Scrap the Irish Language Commissioner

Lord TSC · 19-03-2013 03:04PM

SWL wrote: »

If you are going to lecture others on your view of culture you should really know what culture is.

You listed hobbies, interests, pastimes nothing to do with culture.

I have pastimes, interests e.g. running, cycling etc but they are not cultural in the correct use of the term.

I've got a Masters degree in Empire and Post-Colonial culture. I very much know what my definition of culture is. But since you're the one who disagrees with my view of culture, I'll ask again...how do YOU define culture?

EDIT: And I'm not lecturing. YOU asked ME what my culture was and I responded.

DesperateDan · 19-03-2013 03:14PM

So glad I got to do classical studies in school rather than Irish, what a complete and utter waste of everyone's time. Should be replaced with Chinese, we'll all be taken over by them soon anyway

Coles · 19-03-2013 04:32PM

marienbad wrote: »

Which is exactly the question I asked you earlier ? So what is your answer ?

You'll have to wait another while. I don't have the luxury of being unemployed, but Teamshadowclan is more than qualified to get the conversation started. I suspect he has plenty of time on his hands too with a Masters in English, Culture, Empire and Postcolonialism... That's useful stuff right there! I'll drop in later and give my thoughts.

Lord TSC · 19-03-2013 04:49PM

Coles wrote: »

You'll have to wait another while. I don't have the luxury of being unemployed, but Teamshadowclan is more than qualified to get the conversation started. I suspect he has plenty of time on his hands too with a Masters in English, Culture, Empire and Postcolonialism... That's useful stuff right there! I'll drop in later and give my thoughts.

Back to the insults? Classy :rolleyes:

kowloon · 19-03-2013 04:55PM

Coles wrote: »

You'll have to wait another while. I don't have the luxury of being unemployed, but Teamshadowclan is more than qualified to get the conversation started. I suspect he has plenty of time on his hands too with a Masters in English, Culture, Empire and Postcolonialism... That's useful stuff right there! I'll drop in later and give my thoughts.

So, other people have a bad attitude you say?

I rarely get to use it either, but I'll give it a shot: :rolleyes:

laoch na mona · 19-03-2013 06:17PM

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

Because it practical terms it has no use.

.

how so its a means of communication like all language

opti0nal · 19-03-2013 06:27PM

SWL wrote: »

My previous stance on what? I pointed out that many Iirsh people cannot speak their native language, I am correct in this.

Nonsense! All Irish people can speak their native language.

For most of us, our native language is English, as this is our parents' language and we learn it from birth.

feargale · 19-03-2013 06:43PM

SWL wrote: »

If you wish to use Sami with public officials you can. Sami is available in a couple of university, in both north and south.

Thank you, but that was not my question. Even in France, which is probably the least tolerant EU member state towards its linguistic minorities, some universities provide courses in Breton, Corsican and other minority languages. My question to you is this : What happens in Northern Sweden when a Sami person is pulled by a policeman for speeding, and insists on speaking Sami to the cop? Does every Swedish policeman speak Sami, in Northern Sweden at least? That scenario replicates the one most frequently cited here.

ZeitgeistGlee · 19-03-2013 07:06PM

laoch na mona wrote: »

how so its a means of communication like all language

It is, however so few people use it as their primary tongue and there are so few situations which require its constant/consistent usage that it has, in practical terms, no use.

Coles · 19-03-2013 07:14PM

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Back to the insults? Classy :rolleyes:

Apologies. I was in a bit of a rush and I was making a point about how there's more to life than studying things exclusively because they are deemed to be 'useful' for employment.

It was wrong for me to personalise the point and for that I apologise. And for any offence caused, of course.

laoch na mona · 19-03-2013 07:23PM

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

It is, however so few people use it as their primary tongue and there are so few situations which require its constant/consistent usage that it has, in practical terms, no use.

not to say it has no value i agree with your point but that's not the only value languages have there is the cultural side of it

ZeitgeistGlee · 19-03-2013 07:41PM

laoch na mona wrote: »

not to say it has no value i agree with your point but that's not the only value languages have there is the cultural side of it

Yeah, I'm not trying to make a positive/negative value judgement on Irish in and of itself, I understand people ascribe value to it as part of our heritage*, I'm just not really one of them.

*I prefer not to use "culture" because as I've said already people have different definitions of what exactly constitutes "our culture".

Lord TSC · 19-03-2013 07:54PM

Coles wrote: »

Apologies. I was in a bit of a rush and I was making a point about how there's more to life than studying things exclusively because they are deemed to be 'useful' for employment.

It was wrong for me to personalise the point and for that I apologise. And for any offence caused, of course.

Apologies don't ring true when you've repeatedly resorted to insults and name calling several times within this thread.

As for studying things because they are useful for employment, you'd be hard pressed to find me disagreeing. I spent three years in Uni studying English and philosophy, and a year doing the English MA before I did my H.Dip for employment. I spent four years of my life in courses that, realistically, weren't great for employment but which allowed me to spend plenty of time studying cultures of various forms. So in a way, you're right. Irish shouldn't be studied for the purpose of employment, but because one loves the language and wants to study it for the passion...

...which is why the way people are forced to learn it, and the way in which it's forced on society in multiple ways, is completely counter-intuitive to that line of logic.

Coles · 19-03-2013 08:35PM

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Irish shouldn't be studied for the purpose of employment, but because one loves the language and wants to study it for the passion...

Primary school children have no reason not to love the language, do they? they have no reason to have their own bad attitude towards it, so where do they get it from? It's not as if little Jimmy says to himself when he is 10 years old, "wtf? why am I learning this useless sh!t? this won't get me a job". So where do they get it from?

I've made this point before, and I think it's true that children develop a bad attitude towards the language from their parents. Mammy and Daddy might have a poor grasp on the language and they feel that they can't help little Jimmy with his homework so they tell him not to bother with it. Mammy and Daddy turn over the TV when the Nuacht comes on as if they're being attacked by a swarm of bees. They never encourage little Jimmy to make any effort with it and little Jimmy ends up doing just that.

So. Here's a thought. Little Jimmy is going to spend 14 years learning the language whether you like it or not, so how about we give him a little encouragement? How about we use those cúpla focal we all have and make his experience a bit more fruitful, eh? There's nothing to lose, is there?

Change the attitude.

gobnaitolunacy · 19-03-2013 08:40PM

Coles wrote: »

Primary school children have no reason not to love the language, do they? they have no reason to have their own bad attitude towards it, so where do they get it from? It's not as if little Jimmy says to himself when he is 10 years old, "wtf? why am I learning this useless sh!t? this won't get me a job". So where do they get it from?

I've made this point before, and I think it's true that children develop a bad attitude towards the language from their parents. Mammy and Daddy might have a poor grasp on the language and they feel that they can't help little Jimmy with his homework so they tell him not to bother with it. Mammy and Daddy turn over the TV when the Nuacht comes on as if they're being attacked by a swarm of bees. They never encourage little Jimmy to make any effort with it and little Jimmy ends up doing just that.

So. Here's a thought. Little Jimmy is going to spend 14 years learning the language whether you like it or not, so how about we give him a little encouragement? How about we use those cúpla focal we all have and make his experience a bit more fruitful, eh? There's nothing to lose, is there?

Change the attitude.

All about the attitude. No mention whatsoever of crap teachers and outdated teaching methods, both of which I was subjected to.

Lord TSC · 19-03-2013 08:41PM

Fine, let's go with your theory then.

Where does the negative attitude come from with Mommy and Daddy? What was it that caused them to develop this attitude? And please try not to resort to "they are thick" or some other insulting answer here.

This, by the way, isn't me agreeing with your premise. Just asking you to continue on the train of thought.

Coles · 19-03-2013 08:55PM

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Fine, let's go with your theory then.

Where does the negative attitude come from with Mommy and Daddy? What was it that caused them to develop this attitude? And please try not to resort to "they are thick" or some other insulting answer here.

This, by the way, isn't me agreeing with your premise. Just asking you to continue on the train of thought.

It doesn't actually matter they got it from! They might have got it from their own parents, or from peers, or from cultural stereotypes... but it doesn't actually matter! Little Jimmy has to learn the language and if he spends that time disliking it, or feeling useless at it, then there's a chance that he'll carry that attitude through all his school work.

We can p!ss and moan about it being part of the school curriculum but that's not going to change.

Lord TSC · 19-03-2013 08:57PM

Coles wrote: »

It doesn't actually matter they got it from! They might have got it from their own parents, or from peers, or from cultural stereotypes... but it doesn't actually matter! Little Jimmy has to learn the language and if he spends that time disliking it, or feeling useless at it, then there's a chance that he'll carry that attitude through all his school work.

We can p!ss and moan about it being part of the school curriculum but that's not going to change.

See, that....THAT'S where the attitude comes from

Coles · 19-03-2013 09:04PM

gobnaitolunacy wrote: »

All about the attitude. No mention whatsoever of crap teachers and outdated teaching methods, both of which I was subjected to.

Crap teachers are everywhere and they always have been, and not just teaching Irish! If a teacher is sh!t then the parents have to do something about it. That should include complaining to the principle, but at the very least they should do some extra work at home. At the end of the day the parents have a responsibility to ensure their child is educated.

marienbad · 19-03-2013 09:15PM

Coles wrote: »

Crap teachers are everywhere and they always have been, and not just teaching Irish! If a teacher is sh!t then the parents have to do something about it. That should include complaining to the principle, but at the very least they should do some extra work at home. At the end of the day the parents have a responsibility to ensure their child is educated.

Why would the parents have such a poor attitude towards Irish ?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 19-03-2013 09:58PM

Coles wrote: »

Primary school children have no reason not to love the language, do they? they have no reason to have their own bad attitude towards it, so where do they get it from? It's not as if little Jimmy says to himself when he is 10 years old, "wtf? why am I learning this useless sh!t? this won't get me a job". So where do they get it from?

I've made this point before, and I think it's true that children develop a bad attitude towards the language from their parents. Mammy and Daddy might have a poor grasp on the language and they feel that they can't help little Jimmy with his homework so they tell him not to bother with it. Mammy and Daddy turn over the TV when the Nuacht comes on as if they're being attacked by a swarm of bees. They never encourage little Jimmy to make any effort with it and little Jimmy ends up doing just that.

So. Here's a thought. Little Jimmy is going to spend 14 years learning the language whether you like it or not, so how about we give him a little encouragement? How about we use those cúpla focal we all have and make his experience a bit more fruitful, eh? There's nothing to lose, is there?

Change the attitude.

Could go either way. Do they have a reson to not love the lnagugae? Well, do they have a reson to actually love it in the first place. Most kids will have little experience of it and probably coem to it with a genuinely neutral stance.

Your average 6 year old certainly doesn't sit down with a this-is-my-culture-and-it's-really-important-to-me stance.

Coles · 19-03-2013 11:02PM

marienbad wrote: »

Why would the parents have such a poor attitude towards Irish ?

Obviously not all do! But a significant number of them have probably developed a bad attitude towards the language in the very same way that little Jimmy is developing it off them. From their parents!

We could look at the historic decline in the usage of Irish, the sense of shame after the Famine, the need for English to enable employment and emigration, British language policy, and the subsequent reaction against it. We could look at the societal divisions, - sectarian, political and cultural, (and I was hoping that Teamshadowclan would tell us more about this because I suspect he has studied it in more depth than any of us.) But, you know what? I'm inclined to think that so much water has gone under the bridge since the foundation of the State that those 'historic' influences now have very little impact on our attitude towards the language.

While the political decision to 'revive' the language was undoubtedly a romantic one, it also had the very practical aim of recreating a distinct cultural entity that could stand proud and independent before the World and against the influence of Britain. It was a step towards 'building the Nation', and the decision to make Irish the 'First Official Language' needs to be understood in that context. It's not going to change either.

The policies that were put in place to achieve that aim probably caused some resentment, particularly with the redistribution of land in rural areas by the Land Commission. I know in some areas the resettling of Irish speakers from the whest has caused resentment that continues to manifest itself as a 'bad attitude' towards the language even now.

The economic stagnation of the 1950's and the need for emigration continued to undermine the revival of the language, and I think a resentment towards the language developed as Ireland was kept smothered as a religious and social backwater by the Catholic Church. There was probably a generation that saw the excitement of the social and sexual revolutions in Britain and America and rejected everything that they saw in Ireland. Bright lights beckoned and the baby went out with the bathwater. Of course there was also a counter reaction with the very vibrant Irish music and language revival but in some ways that's an echo of the social revolution that was occurring abroad.

Media? The swamping of Ireland with British and American culture in the 1970s and 80s? The politicising of Irish during the Troubles? The influence of proto-unionists in Irish print and broadcast media? Another generation of emigration in the 1980s?

All these things influenced out attitude towards the language, but they're all in the ha'penny place compared to the influence we have on our own children. We can choose whether or not our children will have a positive attitude towards the language or not, and by extension, on their education in general.

Sorry if this post is long and rambling, and no doubt I've left out plenty of detail. Hopefully Wibbs will correct my factual errors.:pac:

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 19-03-2013 11:15PM

Coles wrote: »

Obviously not all do! But a significant number of them have probably developed a bad attitude towards the language in the very same way that little Jimmy is developing it off them. From their parents!

We could look at the historic decline in the usage of Irish, the sense of shame after the Famine, the need for English to enable employment and emigration, British language policy, and the subsequent reaction against it. We could look at the societal divisions, - sectarian, political and cultural, (and I was hoping that Teamshadowclan would tell us more about this because I suspect he has studied it in more depth than any of us.) But, you know what? I'm inclined to think that so much water has gone under the bridge since the foundation of the State that those 'historic' influences now have very little impact on our attitude towards the language.

While the political decision to 'revive' the language was undoubtedly a romantic one, it also had the very practical aim of recreating a distinct cultural entity that could stand proud and independent before the World and against the influence of Britain. It was a step towards 'building the Nation', and the decision to make Irish the 'First Official Language' needs to be understood in that context. It's not going to change either.

The policies that were put in place to achieve that aim probably caused some resentment, particularly with the redistribution of land in rural areas by the Land Commission. I know in some areas the resettling of Irish speakers from the whest has caused resentment that continues to manifest itself as a 'bad attitude' towards the language even now.

The economic stagnation of the 1950's and the need for emigration continued to undermine the revival of the language, and I think a resentment towards the language developed as Ireland was kept smothered as a religious and social backwater by the Catholic Church. There was probably a generation that saw the excitement of the social and sexual revolutions in Britain and America and rejected everything that they saw in Ireland. Bright lights beckoned and the baby went out with the bathwater. Of course there was also a counter reaction with the very vibrant Irish music and language revival but in some ways that's an echo of the social revolution that was occurring abroad.

Media? The swamping of Ireland with British and American culture in the 1970s and 80s? The politicising of Irish during the Troubles? The influence of proto-unionists in Irish print and broadcast media? Another generation of emigration in the 1980s?

All these things influenced out attitude towards the language, but they're all in the ha'penny place compared to the influence we have on our own children. We can choose whether or not our children will have a positive attitude towards the language or not, and by extension, on their education in general.

Sorry if this post is long and rambling, and no doubt I've left out plenty of detail. Hopefully Wibbs will correct my factual errors.:pac:

You are massively overcomplicating this.

You can get kids interested in more or less anythign as long as you make it interestign and treat them with respect. Currently neither of those thigns happens.

And until they do, all the history, economy, culture and so on is not going to change a thing.

marienbad · 19-03-2013 11:33PM

Coles it is just astonishing that you could go to the trouble of putting together such a lengthy post and fail to mention the curriculum, the teaching methodology, the notion of compulsion.

Can you explain those omissions ? Or is it the case that you don't see these as issues ?

Coles · 19-03-2013 11:33PM

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Do they have a reason to not love the language? Well, do they have a reason to actually love it in the first place. Most kids will have little experience of it and probably come to it with a genuinely neutral stance.

Your average 6 year old certainly doesn't sit down with a this-is-my-culture-and-it's-really-important-to-me stance.

They just need to learn it! It's not complicated. I think there would be a good argument for immersing children in Irish in Playschool and through Junior and Senior infants, simply because they learn the language so easily at that age. And don't worry! They learn English at the very same time, and the bilingual foundation sets them up for learning any future language.

What about this for a compromise. Full immersion in Irish language schooling until the age of 12 and then parents could choose whether the child continued to study it at all? Seems fair enough doesn't it?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 19-03-2013 11:40PM

Coles wrote: »

They just need to learn it! It's not complicated. I think there would be a good argument for immersing children in Irish in Playschool and through Junior and Senior infants, simply because they learn the language so easily at that age. And don't worry! They learn English at the very same time, and the bilingual foundation sets them up for learning any future language.

As I said: most ideas to improve the langauge fail to respect the kids who are going to learn the langauge. "They just need to learrn it" is goign to do nothign for either the student or the langauge.

What about this for a compromise. Full immersion in Irish language schooling until the age of 12 and then parents could choose whether the child continued to study it at all? Seems fair enough doesn't it?

Why should the parents (who's attitude you constantly bemoan) have a say when the kids, who are going to be the ones learning it, don't?

Also, while an interesting idea, it's massively impractical.

Coles · 19-03-2013 11:40PM

marienbad wrote: »

Coles it is just astonishing that you could go to the trouble of putting together such a lengthy post and fail to mention the curriculum, the teaching methodology, the notion of compulsion.

Can you explain those omissions ? Or is it the case that you don't see these as issues ?

I'm afraid I don't. To a child everything in school is 'compulsory'. The curriculum is constantly updated and changed, and teaching methodologies are common enough to all subjects. Of course things aren't perfect, but I really don't think they're important compared to the attitude that the child goes into the classroom with.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 19-03-2013 11:46PM

Coles wrote: »

I'm afraid I don't. To a child everything in school is 'compulsive'. The curriculum is constantly updated and changed, and teaching methodologies are common enough to all subjects. Of course things aren't perfect, but I really don't think they're important compared to the attitude that the child goes into the classroom with.

I don't think you mean "compulsive" in that context.

marienbad · 19-03-2013 11:48PM

Coles wrote: »

I'm afraid I don't. To a child everything in school is 'compulsive'. The curriculum is constantly updated and changed, and teaching methodologies are common enough to all subjects. Of course things aren't perfect, but I really don't think they're important compared to the attitude that the child goes into the classroom with.

Well you have slightly moved the goalposts now Coles and we are now talking about pre and early schooling.

The issues I have mentioned are central to the negative attitude that people have towards the language.

And to pretend that the teaching methodology/curriculum is anything other than a joke is just fooling yourself.

Coles · 19-03-2013 11:50PM

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I don't think you mean "compulsive" in that context.

:eek: 'compulsory'

Scrap the Irish Language Commissioner

Comments