Giobach · 27-08-2012 10:22AM

eddyc wrote: »

Why have two national languages when the vast vast majority speak English? Does this in itself not imply that there is something wrong with using just English?

Nope, no more than eating an apple implies a dislike of oranges.

An Coilean · 27-08-2012 10:24AM

eddyc wrote: »

Why have two national languages when the vast vast majority speak English? Does this in itself not imply that there is something wrong with using just English?

Given that the benefits of Bilingualism are quite clearly proven these days, I would have thought the answer to that question would be clear enough, it should be pointed out that speaking only English is not the problem, its the speaking of only one language, be it Irish, French or any other that is less than desirable.

eddyc · 27-08-2012 10:43AM

Speaking pragmatically would it not be better to teach kids another major European language rather than Irish? Being part of the EU this would seem like the best approach. Children in Germany are learning English from an extremely young age and a great many German people understand it if not speak it fluently. This hasn't worked for Irish. Probably in part because there are so few speakers and therefore less business and culture conducted through the language.
The vast majority of people in Ireland conduct their lives through English, why do we even need two national languages? I fully support cultural preservation but the waste involved in teaching every child, putting every document, road sign, bus stop (which in Dublin is frankly ridiculous) into Irish is crazy.

dubhthach · 27-08-2012 10:52AM

eddyc wrote: »

Speaking pragmatically would it not be better to teach kids another major European language rather than Irish? Being part of the EU this would seem like the best approach. Children in Germany are learning English from an extremely young age and a great many German people understand it if not speak it fluently. This hasn't worked for Irish. Probably in part because there are so few speakers and therefore less business and culture conducted through the language.
The vast majority of people in Ireland conduct their lives through English, why do we even need two national languages? I fully support cultural preservation but the waste involved in teaching every child, putting every document, road sign, bus stop (which in Dublin is frankly ridiculous) into Irish is crazy.

There's no reason why you can't have both Irish and a continental language thought in primary school.

If you go to Fryslân (Friesland) in the Netherlands they by default teach the following in primary school:

Dutch
Frisian
English

Likewise children might learn German as well however in the Netherlands the teaching of English is generally replacing other European languages as the default foreign language learnt in primary school.

There are several private primary schools here in Dublin where a continental language is thought from 2nd class onwards. However one key difference is they use native speakers who sole task is to teach say Spanish or French. The same schools by the way have separate specialized teachers for Irish as well. (they don't teach any other subjects).

Here in Ireland our teachers are generally "Jack of all Trades" it's hardly a wonder there are issues teaching Irish when large numbers of teachers have are below-standard in it themselves. I don't see how in existing system you could bring in wide spread teaching of either German or French (let alone Spanish or Chinese) without importing 5-10,000 language teachers to make up for lack of local skills in foreign languages.

An Coilean · 27-08-2012 10:54AM

eddyc wrote: »

Speaking pragmatically would it not be better to teach kids another major European language rather than Irish? Being part of the EU this would seem like the best approach. Children in Germany are learning English from an extremely young age and a great many German people understand it if not speak it fluently. This hasn't worked for Irish. Probably in part because there are so few speakers and therefore less business and culture conducted through the language.
The vast majority of people in Ireland conduct their lives through English, why do we even need two national languages? I fully support cultural preservation but the waste involved in teaching every child, putting every document, road sign, bus stop (which in Dublin is frankly ridiculous) into Irish is crazy.

This has been gone over, the counter argument to suggesting that a language other than Irish should be taught is that the infastructure to teach such a language is not there, neither the political will is there nor the public demand, and teaching a plurality of other languages, while desirable, has much less potential to produce a bilingual population than Irish.

Interest in History · 27-08-2012 11:11AM

Cú Giobach wrote: »

I didn't ask about people who express certain sentiments ie, an actual issue with World languages (which obviously includes English), but is a desire to revive Irish actually implying someone has an issue or problem with English (or even other languages)?

Well I guess it means that they are not content just with having English as their mother tongue with an element of bi-lingualism (if they want that) coming from (say) French or Spanish which they have learned in school.
The Revivalist wants his/her element of bi-lingualism to come from Irish, which for the pupose Irish needs to be revived. I wouldn't call that a problem with English. They have that language anyway. But none of this represents a basic problem of any sort, I think.

The problem that exists, the one that gives rise to these debates, is in the political sphere. It arises when the choices of some individuals or groups are applied universally to the community through governmental action. In that sense it is a normal political question.

Q: What is government policy on 'X' - who is benefitting from it and who is not - who wants it and who doesn't want it - does it need adjusting, if so which way, stronger or weaker - does it need abolishing?

the Irish question is special of course in that in addition to being about language it is also about ideology. This complicates things! And makes them more interesting.

eddyc · 27-08-2012 11:15AM

It's sad because having a large percentage of our population conversant in another European language would probably help our economy. What we have instead is good money after bad being spent on a plan for Irish language preservation that is not working. This money could actually be used to bring in the necessary teachers for teaching other major languages, but this will never happen I suppose.

Cú Giobach · 27-08-2012 11:53AM

Interest in History wrote: »

Well I guess it means that they are not content just with having English as their mother tongue with an element of bi-lingualism (if they want that) coming from (say) French or Spanish which they have learned in school.

This is the point I am trying to get out of you.
Wanting to revive a language merely shows that, a desire to revive a language, it does not imply an issue, problem or dislike of another and neither does the desire for bilingualism.

In a general sense liking one thing does not mean the automatic dislike of another, especially if the stated desire is to actually have both.

Interest in History · 27-08-2012 12:12PM

Cú Giobach wrote: »

This is the point I am trying to get out of you.
Wanting to revive a language merely shows that, a desire to revive a language, it does not imply an issue, problem or dislike of another and neither does the desire for bilingualism.

In a general sense liking one thing does not mean the automatic dislike of another, especially if the stated desire is to actually have both.

Agreed of course. If I was slow to get your point it was because I never saw it as an issue.

On another point that is coming up - the assumed intellectual enrichment of all and sundry through learning a second language. I think that the generalisations about the value of bilingualism should be taken with a grain of salt. Or at least, be used far more selectively.

Kevin Williams makes the point that for this to be true (a) the student must achieve an advanced knowledge of the language in question; (b) the language must have a literature or body of learning which reflects and expresses the experiences of its user community; and (c) the life of the user community and their use of their language must occur in the context of a wide span of social activity and encompassing a full range of cutural experiences.

So: the question. Do you think that these conditions are fulfilled in (say) French for many Leaving Cert students.

Cú Giobach · 27-08-2012 12:55PM

Interest in History wrote: »

Agreed of course. If I was slow to get your point it was because I never saw it as an issue.

Brought up because of this quote you gave.
"Since we have collectively - and silently - decided to go on speaking English. we must, for the sake of our psychological health, come to terms with that decision. We must learn both to respect and to love the language we actually speak."

On another point that is coming up - the assumed intellectual enrichment of all and sundry through learning a second language. I think that the generalisations about the value of bilingualism should be taken with a grain of salt. Or at least, be used far more selectively.

Kevin Williams makes the point that for this to be true (a) the student must achieve an advanced knowledge of the language in question; (b) the language must have a literature or body of learning which reflects and expresses the experiences of its user community; and (c) the life of the user community and their use of their language must occur in the context of a wide span of social activity and encompassing a full range of cutural experiences.

So: the question. Do you think that these conditions are fulfilled in (say) French for many Leaving Cert students.

I left school decades ago, the only language I did was Irish (which I failed) and am not involved in teaching in any way, so I have no idea whatsoever about what is actually learned in the leaving cert today.
But no, to become fluent in French much more than the leaving cert is required, and immersion in French in Ireland is tricky.
So Kevin Williams basically says for bilingualism to be beneficial, the person must be bilingual, that hardly seems surprising.
On what authority do you think the stated values of bilingualism should be taken with a grain of salt??

DUB142 · 27-08-2012 01:05PM

paullyons00 wrote: »

In my opinion, the only way we can possibly revive the Irish language to make it the first language of the people, business and pleasure, is as follows:

All citizens below the age of 30 and above the age of 17 have 5 years to reach an agreed level of fluency.

Each will be assessed through an oral and written exam at the end of those 5 years.

If the candidate does not pass on his/her first exam, they will be given a second chance to pass but at a higher pass mark.

Any candidate who fails the second exam should be stripped of their rights and citizenship and should face a hefty prison sentence.

This may seem autocratic or communist, but in my view its the only way we can revive the language or else it will die out in years to come.

I'd love to hear your opinions on my way of thinking and alternative views on how we should go about reviving the language.

Haha not sure Enda be up for this

Interest in History · 27-08-2012 01:27PM

Cú Giobach wrote: »

So Kevin Williams basically says for bilingualism to be beneficial, the person must be bilingual, that hardly seems surprising. On what authority do you think the stated values of bilingualism should be taken with a grain of salt??

Yep. To get the benefits of being bilingual you must be bilingual.

How many of the stdents emerging from any language class after the Laeving Cert has achieved that position in that language? Mighty few, I would say. Therefore the grain of salt should be to hand when you are told of the benefits of bilingualism to all the others.

Cú Giobach · 27-08-2012 01:38PM

Interest in History wrote: »

Yep. To get the benefits of being bilingual you must be bilingual.

How many of the stdents emerging from any language class after the Laeving Cert has achieved that position in that language? Mighty few, I would say. Therefore the grain of salt should be to hand when you are told of the benefits of bilingualism to all the others.

You are not making any sense.
What has people leaving school (or any other language classes for that matter) having not learned the language got to do with the positive aspects of bilingualism?

How to revive the Irish language.

Comments