Why can nobody speak Irish?

An Coilean wrote: »

Yes, most signs in the Gaeltacht are monolingual Irish. It was and is felt that this should be the case to represent areas that are Irish speaking. English is not under threat from the Irish language in English speaking areas, Irish is under threat from the English language in Irish speaking areas. Existing signage policy reflects that.
You might object to this and frankly it comes accross as petty that you do, but it is a minor issue in itself either way.

Look, either we have two official languages equal in statuts or we do not. Irish is not under threat in English speaking areas.

I obect to people demanding equality and differential treatment at the same time. Nothing petty about it in the same way there is nothing petty about wanting to conduct your business with the state in the official langauge of your choice.

People harp on about the rights of Irish speakers, but guess what, Irish speakers need rights to get any kind of fair play in this country. If you want to use Irish you have an uphill battel ahead of you, with the likes of you and iwasfrozen sneering at you and objecting all the way. As it is, people who want to use English have every service layed out for them without question, will never be fobed off, laughed at, messed around or poorly treated for simply wanting to use their language when dealing with the state and you have the cheek to complain about Irish speakers wanting access to the most basic of services in their language or a few signs in Irish speaking areas.

FFS get a life, will you.

If wanting roadsigns in two languages for practical reasons is "FFS get a life" but demanding everything else in Irish just to prove a point is "fighting for your rights" is not the height of arrogance and hpocracy, I do not know what is.

I don't sneer at people and I don't object in any way to the promotion of the Irish langauge. At least I didn't until I started debating with you - to be honest, I'm beginning to see the Irish-haters point of view and I have you to thank for it.

And on top of that there's the strawman: a lot of the stuff you are saying that I and Iwasfrozen said is stuff he may well have said, but I have not. I have not sneered at you nor anyone else in this debate and the fact that you have to resort to accuseing me of doing so shows who inaccurate your reading of other people's posts is and how pompous your attitude to language equality is. Debate with me the points I raise and with him whatever he raises and do not misquote me again.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Look, either we have two official languages equal in statuts or we do not.

The fact of the matter is we dont, either de jure or de facto.

De jure, as is intentionaly made plain in the constitution, Irish has superior status to English.
De facto, the status of English is so much more protected and superior to Irish as not to be a contest in any way shape or form.

The preferential treatment that Irish sometimes gets is not aimed at giving Irish a superior de facto position, much like the idea behind positive descriminition Gender Quotas, its to try and level the playing field to some extent.

If wanting roadsigns in two languages for practical reasons is "FFS get a life" but demanding everything else in Irish just to prove a point is "fighting for your rights" is not the height of arrogance and hpocracy, I do not know what is.

Its clear that you dont.

There is a reason that signs in the Gaeltacht are in Irish only, personally it would not bother me if signs with necessary information such as safety/warning signs were bilingual in Gaeltacht areas. For gods sake its only a bit of symbolism to make it look like the state gives a fuk about the language. Its a non-issue.
There is such a gulf between that and the **** Irish speakers have to put up with that using it in a lame effort at whataboutery is simply laughable.

An Coilean wrote: »

The fact of the matter is we dont, either de jure or de facto.

De jure, as is intentionaly made plain in the constitution, Irish has superior status to English.
De facto, the status of English is so much more protected and superior to Irish as not to be a contest in any way shape or form.

If English is protected, when wh ar we talking about roadsigns?

The preferential treatment that Irish sometimes gets is not aimed at giving Irish a superior de facto position, much like the idea behind positive descriminition Gender Quotas, its to try and level the playing field to some extent.

I never said it was - I said some of it's proponents want superiority, not equality and are quiet happy to ignore situations where it's not equal and the commissioner is not doing his job when it's the English that's missing, see below.

There is a reason that signs in the Gaeltacht are in Irish only, personally it would not bother me if signs with necessary information such as safety/warning signs were bilingual in Gaeltacht areas. For gods sake its only a bit of symbolism to make it look like the state gives a fuk about the language. Its a non-issue.
There is such a gulf between that and the **** Irish speakers have to put up with that using it in a lame effort at whataboutery is simply laughable.

Everything passed by the Dial and written in both langaues is "only a bit of symbolism" and yet, if it went back to being English only, you wouldn't be on here citing it as a "non-issue" and that, my friend is an archetpal hypocrital standpoint.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Everything passed by the Dial and written in both langaues is "only a bit of symbolism" and yet, if it went back to being English only, you wouldn't be on here citing it as a "non-issue" and that, my friend is an archetpal hypocrital standpoint.

There is a bit of a difference between a few roadsigns in Conemara and the legislation of the country. As I said, its a nonissue and I don't particularly mind if they are replaced with bilingual signs.

I said some of it's proponents want superiority, not equality and are quiet happy to ignore situations where it's not equal and the commissioner is not doing his job when it's the English that's missing.

You are on here complaining about some people supposidly wanting superority for Irish, well dont worry your little head about it because its not going to happen in our lifetime. Meanwhile English actually does have superiority right now, not equality.

I am not such a fool as to believe that perfect equality can exist, It seems quite clear mto me what kind of equality you are interested in given that you are quite happy to ignore the vast list of situations when its Irish thats missing and are going on about the one instance where Irish has a higher status. And you are callinjg me a hypocrit?

An Coilean wrote: »

There is a bit of a difference between a few roadsigns in Conemara and the legislation of the country. As I said, its a nonissue and I don't particularly mind if they are replaced with bilingual signs.

Yes - on a practical level, more tourists and mono-ligual natives are going to need the roadsigns.

You are on here complaining about some people supposidly wanting superority for Irish, well dont worry your little head about it because its not going to happen in our lifetime. Meanwhile English actually does have superiority right now, not equality.

I am not such a fool as to believe that perfect equality can exist, It seems quite clear mto me what kind of equality you are interested in given that you are quite happy to ignore the vast list of situations when its Irish thats missing and are going on about the one instance where Irish has a higher status. And you are callinjg me a hypocrit?

Firsly, quit the condescention. It does your point no favours.

Secondly, I support any initiation to put Irish and English side by side, as you well know from past debates we've had on the issue. As I have said twice now, debate the issues that I raise with me and do not assume to know how I feel about certain issues because someone else said so.

Kicking Bird wrote: »

If you're getting so upset every time you see a bilingual road sign,I genuinely think you need psychiatric help.

On the contrary, let's have biingual signs everywhere!

It seems An Coilean is not interested in language equality after all. He's an Irish supremacist, go figure. Any way there's no point complaining to "An Coimisinéir" as monolingual Irish signs are allowed under the OLA, go figure.

@An Coilean, given your hypocritical stance on road signs how do you view discrimination against English speaking civil service staff and English speaking leaving cert students? These people are being discriminated against in their own country but they have no commissioner to protect their rights. Would you support the extension of the OLA to provide statuary protection the English language?

And before you say it no the English language is not in danger but the preservation of the English language would not be the commissioners job. His job would be to ensure the language rights of English speakers are being met and to end discrimination against those who wish to live "go hiomlán i mBéarla*."

*Did I get that right? I know google translate is not the best but I'm actually trying to a learn a bit of Irish atm.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It seems An Coilean is not interested in language equality after all. He's an Irish supremacist, go figure. Any way there's no point complaining to "An Coimisinéir" as monolingual Irish signs are allowed under the OLA, go figure.

Go on, for the laugh, what makes me a 'supremacist'?

An Coilean wrote: »

Go on, for the laugh, what makes me a 'supremacist'?

You hypocritical dismissal of monolingual signs in the gaeltacht would indicate a supremacist tendency to the detriment of the status of the English language in this country.

Also I edited my post since so it includes a lot more.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

@An Coilean, given your hypocritical stance on road signs

My hypocritical stance of, there is a reason for it, but its a minor issue and would not especially worry me if they were bilingual?

How do you view discrimination against English speaking civil service staff and English speaking leaving cert students? These people are being discriminated against in their own country but they have no commissioner to protect their rights. Would you support the extension of the OLA to provide statuary protection the English language?

Somewhat akin to the Foxnews Lady who dismissed poor people by trying to claim that $250,000 a year is poverty.

With regard to the two instances you noted, for the civil service I dont see how it can be called discrimination when they are passed over in favor of someone with a greater skill set than them.
As for LC students. The 10% of marks not earned is in recognition of the fact that there is a huge gap in support available to the student doing their LC through Irish and English, ie it is often hard to get something as basic as a text book in Irish for a subject, never mind all the other supports available for the English speaker that are not available for the Irish speaker. Simply put, doing the LC in Irish is more work than doing it in English, to not have some kind of recognition of that fact in place would see students sitting their LC in Irish descriminated against.
If that gap in supports was closed, I would have no problem with the 10% of marks not earned being scrapped.

And before you say it no the English language is not in danger but the preservation of the English language would not be the commissioners job. His job would be to ensure the language rights of English speakers are being met and to end discrimination against those who wish to live "go hiomlán i mBéarla*."

English speakers language rights are being met, if you feel yours have been infringed in some way, contact An Comisinéir, I am sure he would be glad to help with any legitimate case you have.

*Did I get that right? I know google translate is not the best but I'm actually trying to a learn a bit of Irish atm.

Looks good to me, GT is terrible but can be usefull if you have an idea of what you are looking for. Best of luck with the Irish.

An Coilean wrote: »

My hypocritical stance of, there is a reason for it, but its a minor issue and would not especially worry me if they were bilingual?

So you would support country wide bilingual signs?

Somewhat akin to the Foxnews Lady who dismissed poor people by trying to claim that $250,000 a year is poverty.

It's nothing at all like that.

With regard to the two instances you noted, for the civil service I dont see how it can be called discrimination when they are passed over in favor of someone with a greater skill set than them.

That would be true if there were monolingual Irish speakers also being passed over by bilingual speakers but there aren't. As things stand we have Irish speakers passing over English speakers and this needs to change.

As for LC students. The 10% of marks not earned is in recognition of the fact that there is a huge gap in support available to the student doing their LC through Irish and English, ie it is often hard to get something as basic as a text book in Irish for a subject, never mind all the other supports available for the English speaker that are not available for the Irish speaker. Simply put, doing the LC in Irish is more work than doing it in English, to not have some kind of recognition of that fact in place would see students sitting their LC in Irish descriminated against.
If that gap in supports was closed, I would have no problem with the 10% of marks not earned being scrapped.

Given there are Irish speaking secondary schools I'm willing to bet support isn't as hard to come across as you imply.

English speakers language rights are being met, if you feel yours have been infringed in some way, contact An Comisinéir, I am sure he would be glad to help with any legitimate case you have.

Monolingual Irish signs are allowed under the OLA. Go figure.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

So you would support country wide bilingual signs?

Wouldent bother me, lot more work to be done outside the Gaeltacht than in it in this regard though.

That would be true if there were monolingual Irish speakers also being passed over by bilingual speakers but there aren't. As things stand we have Irish speakers passing over English speakers and this needs to change.

Would that not be because there are no monolingual Irish speakers in the Civil Service to be passed over? Why does it need to change, and more importantly how would you ensure that civil servants with a necessary skill set to provide a service are in place to provide that service if the targeted promotion of those with that skill set is prevented?

Given there are Irish speaking secondary schools I'm willing to bet support isn't as hard to come across as you imply.

I'll take that bet. How Much?

Good luck finding basic text books for most subjects in Irish, not to mention the miriad other services that students learning through English have access to. Students learning through Irish have an aditional workload and this is recognised in the exam, nothing wrong with that in my opinion, not having it would set up a significant discouragment to studying through Irish.

Monolingual Irish signs are allowed under the OLA. Go figure.

They are, as are signs on which the text in Irish is displayed more promently than the English. Personally I would favor both languages being displayed equally, as is common practice in most bilingual countries.

Carlos Orange

An Coilean wrote: »

Meanwhile English actually does have superiority right now, not equality.

English is bound to have a superior position since it is the daily language of the 95%+ of people in Ireland.

psinno wrote: »

English is bound to have a superior position since it is the daily language of the 95%+ of people in Ireland.

Might is right?

Carlos Orange

An Coilean wrote: »

Might is right?

Reality is right.

BognarRegis

An Coilean wrote: »

Might is right?

It is, apparently, in the classroom, where small, defenceless, English-speaking children are forced to speak Irish.

BognarRegis wrote: »

It is, apparently, in the classroom, where small, defenceless, English-speaking children are forced to speak Irish.

Sher god love em, poor little guys. Give it a few years, I'm sure there will be a heartfelt apology by the Taoiseach, sorry 'Prime Minister' in the Dáil, I mean 'Irish House of Commons'.

An Coilean wrote: »

Sher god love em, poor little guys. Give it a few years, I'm sure there will be a heartfelt apology by the Taoiseach, sorry 'Prime Minister' in the Dáil, I mean 'Irish House of Commons'.

In other words, you accept that kids don't wnat to speak Irish, but **** them - the lanaguge is more important.

An Coilean wrote: »

Looks good to me, GT is terrible but can be usefull if you have an idea of what you are looking for. Best of luck with the Irish.

Should it not be "as bearla" as in "as gaeilge"?

As for the rest I've lost my laptop charger and my sanity won't permit me to post long posts on my phone so we'll have to continue this some other day.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Should it not be "as bearla" as in "as gaeilge"?

As for the rest I've lost my laptop charger and my sanity won't permit me to post long posts on my phone so we'll have to continue this some other day.

You can use 'i mBéarla' or 'as Béarla'
and you can use 'i nGaeilge' or 'as Gaeilge'

Personally I would have a preference for 'i nGaeilge' but either is fine.

Garzard

Leaving out the whole issue of overhauling the way Irish is taught etc, I think the problem could largely be solved as simply as removing it as a compulsory subject.

bullhits

They need to change how it's taught alright. I hated it in school, I'd love to be able to speak it now though.

Garzard wrote: »

Leaving out the whole issue of overhauling the way Irish is taught etc, I think the problem could largely be solved as simply as removing it as a compulsory subject.

Depends on what you think the problem is really. If its that Irish is taught in schools, then yes, doing nothing more than making the current course optional would probably do quite a bit to 'fix' that problem.

If its the standard to which Irish is learned by and large, then no, making it optional will have no effect on that.

An Coilean wrote: »

Depends on what you think the problem is really. If its that Irish is taught in schools, then yes, doing nothing more than making the current course optional would probably do quite a bit to 'fix' that problem.

If its the standard to which Irish is learned by and large, then no, making it optional will have no effect on that.

Except it doesn't matter what effect it has on the language, it's the effect education has on the student that I'd be more concerned about.

Christy42

An Coilean wrote: »

Depends on what you think the problem is really. If its that Irish is taught in schools, then yes, doing nothing more than making the current course optional would probably do quite a bit to 'fix' that problem.

If its the standard to which Irish is learned by and large, then no, making it optional will have no effect on that.

Could the student then take a course that they would have more engagement with though?

Even a lot of people who would choose it would feel better about if they feel it was their choice. A lot of the issue with it is the feeling that it is being forced down our throats at school. Make it optional and you will reduce some of the animosity towards the subject. A lot of people dislike history but don't have the same hatred towards it as people do to Irish, because they ignored it and history ignored them.

Cody Pomeray

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

In other words, you accept that kids don't wnat to speak Irish, but **** them - the lanaguge is more important.

Eh, society over-rules our kids' personal likes and dislikes all the time.

Given the importance that the universities and some professions place on the Irish language, in line with the language's lawful dominance, it would be tantamount to neglect to refuse to instruct children in the Irish language.

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Eh, society over-rules our kids' personal likes and dislikes all the time.

Given the importance that the universities and some professions place on the Irish language, in line with the language's lawful dominance, it would be tantamount to neglect to refuse to instruct children in the Irish language.

Oh, I'm not suggesting to "refuse" to tech them - not at all. I agree completely that the opportunity should be there for all Irish students.

But I stop at opportunity. Becuase a lot of people enjoy studying it and power to them. Also, though, because the aim of any education system is to serve students and provide them with an education. It is NOT to sustain an interest group. We already have an entire government department for that.

A also have no idea what you mean by "lawful dominance" as it is in no way a dominant language in practical terms.

BognarRegis

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Eh, society over-rules our kids' personal likes and dislikes all the time.

That would in in cases where the welfare of the child was at issue. There is no disadvantage in not speaking Irish.

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Given the importance that the universities and some professions place on the Irish language, in line with the language's lawful dominance, it would be tantamount to neglect to refuse to instruct children in the Irish language.

The issue is one of proportionality. It should not take over a decade of forcible lessons to impart the 'cupla focal' we use to impress our foreign friends. An hour a month would be enough to inform Irish children of the existence of Irish.

The present approach to Irish favours quantity over quality.

We can get better results by teaching Irish to those who wish to speak it.

Cody Pomeray

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Oh, I'm not suggesting to "refuse" to tech them - not at all. I agree completely that the opportunity should be there for all Irish students.

But I stop at opportunity.

So what... you think 10 year olds should be given a decision whether to take a subject that many of them will need for matriculation purposes? Of course they shouldn't.

Many students are already permitted to elect not to study a modern continental language, which can also disqualify them from University. Equally stupid (lack of ) option to give a child.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

A also have no idea what you mean by "lawful dominance" as it is in no way a dominant language in practical terms.

Dominant in the eyes of the law, which is given practical effect by public institutions - public service, universities, etc.

BognarRegis wrote: »

That would in in cases where the welfare of the child was at issue. There is no disadvantage in not speaking Irish.

See above. If nothing else, it can be an important educational requirement. Until the language is relegated to second division in the eyes of the state, that position will remain.