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

Scrap the Irish Language Commissioner

Larbre34

An Coimisinéir Teanga is at it again, forcing an Irish language awareness programme on the Gardaí, a force so stretched and weary they have barely the time and resources to fulfil their role in English, never mind find the time to learn operational Irish.

All told, An Coimisinéir forces a huge amount of wasted expenditure on state bodies, in terms of signage, reports and publications, made available for a population where 95% of the functional language is English.

So, in this time of belt-tightening, is An Coimisinéir a luxury we can afford? Would the money be better spent encouraging the use and love of the first official language willingly and voluntarily, rather than forcibly?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Reekwind

Wibbs wrote: »

As I pointed out earlier when the Irish went to all corners of the globe they dropped the language like a brick when they did so and pretty damn quickly too. Irish people = 2nd largest ethnic group in the US of A, Irish language = 76th spoken language in the US of A. And that was well beyond the reach of London and a huge proportion of those folks came from Irish speaking areas in the first place

That's flawed for a few reasons though

In the first place, 'those of Irish descent' are the second largest ethnic group in the US, not the Irish themselves. Why would we expect an American whose ancestors emigrated a century ago to still speak Irish? Do all those descended from Germans or Italians still speak those languages in the US today? Part of the emigrant experience is that the tongue, customs and traditions of the 'old country' inevitably weaken as the generations pass

Secondly, I'm not sure that I'd hold up the desperate huddled masses that fled this island as shining examples. They abandoned the language out of necessity in what were extremely harsh conditions. Irish wasn't 'relevant' back then because it couldn't get you a job abroad; I'd suggest that that's not a healthy attitude to encourage in the long term

tdv123 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvlQXPNwrqo

He's talking about Scottish Gaelic but still makes sense.

Have we really gotten to the point where we need a caricature of middle England telling us that the decline of gaelic languages is an act of "natural selection" and that we should all just get over it?

Grayson

Reekwind wrote: »

That's flawed for a few reasons though

In the first place, 'those of Irish descent' are the second largest ethnic group in the US, not the Irish themselves. Why would we expect an American whose ancestors emigrated a century ago to still speak Irish? Do all those descended from Germans or Italians still speak those languages in the US today? Part of the emigrant experience is that the tongue, customs and traditions of the 'old country' inevitably weaken as the generations pass

If we don't expect an american who's grandparents spoke irish to know Irish, why do you expect us to? In all my friends, none of our parents spoke irish (and I grew up in the middle of the country in westmeath. It's not like I grew up in the pale). And my grand parents didn't speak it either. Did my great grand parents? I honestly don't know? But it means I'm at least three generations separated from a language that was once living. I say once living because in 90% of the country, it is dead.
There are some small areas where it's still active, but they'll get smaller. the reason is that no-one wants to move there. It's pretty and the people are nice, but there's not much in the way of careers and most people would stay closer to major population centres.

We've had 8 decades of compulsary irish. It hasn't worked. make it optional after the junior cert. the people who like it will still learn it. But it means that those that don't aren't forced to waste their time in a classroom where they won't learn anything. i say that they won't because there hasn't been a single fluent irish speaker in leaving cert pass irish. the good ones do honors. the rest do pass just so they can pass their leaving cert.

Reekwind

Grayson wrote: »

If we don't expect an american who's grandparents spoke irish to know Irish, why do you expect us to?

Because that's America and this is Ireland. These are different countries

We've had 8 decades of compulsary irish. It hasn't worked

I don't think that anyone's suggesting that the State's approach to Irish education, and language policy in general, has been anything other than a shambles

How many people emerge from the Irish education system (never mind pass level alone) speaking French or German? Let's scrape them as well, shall we?

Wibbs

Reekwind wrote: »

That's flawed for a few reasons though

In the first place, 'those of Irish descent' are the second largest ethnic group in the US, not the Irish themselves. Why would we expect an American whose ancestors emigrated a century ago to still speak Irish? Do all those descended from Germans or Italians still speak those languages in the US today?

Obviously not "all", but yes and at a massively higher rate than the Irish diaspora, even today. At one time pre WW1 German was America's second language and still holds out in some areas today. Nearly a million Italians report they speak it at home. The Dutch make up around 4 million Americans, yet over 100,000 of them have the language. French and dialects of same are the fourth most spoken languages in the US with over 2 million speakers. The Ducth have been there since the 1600, the French not long after that. Lest we forget the Chinese who've been there since around the time we were and that language(s) is the third most spoken after English and Spanish. Irish people? around 40 million of that ancestry. Irish speakers? 20,000.

LordSutch

Reekwind wrote: »

I don't think that anyone's suggesting that the State's approach to Irish education, and language policy in general, has been anything other than a shambles.

Agreed, but how many more torturous decades will it take for Irish to lift off?

Make it optional after Junior Cert I say.

ZeitgeistGlee

Reekwind wrote: »

I don't think that anyone's suggesting that the State's approach to Irish education, and language policy in general, has been anything other than a shambles

Coles most certainly has, apparently anyone who doesn't come out of secondary education with fully fluent Irish is simply some low-class, lowbrow, anglo-americophile.

Reekwind

Wibbs wrote: »

Obviously not "all", but yes and at a massively higher rate than the Irish diaspora, even today. At one time pre WW1 German was America's second language and still holds out in some areas today. Nearly a million Italians report they speak it at home. The Dutch make up around 4 million Americans, yet over 100,000 of them have the language. French and dialects of same are the fourth most spoken languages in the US with over 2 million speakers. The Ducth have been there since the 1600, the French not long after that. Lest we forget the Chinese who've been there since around the time we were and that language(s) is the third most spoken after English and Spanish. Irish people? around 40 million of that ancestry. Irish speakers? 20,000.

Almost all of which exist in ethnic enclaves. Those areas in which Dutch and German predominate, for example, tend to be comprised of isolated rural communities. Where these languages met the cities (such as Jersey Dutch) then English won

The exceptions are Italian, where the main waves of emigration were in the 20th C, and Chinese, which is both relatively concentrated and continually refreshed by ongoing immigration

LordSutch wrote:

Make it optional after Junior Cert I say

That would be a death knell, certainly in the current climate. Teach it properly from a young age and suddenly Leaving Cert Irish becomes much less of a burden

ZeitgeistGlee

Reekwind wrote: »

That would be a death knell, certainly in the current climate. Teach it properly from a young age and suddenly Leaving Cert Irish becomes much less of a burden

Why? Statistics and history have shown that the forced attempt to revive Irish by making it a mandatory part of formal education has done nothing to impede its decline (and arguably actually sped it up).

By making Irish optional post-Junior Cert level you ensure that only those with a love or, at at least interest in Irish take it for Leaving Cert level. Class sizes diminish considerably, leaving teachers more time to interact with and personalise their students education, observing and correcting deficiencies which might not be seen in a larger class.

Attitude (which Coles has harped on about repeated) towards Irish receives a remarkable upsurge as those doing Irish actually want to be there and those who don't aren't (allowing them to pursue subjects of their own choosing). Suddenly rather than a misery and drudgery Irish becomes no more hated than French, Biology or Business Studies.

Absolutely the curriculum should be modernised in the same way French and German are, but doing that by itself is like bucketing out a sinking lifeboat. It will help, but the end result is still almost inevitable.

Iwasfrozen

Reekwind wrote: »

That would be a death knell, certainly in the current climate. Teach it properly from a young age and suddenly Leaving Cert Irish becomes much less of a burden

Admitting making Irish optional would be the death knell for the language is akin to admitting irish language education is not for the good of the students but for the good of the language. And that's just putting the cart before the horse, the country serves the students, not the other way around.

Reekwind

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

Why? Statistics and history have shown that the forced attempt to revive Irish by making it a mandatory part of formal education has done nothing to impede its decline (and arguably actually sped it up)

History shows that a badly broken approach to teaching Irish has not worked. Which should surprise no one. It says nothing about mandatory language teaching

By making Irish optional post-Junior Cert level you ensure that only those with a love or, at at least interest in Irish take it for Leaving Cert level. Class sizes diminish considerably, leaving teachers more time to interact with and personalise their students education, observing and correcting deficiencies which might not be seen in a larger class

But that's shouldn't be the purpose of any reforms. The objective is not to ensure that those who like speaking Irish speak Irish well (because they do that anyway) but that the Irish-speaking population pool expands. You will not do that by lowering the number of people who learn the language

Ultimately, and I make no apologies for ambition here, the end goal should be a fully bilingual population. That requires more and better teaching of the language, not less

Iwasfrozen wrote:

Admitting making Irish optional would be the death knell for the language is akin to admitting irish language education is not for the good of the students but for the good of the language. And that's just putting the cart before the horse, the country serves the students, not the other way around.

Whatever happened to ask not 'what your country can do for you...'?

Students don't like learning Irish. Boo hoo. I can't recall myself being overly fond of chemistry or accounting either. Students are taught these subjects because they're of benefit to them in life and I maintain that they would be better off knowing Irish. That that isn't working is cause for reexamining how the language is taught, not giving up on it entirely

To use your angle, such a surrender would indeed be doing a great disservice to the students

Canard

Reekwind wrote: »

Students don't like learning Irish. Boo hoo. I can't recall myself being overly fond of chemistry or accounting either. Students are taught these subjects because they're of benefit to them in life and I maintain that they would be better off knowing Irish. That that isn't working is cause for reexamining how the language is taught, not giving up on it entirely

To use your angle, such a surrender would indeed be doing a great disservice to the students

I didn't do chemistry or accounting because I didn't have to, bit of a difference. I didn't hate Irish but I do think it was a bit pointless. In fact I found it very easy, but I haven't used it since I left school - though that summer I was in America and saw people unable to communicate with a German man. Which would have been more beneficial, Irish or German?

I think if Irish was taught the way other foreign languages are, there'd be much better results, even if the exam became a bit easier. The French exam requires you to write opinion pieces on topical things, rather than 4-5 page essays on unpredictable things about the state of the healthcare system - I couldn't even do that in English. Irish's curriculum is the problem, the language isn't difficult.

Any Irish I use anymore is almost purely conversational. Better to practice that than to learn off clichés that no one uses in real life. When was the last time you stopped and exclaimed "What's rare is wonderful!" or anything? Sure you're penalised for that kind of thing in the LC English exam, it's totally backwards if the aim is bilingualism to use unnatural phrases. Maybe they do it in the Gaeltacht though, I don't know.

ZeitgeistGlee

Coles wrote: »

That's not actually true, is it? It's just one of those things that is said to discourage others from making the effort.

Of course not, we all know the native speakers and nouveau-Gaelgoirs are practically virginal in their attitudes towards we the barbarous English-speaking rabble. It's not as if we've had direct examples of a woeful superiority complex from several of them right here in this thread.

Coles wrote: »

It's great to see all the hatred coming out about the language. Really gets to the nub of the problem. ATTITUDE. An inferiority complex about their own culture. And it IS their own culture, despite the vehement attempts to deny it!

Because clearly culture is a static thing. :rolleyes:

Coles wrote: »

Eh? Let's keep it polite.

The irony of this statement leaves me breathless.

Coles wrote: »

Yes. If it was all just in Irish it would save a fortune. Imagine how quickly people would learn the language! Problem solved.

Oh so we're back to the forced extermination of indigenous languages so that a preferable one can take its place. Good to see you practice what you preach Coles.

nomnomnom wrote: »

I tried many times to converse with Gardai in my local Gaeltacht area and was assaulted twice for 'being a cheeky wee ****' . I was'nt being cheeky , I just wanted to be dealt with in my first and national language.

While the Gardaí in this situation were obviously wrong (being that they are in a Gaeltacht), you've obviously got a fully-functional use of the English language so purely out of curiosity did you attempt to explain your desire to use Irish to the Gardaí?

Likewise having apparently multiple experiences with Gardaí being unable to speak Irish, why do you persist in attempting to communicate firstly through Irish? Would it not save everyone's time and patience if you asked the Garda in English if he/she speaks Irish and if they do continue from there.

nomnomnom wrote: »

Please stop running down Irish, to many of us it is our primary language and we deserve to be able to deal in business, deal with the judicial system, converse with the Gardai and anything else we need to do through Irish.

Of course, what you don't have is a right to force that dialect of communication on everyone else. Nor likewise do you have a right to run down English (as you do later) as to the vast majority of us it is our primary language.

nomnomnom wrote: »

I dont want Irish shoved down everyones throat but anyone who has a job where they must deal with the public in Gaeltacht areas should have a grasp of Gaelic.

I don't think anyone has argued otherwise.

nomnomnom wrote: »

And to all you Gaelic haters, best of luck to you all as your kids grow up to be genital crab infested, single digit IQ, American idol wannabee twats thanks to UK and US culture via TV.

Interesting that the majority of your post is a plea for those of us who don't speak Irish to respect it and your right to use it, and then you turn around and insult those who disagree with you. Hypocrisy much?

Coles wrote: »

And it's self evident that someone is 'thick'/ignorant/moronic if they learn a language for 14 years and still can't speak a word of it! What other evidence could possibly be needed! Seriously?

That the Irish education system is an appalling hodge-podge of self-interest groups looking out for their own? :rolleyes:

I mean if a person can learn French in five years but not Irish in near 15 I think that says more about Irish than the person doesn't it.

Coles wrote: »

Private schools do well because of the greater resources. It's interesting that learning in Irish bridges the resource gap, no?

Would that be in addition to the extra points students get for doing exams through Irish? :rolleyes:

Interesting that private schools do well because they have greater resources and yet Irish-speaking schools with their smaller classes (which presumably don't count as a greater resource) just manage to be better all by themselves. Must be the inherently more educated and erudite Irish-speaking households you discussed previously.

Reekwind

Patchy~ wrote: »

...though that summer I was in America and saw people unable to communicate with a German man. Which would have been more beneficial, Irish or German?

That's a false dichotomy though. Everything I've seen suggests that people find it much, much easier to learn a foreign language when they've been raised as bilingual. Learn a second language at and early age and numbers three and four will follow naturally

Perhaps ironically, a big part of the reason that I want to see Irish taught properly is that it would help us tackle our problem with other languages. Why can't Ireland be like the Dutch in this regard? One of the big benefits of establishing a bilingual society (with Irish as the alternative to English) would be in encouraging people to learn other languages as well

Because while we can, rightfully, deride the teaching of Irish in our schools, how many of us come out with fluent French or German as well?

And I fully agree with the rest of your post. The problem is not the language but how it's (not) taught. People have been making that same point since Pearse's day though

LordSutch

Reekwind wrote: »

History shows that a badly broken approach to teaching Irish has not worked. Which should surprise no one. It says nothing about mandatory language teaching

But that's shouldn't be the purpose of any reforms . . .

So after eight decades of a disasterous language policy, what would be your magic bullet approach? Tweaking the Irish syllabus
over the decades has not worked, so either something spectacular needs to appear, or irish should be made optional after Junior Cert.

ZeitgeistGlee

Reekwind wrote: »

History shows that a badly broken approach to teaching Irish has not worked. Which should surprise no one. It says nothing about mandatory language teaching

Of course not, amazing that it's entirely down to the aspect of Irish education you want to reform but not the part you wish to retain. :rolleyes:

I think we can both be honest here and simply acknowledge that if Irish was ever made optional the chances of making it mandatory again after an appropriate testing period would be practically nil.

Reekwind wrote: »

But that's shouldn't be the purpose of any reforms. The objective is not to ensure that those who like speaking Irish speak Irish well (because they do that anyway) but that the Irish-speaking population pool expands. You will not do that by lowering the number of people who learn the language

Why not? Perhaps from the point of view of mandatory Irish-teaching interest groups it shouldn't be the purpose of reforms but I assure you to many of the rest of us it absolutely should.

The expansion of the Irish-speaking population pool expanding by the continued mandatory nature of Irish is an illusion. There are more students studying it true, but the retention rate remains appalling post-Leaving Cert. With a smaller, optional group any expansion is actually down to people wanting to do the language. You force it to stand on its own merits or die. (Which I think is something Irish proponents are dreadfully afraid of ever actually doing despite their bluster and rhetoric because they don't know if it would.)

Reekwind wrote: »

Ultimately, and I make no apologies for ambition here, the end goal should be a fully bilingual population. That requires more and better teaching of the language, not less

And I will make no apologies for directly stating that for many of us, a fully-bilingual population is neither an item of interest or dare I say, even desire.

Canard

Reekwind wrote: »

That's a false dichotomy though. Everything I've seen suggests that people find it much, much easier to learn a foreign language when they've been raised as bilingual. Learn a second language at and early age and numbers three and four will follow naturally

Perhaps ironically, a big part of the reason that I want to see Irish taught properly is that it would help us tackle our problem with other languages. Why can't Ireland be like the Dutch in this regard? One of the big benefits of establishing a bilingual society (with Irish as the alternative to English) would be in encouraging people to learn other languages as well

Because while we can, rightfully, deride the teaching of Irish in our schools, how many of us come out with fluent French or German as well?

And I fully agree with the rest of your post. The problem is not the language but how it's (not) taught. People have been making that same point since Pearse's day though

Oddly enough, any bilinguals I know have immense trouble learning a foreign language. Any foreign languages I know are from studying, but I can think of 4 people I know who speak fluent French/German/Spanish/Russian (one each I mean) yet haven't been able to do others very well once it's not learned as a native tongue.

I think we'd be a lot better off with Irish if it were taught in a more technical fashion to be honest. My Irish is accurate but I probably can't tell you what rules I'm following, whereas I understand exactly what I'm doing with French or Spanish, or even English a lot of the time. People don't come out of school with fluent anything I suppose, but I saw someone a while ago saying "Is mise Éireannach" - and you can easily see how that mistake could happen. It's just not explained because there's too much emphasis on literature. I'd say a lot of the Irish language's problems would be solved if the course was changed drastically, it's just so confusing to wonder why those with the power don't do it.

Duggys Housemate

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

Coles most certainly has, apparently anyone who doesn't come out of secondary education with fully fluent Irish is simply some low-class, lowbrow, anglo-americophile.

Of course people who hate the tongue their ancestors were born with, are in general sub educated low brow trolls. English is hegemonic. A minority speak Irish but are indigenous. Hating the language is as liberal as a English man wanting to ban Welsh or Scottish Gaelic.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Coles wrote: »

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

Coles most certainly has, apparently anyone who doesn't come out of secondary education with fully fluent Irish is simply some low-class, lowbrow, anglo-americophile.

Thank you for summing up the last three pages. At least he's not going down the West Brit road.

Has anyone pointed out to him that 99.99something percent of the woprld populatino never bother with Irish...?

ZeitgeistGlee

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Of course people who hate the tongue their ancestors were born with, are in general sub educated low brow trolls.

Based upon? You, Coles and Nomnomnom have all repeated the same diatribe but I've yet to see any of you actually produce a jot of evidence to support it.

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

English is hegemonic. A minority speak Irish but are indigenous. Hating the language is as liberal as a English man wanting to ban Welsh or Scottish Gaelic.

Your example might bear merit if Welsh or Scots-Gaelic was a language of mandatory education in England.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Of course people who hate the tongue their ancestors were born with, are in general sub educated low brow trolls. English is hegemonic. A minority speak Irish but are indigenous. Hating the language is as liberal as a English man wanting to ban Welsh or Scottish Gaelic.

Coles, nonnom and a few other have failed here, so perfaps you can try: where is this hatred for the language you are all talking of...??

While highlighting the "hatred" you can also highlight the "liberal", or by "liberal" do you mean the more traditional "everyone who disagrees with me, so THERE!"?

Irish Musician

Learning the old mother tounge in school was a great memory indeed. Not being the brightest button( couldn't concentrate)of the bunch and not understanding why I regularly got the crap beaten out of me by the Christian brothers for not understanding something that,apart from An Nuacht,I never heard anywhere in real life. Can anyone translate the national anthem with googling it? I never knew what it meant until I did,30 years after having it taught to me.

Spend the money on something that is useful for kids coming into the world today.Computers,finance,another useful international language.Invest it in a musical education if nothing else.

Also increase the punishment/fine to anyone who insists on being charged with it if it is not their most used language.

Reekwind

LordSutch wrote: »

So after eight decades of a disasterous language policy, what would be your magic bullet approach?

Completely overhaul the way in which we learn the language. At the core of this is a very simple solution: bilingual education. That is, teach kids in two languages

This isn't rocket science: Pearse was recommending the same thing a century ago and there are plenty of examples of this approach from around the world today. It doesn't require a huge amount of innovation, just getting the government to commit to overhauling the education system. This might not be achievable overnight (and it would be nonsense to refer to the needed refers as a "magic bullet") but is certainly more productive than either minor tweaks or giving up entirely

ZeitgeistGlee wrote:

The expansion of the Irish-speaking population pool expanding by the continued mandatory nature of Irish is an illusion. There are more students studying it true, but the retention rate remains appalling post-Leaving Cert

And you don't particularly care about that, correct?

If you consider Irish to be an irrelevancy and can't see the benefits (either personal, economic or cultural) of growing up with a second language then fine. I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise. I disagree with such a parochial attitude but I've said enough in the above posts to explain my position

What I will say is that the mention of 'attitude' above wasn't entirely incorrect. So long as Ireland suffers from this quick-fix mentality then the country is screwed. There is a problem (people aren't learning Irish very well) and so we take the easiest route out (let's not make them learn it). No long-term thought, no ambition, just sheer mental laziness. Dodging work rather than seeing where we want to go and how we should get there

Patchy~ wrote:

Oddly enough, any bilinguals I know have immense trouble learning a foreign language. Any foreign languages I know are from studying, but I can think of 4 people I know who speak fluent French/German/Spanish/Russian (one each I mean) yet haven't been able to do others very well once it's not learned as a native tongue

I think the age at which the second language is learnt is key. Coming out of secondary school with decent French is not going to be a huge help in learning, say, Russian. Most of the work should be done before entering secondary school, certainly before the Leaving Cert cycle

I think we'd be a lot better off with Irish if it were taught in a more technical fashion to be honest. My Irish is accurate but I probably can't tell you what rules I'm following, whereas I understand exactly what I'm doing with French or Spanish, or even English a lot of the time

Again, agreed. It was a massive eye-opener when I was taught French; it was the first time that anyone had really shown me how to approach a language in a technical way

Mind you, I think we have to go beyond just changing the course but that's certainly a component of the necessary reforms

Ikky Poo2 wrote:

Coles, nonnom and a few other have failed here, so perfaps you can try: where is this hatred for the language you are all talking of...??

"Hatred" is a strong word, and not one that I would use, but I think it's safe to say that the old attitudes prevail when it comes to Irish. That is, treating it with disdain or as a burden to be suffered. Writing off a language as a waste of time that's not worth teaching is a pretty negative view, however you spin it

It's a perspective that was understandable in the mid-19th C but not so much in this thread, where it has been displayed

Duggys Housemate

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Coles, nonnom and a few other have failed here, so perfaps you can try: where is this hatred for the language you are all talking of...??

While highlighting the "hatred" you can also highlight the "liberal", or by "liberal" do you mean the more traditional "everyone who disagrees with me, so THERE!"?

What are you talking about?

In general if an indigenous language is opposed by a person, or groups these people are considered right wing. Even non-indigenous. My guess is that if the OP opposed some Polish translation he would be considered right wing.

And that's the UN definition too. If we stopped promoting Irish they would accuse us of cultural genocide. The UN is mandated to protect minority languages, and urges its members to do so.

Duggys Housemate

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

Based upon? You, Coles and Nomnomnom have all repeated the same diatribe but I've yet to see any of you actually produce a jot of evidence to support it.

Your example might bear merit if Welsh or Scots-Gaelic was a language of mandatory education in England.

Mandatory education is not the issue at hand. My example would be if an English man ( or speaker) in Cardiff opposed welsh signs. And welsh speakers in the police. ( if you go to Wales you will see their police bulletins are bilingual)

Only in Ireland is the opposition to a minority indigenous language considered in any way left wing.

Wibbs

Reekwind wrote: »

Almost all of which exist in ethnic enclaves. Those areas in which Dutch and German predominate, for example, tend to be comprised of isolated rural communities. Where these languages met the cities (such as Jersey Dutch) then English won

Not quite. The Irish had "enclaves" too, in Boston and New York for example. The largest wave of Italian immigration was in the late 19th century, not unlike the Irish(and again mostly urban). Jews also tended to be urban in nature and far more of them held onto Yiddish than the Irish held onto Irish. It's only in recent years has Yiddish dropped in popularity, still close to 100,000 speak it. German survives today in isolated areas, but pre WW1 and anti German and German language propaganda entreating people to "speak American" it was everywhere. It was the second most spoken language in the US. New York alone in 1900 had over ten German language daily newspapers. It is quite clear that of pretty much all the major diaspora in the US the Irish(many if not most of the 19th century immigrants came from Irish speaking areas), dropped the cupla focal with remarkable speed.

That would be a death knell, certainly in the current climate.

I have oft found it interesting that the pro and anti side, extreme or "meh" seem convinced of the language's demise, only from different angles. Personally I don't see it dying out any time soon. IMHO it's reached an equilibrium of sorts, it's major contractions of the past seem to have ground to a halt anyway, which is a good thing.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Reekwind wrote: »

"Hatred" is a strong word, and not one that I would use, but I think it's safe to say that the old attitudes prevail when it comes to Irish. That is, treating it with disdain or as a burden to be suffered. Writing off a language as a waste of time that's not worth teaching is a pretty negative view, however you spin it

It's a perspective that was understandable in the mid-19th C but not so much in this thread, where it has been displayed

But others have used hatred as a cornerstone of their arguments. And very few people here have advised writing it off. Those who do tend not to have spent much time thinking about the issue.

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

What are you talking about?

In general if an indigenous language is opposed by a person, or groups these people are considered right wing. Even non-indigenous. My guess is that if the OP opposed some Polish translation he would be considered right wing.

And that's the UN definition too. If we stopped promoting Irish they would accuse us of cultural genocide. The UN is mandated to protect minority languages, and urges its members to do so.

People may have other reasons for hating something. It may have casued hardship. It may have caused pain. Some people can trasncend this, some can not.While it can, it doesn't nessecailry make them "low-brow".
I also poitned out that such hatred is nowhere hear as widespread as some posters would have us beleive. Do you beleive it is? Honest question.

For "cultrual genocide" I would argue thaht we would ahve to get rid of GAA, hurling, Irish dancing, music et al. To oppose the Language Comissioner or his policies is nethter hating the language nor in defiance of any UN stance.

ZeitgeistGlee

Reekwind wrote: »

And you don't particularly care about that, correct?

In fact I do. I find it saddening that despite the appalling retention rate of Irish beyond Leaving Cert level no move is made to actually change the curriculum to bring about actual as opposed to illusive improvement. I believe that the best way to do this (which you disagree with) is to make Irish optional for aforementioned reasons.

I have respect for anyone who wishes to learn Irish, and in some ways I regret that my own position is not more inclined to doing so. However I do not hold Irish to be sacredly deserving of continued existence at the expenses with which it is currently privy to.

Reekwind wrote: »

If you consider Irish to be an irrelevancy and can't see the benefits (either personal, economic or cultural) of growing up with a second language then fine. I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise. I disagree with such a parochial attitude but I've said enough in the above posts to explain my position

Believe me I wholeheartedly acknowledge and understand the personal and economic benefits of growing up with a second, or even third language (hence my previous post asserting that foreign language education should start in primary rather than secondary level). I do not however believe that Irish must be one of those languages, often at the expected expense of the other.

Culture is a dynamic thing, the culture of any nation today is vastly different to what it was a century ago. Holding one particular view of what constitutes a nation's "culture" (often a historic one) to supremacy over every other is far more parochial in my opinion. A nation's culture is defined by its people, not the other way around.

Reekwind wrote: »

What I will say is that the mention of 'attitude' above wasn't entirely incorrect. So long as Ireland suffers from this quick-fix mentality then the country is screwed. There is a problem (people aren't learning Irish very well) and so we take the easiest route out (let's not make them learn it). No long-term thought, no ambition, just sheer mental laziness. Dodging work rather than seeing where we want to go and how we should get there

And of course an "overhaul" of the Irish curriculum without the threat of making it optional to actually move interest groups to proper purpose is anything but a "quick fix".

ZeitgeistGlee

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Mandatory education is not the issue at hand.

It has been for the last several pages and was what I was talking about when you quoted me.

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

My example would be if an English man ( or speaker) in Cardiff opposed welsh signs. And welsh speakers in the police. ( if you go to Wales you will see their police bulletins are bilingual)

Nobody has opposed bilingual signage to my knowledge, aside from those who seemed fine with signage in the Gaeltachts being Irish-only. Nor has anyone opposed that people be able to speak to Gardaí or any other member of the Public Service in Irish. In the Gaeltacts it makes sense that such individuals should have a working Irish vocabulary but outside of them the reasonability and feasibility is much less.

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Only in Ireland is the opposition to a minority indigenous language considered in any way left wing.

I don't see the political slant on this to be honest (you're the first and only one to bring it up). Nobody's has talked about banning or in any way opposing Irish language unless you consider moves to modernise or take away its mandatory educational status to be "opposition".

Reekwind

Wibbs wrote: »

Not quite. The Irish had "enclaves" too, in Boston and New York for example

"Had" being the word. Irish enclaves gave long ago to immigrants from other nations. Which is as you'd expect with urban landscapes constantly shifting; few Italians now live in Little Italy in New York, for example. Those that do survive for decades, such as NY's Borough Park or any Chinatown, typically require successive waves of immigrants to maintain the same ethnic concentration

Things are different in the countryside where villages or small towns are less exposed to such competing influences

I have oft found it interesting that the pro and anti side, extreme or "meh" seem convinced of the language's demise, only from different angles. Personally I don't see it dying out any time soon. IMHO it's reached an equilibrium of sorts, it's major contractions of the past seem to have ground to a halt anyway, which is a good thing.

I'd suggest that the trend is gently downwards. Certainly, without action, it's not going up any time soon

Waestrel

I have read the whole thread, and I think the usual points have been said, I will just add that for me, my friends and probably a lot of the young Irish population, the Irish language is not relevant to my identity as an Irish man. Nor is irish dancing, trad music or GAA. Yet I am irish. And also a European.

There are many shades to Irishness, and I wish some of my Gaelgoir brethren would open their hearts to a more pluralist definition of irishness, not the horrible narrow minded nonsense spewed in this thread. This is the reality of Irish identity in 21st century Europe.