How to revive the Irish language.

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 9:59am

An Coilean wrote: »

It was done by the State because it was decided about ten years ago that only the Irish Language Placenames in Gaeltacht areas would be used, and that the English versions that were made up and inposed on the local populace by the ordinance survey during atempts the anglacise the country would no longer have any official usage in those areas where Irish is still spoken.

It will be interesting to see under the latest Gaeltacht Act what areas of the old official Gaeltacht territory are proven to be Irish-speaking in reality.

Certainly O Cuív has left his mark on the Revival of Irish project. It shows what a man of conviction can accomplish. At the time the Official Languages Act received the unanimous support of every party and every member of the Oireachtas. And to-day they all top and tail their Dail contributions with the cúpla foccal. Take it as a assertion of their patriotism if you like it. Take it as Disneyland play-acting if you don't.

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 10:02am

mackerski wrote: »

One of the useful things about digital maps is the possibility to optimise the map for the user. Many (most?) map users would like to see one single name for each feature in the language that suits him or her. Anything more is clutter.

So the "right" solution to this balancing act is to allow the user to choose a language.

OMG! Next you'll be suggesting that students should be allowed to choose whether or not to study Irish for the Leaving Certificate.

Spring Onion · 29-10-2013 10:19am

An Coilean wrote: »

It was done by the State because it was decided about ten years ago that only the Irish Language Placenames in Gaeltacht areas would be used, and that the English versions that were made up and inposed on the local populace by the ordinance survey during atempts the anglacise the country would no longer have any official usage in those areas where Irish is still spoken.

But it was only done in the past 2-3 years. These are fairly new signs (no more than 5 years old) and the messy "update" was done after that. To be fair to the council, it does not look very professional i.e. looks like it was done in a hurry.

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 10:28am

Spring Onion wrote: »

But it was only done in the past 2-3 years. These are fairly new signs (no more than 5 years old) and the messy "update" was done after that. To be fair to the council, it does not look very professional i.e. looks like it was done in a hurry.

The state officials have to respond to the law and this law reflects the Revivalist project, itself the property of a set of officials. All that the population can do is to continue as always to speak English. Which they will.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 10:50am

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

By that logic you'd have to re name every town in the country.

No for two reasons, firstly the placenames order relates to Gaeltacht areas only, secondaly there is no renaming, just dropping the English transliteration.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 10:57am

Curly Judge wrote: »

I don't remember voting for that?

Were you a TD in 2003? If not then there is your problem.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 11:02am

Spring Onion wrote: »

But it was only done in the past 2-3 years. These are fairly new signs (no more than 5 years old) and the messy "update" was done after that. To be fair to the council, it does not look very professional i.e. looks like it was done in a hurry.

I am not familiar with the specific case, its possible that you are just wrong, or that the council did not get around to changing them until some years later, or that they put up signs with the obsolete English language placename by mistake a few years ago and had to correct them.

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 11:04am

An Coilean wrote: »

No for two reasons, firstly the placenames order relates to Gaeltacht areas only, secondaly there is no renaming, just dropping the English transliteration.

In some cases there is "re-naming" in the sense that the historic name in Irish is simply different to the name that people gave the place in English. So, not actually re-naming, I guess. rather: using its other name.

The phonetics of the name in Gaelic will default to those of whatever language is in use in the community of course. And the public will become used to the spelling, even if at first it looks odd. As for example with Dún Laoghaire which all natives pronounce 'dunnleery', in spite of RTE's best effort to promote the gaelic phonetics of 'Dún Laoghaire'.

Curly Judge · 29-10-2013 11:07am

An Coilean wrote: »

I am not familiar with the specific case, its possible that you are just wrong, or that the council did not get around to changing them until some years later, or that they put up signs with the obsolete English language placename by mistake a few years ago and had to correct them.

Says it all really.

Curly Judge · 29-10-2013 11:09am

An Coilean wrote: »

Were you a TD in 2003? If not then there is your problem.

True, but then again, neither were you.
Yet your agenda seems to have been adopted rather than mine.
How would you like the whole thing to be put to a referendum?

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 11:11am

Curly Judge wrote: »

Muttoner O'Cuiv, I believe?
Gauleiter in Chief of Irish language fascism.

Every single party in the Oireachtas voted for the Official languages Act without even one singe Deputy dissenting.

I'd say that most of them did this in the belief that it was just another bit of their well practiced Cúpla Foccal play-acting. But the fact is that Eamonn O Cuív did not act alone by any stretch and whatever else he is accused of he should not be accused of acting as a dictator.

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 11:16am

Curly Judge wrote: »

True, but then again, neither were you.
Yet your agenda seems to have been adopted rather than mine.
How would you like the whole thing to be put to a referendum?

The Revivalists would win a referendum, being deeply committed and well resourced. Anyway, it's irrelevent. The population carries out its own linguistic referendum daily - we vote to speak English.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 11:20am

Interest in History wrote: »

In some cases there is "re-naming" in the sense that the historic name in Irish is simply different to the name that people gave the place in English. So, not actually re-naming, I guess. rather: using its other name.

The phonetics of the name in Gaelic will default to those of whatever language is in use in the community of course. And the public will become used to the spelling, even if at first it looks odd. As for example with Dún Laoghaire which all natives pronounce 'dunnleery', in spite of RTE's best effort to promote the gaelic phonetics of 'Dún Laoghaire'.

There are actually not to many examples of this happening, Dún Laoghaire is one, but then there is a difference between a community learning a newley imposed placename and knowing a pre-existing one.
It should be noted that there are examples of the reverse as well, for example Botharbue in Cork is not pronounced as Botharbue but rather as Botharbuee which is identical to the prononciation of Irish language placename.

I have come accross it suggested before that it is a natural and inevitable process that Irish language placenames will be anglacised by the English speaking community. Specifically with new housing developments that are named in Irish, it is supposidly pointless to name them in Irish as they will just become anglacised anyway. With the implication being that this is what happened to all the other placenames in the country aswell.

This is not true however, almost all English language placenames came about as a result of imposition by the British administration rather than as some kind of 'natural' process whereby communities that became English speaking found that the old Irish placename no longer fit and so they anglacised it themselves.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 11:23am

Curly Judge wrote: »

True, but then again, neither were you.
Yet your agenda seems to have been adopted rather than mine.
How would you like the whole thing to be put to a referendum?

Somehow I don't think that I personally agree with it had much impact on their decision to adopt it at the time.

I would welcome a referendum on the issue, but I doubt many on your side of the argument would in reality.

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 11:26am

An Coilean wrote: »

It was done by the State because it was decided about ten years ago that only the Irish Language Placenames in Gaeltacht areas would be used, and that the English versions that were made up and inposed on the local populace by the ordinance survey during atempts the anglacise the country would no longer have any official usage in those areas where Irish is still spoken.

I wonder how much it all matters - what the actual yield is in terms of the nation's welfare. The period of anglicisation is a long way back if we place it before 1922. The term to-day can only apply to the functional choice of English made by a free people which presumably will continue on its historic track.

LordSutch · 29-10-2013 11:31am

Interest in History wrote: »

OMG! Next you'll be suggesting that students should be allowed to choose whether or not to study Irish for the Leaving Certificate.

Now that would be a very sensible move although I doubt if would ever happen. Many students would love the choice to put 100% study time into one other language, be it French, German, Spanish, or whatever. Keeping Irish as a core subject in the Leaving Cert is very limiting and a distraction to many (IMO). That's not to say that Irish should be dropped (far from it), its just that it might be taken up and studied by more discerning students if it wasn't soooo stubbornly mandatory. Make Irish optional in the LC I say, and give it extra points (as a sweetner) to encourage LC students to adopt it as their 2nd language, instead of French etc.

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 11:35am

An Coilean wrote: »

There are actually not to many examples of this happening, Dún Laoghaire is one, but then there is a difference between a community learning a newley imposed placename and knowing a pre-existing one.
It should be noted that there are examples of the reverse as well, for example Botharbue in Cork is not pronounced as Botharbue but rather as Botharbuee which is identical to the prononciation of Irish language placename.

I have come accross it suggested before that it is a natural and inevitable process that Irish language placenames will be anglacised by the English speaking community. Specifically with new housing developments that are named in Irish, it is supposidly pointless to name them in Irish as they will just become anglacised anyway. With the implication being that this is what happened to all the other placenames in the country aswell.

This is not true however, almost all English language placenames came about as a result of imposition by the British administration rather than as some kind of 'natural' process whereby communities that became English speaking found that the old Irish placename no longer fit and so they anglacised it themselves.

yes: in The Names of Irish Places' Joyce counsels close attention at all time to the colloguial pronunciation of place names.

I don't think it matters much what a new housing estate is called although the Irish-ised inventions at least spare us 'Tudor Mansions' and 'Windsor Grove'. "Cloch and Charraigh" will soon become "Clockacarry" anyway.

Your last point underlines the need to distinguish between anglicisation of the phonetics of gaelic names, translations into English of the sense of a gaelic name, and the attribution of a completely new new English name to a place.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 11:36am

Interest in History wrote: »

I wonder how much it all matters - what the actual yield is in terms of the nation's welfare. The period of anglicisation is a long way back if we place it before 1922. The term to-day can only apply to the functional choice of English made by a free people which presumably will continue on its historic track.

Anglicisation continued well up to and beyond 1922. As for a functional choice made by free people, During the 19th centuary and today, it is quite dificult to speak of 'free choice' when speaking of language shift accross populations. You could take a quick look at a situation and conclude that people are simply making a choice to speak one language over another, but often on closer inspection in cases like this, state policy will be found to have been acting to push or pull them in their decisions and even today the actions of the state are quite weighted twords pushing people to English usage.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 11:43am

Interest in History wrote: »

"Cloch and Charraigh" will soon become "Clockacarry" anyway.

The point of my post was that this almost certainly will not happen, there are very few examples to suggest that it will.

If Clockacarry is not already a recognised name for it, ie its not on the signs for the place etc, then it will probably never come to be recognised as a name for the place in the absence of it being imposed from outside as most existing English language placenames were historicaly.

The point is that places that have an English language name in Ireland today did not get those names over time as a result of the local community changing them to suit their new spoken language, they were almost all imposed from outside by the state administration.

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 11:44am

An Coilean wrote: »

Anglicisation continued well up to and beyond 1922. As for a functional choice made by free people, During the 19th centuary and today, it is quite dificult to speak of 'free choice' when speaking of language shift accross populations. You could take a quike look at a situation and conclude that people are simply making a choice to speak one language over another, but often on closer inspection in cases like this, state policy will be found to have been acting to push or pull them in their decisions and even today the actions of the state are quite weighted twords pushing people to English usage.

Obviously you are correct. There are powerful forces pushing the population into being English-speaking. But is the State, post-1922, maintaining programmes to preserve Irish in the face of those forces?
Surely that is undeniable.

The issues that arise are the degree to which the efforts of the state are effective, and how far, in terms of civil liberty, the state should impose its programmes on a population that has persisted in the other linguistic choice.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 12:00pm

Interest in History wrote: »

Obviously you are correct. There are powerful forces pushing the population into being English-speaking. But is the State, post-1922, maintaining programmes to preserve Irish in the face of those forces?
Surely that is undeniable.

It is, but it is also maintaining programs that act to undermine Irish and push English instead and it is quite likely that on balance the state is having a more negative impact on the Irish language than positive.

This perception that the state has been bending over backwards since its foundation to accomodate the Irish speaking community really has no basis in reality.

The issues that arise are the degree to which the efforts of the state are effective, and how far, in terms of civil liberty, the state should impose its programmes on a population that has persisted in the other linguistic choice.

It is not the one way street you would present it as, you seem to think that the states language policy only impact on the English speaking community, this is far from true, the English speaking community is quite insulated from any negative impact to them as a result of the language they choose to speak, beyond symbolic gestures and learning Irish in school there is little if any impact on them in reality. How often has a sick English speaking child not had access to a doctor that could speak to them in thier language, how often are English speakers forced to use a different language because there is no one in their local council offices that can speak English with them, when was the last time an English speaker was arrested because they believed that it was their right to use their choice of official language?

It is quite clear to me that the Irish speaking community is far more vulnerable to the states language policys and in reality there is no comparrision between the experiance of both communities of those policies.

Interest in History · 29-10-2013 12:11pm

An Coilean wrote: »

The point of my post was that this almost certainly will not happen, there are very few examples to suggest that it will.

If Clockacarry is not already a recognised name for it, ie its not on the signs for the place etc, then it will probably never come to be recognised as a name for the place in the absence of it being imposed from outside as most existing English language placenames were historicaly.

The point is that places that have an English language name in Ireland today did not get those names over time as a result of the local community changing them to suit their new spoken language, they were almost all imposed from outside by the state administration.

I don't mean to contest your central point. Only to say that whatever the source of a name, Gaelic as of old, gaelic a transliteration to English, a new English name, etc., etc., they will all end up being pronounced in the vernacular of the living population. So, for example, any name in Irish containing a 'ch' will have that 'ch' pronounced as a 'k'.

And placenames in any language in any country don't function as a language lesson. They're just placenames. (Except for nerds like us, I guess.) But the choice of placename most certainly has a power aspect - as a symbol of the regime in power in a country. As when the Germans occupied the Ukraine and named Lviv as Lemberg. So the changing of the Gaeltacht names under the OLA may not matter much functionally, but it matters to those who want to say: "This is not England, this is Independent Ireland".

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 12:22pm

Interest in History wrote: »

And placenames in any language in any country don't function as a language lesson. They're just placenames. (Except for nerds like us, I guess.) But the choice of placename most certainly has a power aspect - as a symbol of the regime in power in a country. As when the Germans occupied the Ukraine and named Lviv as Lemberg. So the changing of the Gaeltacht names under the OLA may not matter much functionally, but it matters to those who want to say: "This is not England, this is Independent Ireland".

To be honnest, the message is more that this is an Irish speaking community and not an English speaking community rather than this is Ireland not England.

The who mentality of using Irish for nefarious nationalist purposes is more connected to those who are nationalist first and foremost that the language community itself. To the language community, the language is more important in and of itself than as a symbol of national identity and indeed the use of the language as a symbol by the state while at the same time failing to actually provide for the needs of the language community is not welcomed.

Spring Onion · 29-10-2013 12:23pm

An Coilean wrote: »

I am not familiar with the specific case, its possible that you are just wrong, or that the council did not get around to changing them until some years later, or that they put up signs with the obsolete English language placename by mistake a few years ago and had to correct them.

I live on the road and pass these signs every day and you are suggesting I am wrong?

I still don't see why new and perfectly correct signposts with both English and Irish placenames need to be defaced to prove...well i don't know what. Isn't that extremely childish? I actually thought it was done by a local nut.

Jester252 · 29-10-2013 12:29pm

We should really drop mandatory Irish for the LC. Thank god that some university are dropping the need for three languages to get into science and engineering courses

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 29-10-2013 12:32pm

An Coilean wrote: »

No for two reasons, firstly the placenames order relates to Gaeltacht areas only, secondaly there is no renaming, just dropping the English transliteration.

So, can we paint over the Irish placenames in English speaking areas then?

Curly Judge · 29-10-2013 12:34pm

Interest in History wrote: »

The Revivalists would win a referendum, being deeply committed and well resourced. Anyway, it's irrelevent. The population carries out its own linguistic referendum daily - we vote to speak English.

Ooohhh.....I'm not so sure.
In the privacy and secrecy of the ballot box you could be surprised at how people react.
Especially if, during the campaign,a few revivalists could be prodded into repeating the interesting opinions of poster No1.
Game changer or what?

Curly Judge · 29-10-2013 12:37pm

Spring Onion wrote: »

I live on the road and pass these signs every day and you are suggesting I am wrong?

I still don't see why new and perfectly correct signposts with both English and Irish placenames need to be defaced to prove...well i don't know what. Isn't that extremely childish? I actually thought it was done by a local nut.

It was!
It's just that there are quite a lot of them about.

Spring Onion · 29-10-2013 12:47pm

Curly Judge wrote: »

It was!
It's just that there are quite a lot of them about.

Ha Ha, there must be. I would be curious to meet one...

Ironic that when i grew up, American tourists would give out that West Galway did not have enough signposts. Now we get spanking new signs and the local loolahs paint over the English placenames so that tourists looking for "Oughterard" will need to brush up on their Irish pronuniciation when trying to find "Uachtar Ard". As for "Maam Cross" and "An Teach Dóite", good luck to them!!

Only in Ireland.

mariaalice · 29-10-2013 12:53pm

My brother and his wife live bilingually and speak Irish and English to their children and they have opted for an Irish speaking secondary school for their children it is the only way that children will become naturally able to switch between the two its hard to learn something in isolation.

In secondary school there need to be two completely different approaches to Irish one that is academic and one that is not so academic based and is more Irish studies, culture with basic written Irish and a large amount of spoken Irish.

The official government attenuated to Irish is the cause of the problem.

For example how come it is only for the 1970s on that Gaelscoil took off and that earlier effort often shut down.

Curly Judge · 29-10-2013 1:02pm

Spring Onion wrote: »

Ha Ha, there must be. I would be curious to meet one...

Ironic that when i grew up, American tourists would give out that West Galway did not have enough signposts. Now we get spanking new signs and the local loolahs paint over the English placenames so that tourists looking for "Oughterard" will need to brush up on their Irish pronuniciation when trying to find "Uachtar Ard". As for "Maam Cross" and "An Teach Dóite", good luck to them!!

Only in Ireland.

It's kind of like the penal laws in reverse.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 1:08pm

Spring Onion wrote: »

I live on the road and pass these signs every day and you are suggesting I am wrong?

I still don't see why new and perfectly correct signposts with both English and Irish placenames need to be defaced to prove...well i don't know what. Isn't that extremely childish? I actually thought it was done by a local nut.

I am suggesting that I don't have any idea of who you are or where you live, and as such, you could indeed be quite easily wrong.

The signposts were changed because for official purposes those places only have one name, the Irish language placename.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

So, can we paint over the Irish placenames in English speaking areas then?

Well, I'm not going to stop you, the State won't be doing so any thime soon though.

dubhthach · 29-10-2013 1:11pm

Interest in History wrote: »

As for example with Dún Laoghaire which all natives pronounce 'dunnleery', in spite of RTE's best effort to promote the gaelic phonetics of 'Dún Laoghaire'.

Tbh it should really be spelt Dún Laoire, no one spells Laois as Laoighis anymore for example. -- however the pre-spelling reform form is the one used in legislation, so it's stuck (Awh inertia!)

Of course one looses the actual meaning of the name when you go to the simplified spelling.

Laoghaire = Laogh+aire -> Lao + aire (Calf + Friend/carer) though Aire also means noble, which where's it usage for government minister comes from.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 1:15pm

Curly Judge wrote: »

It's kind of like the penal laws in reverse.

You don't know much about the Penal laws, do you? :rolleyes:

Spring Onion · 29-10-2013 1:18pm

An Coilean wrote: »

I am suggesting that I don't have any idea of who you are or where you live.

The signposts were changed because for official purposes those places only have one name, the Irish language placename.

What does it matter who I am? Or where I live?

I was pretty clear in my 1st post on exactly where the signs are and what has happened to them and you suggested I made it up somehow...because you don't know me or where I live? Who the hell do you think you are?

As I already said - N59, leaving Galway on road to Clifden. First example is at the Barna turnoff around 3 miles outside Galway. You cant miss them - big green road signs. Let me know if you need more examples.

mariaalice · 29-10-2013 1:27pm

Dose any one think the obsession with grammar and linguistic purity, place names, and road signs, and so put a lot of people off official Irish.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 1:28pm

Spring Onion wrote: »

What does it matter who I am? Or where I live?

Well if in reality you live in Belfast, its quite unlikely that you have much of an idea about the circumstances in which those signs came to have only the Irish version of the name shown.
As i said, I have no idea who you are, when i was replying it was equally possible in my mind that you had only seen the signs once in your life in passing as it is that you live on that road and see them every day.

I was pretty clear in my 1st post on exactly where the signs are and what has happened to them and you suggested I made it up somehow...because you don't know we or where I live?

I don't see why you are getting upset, you claim that you live near to these signs, and as such have a good idea of what you are talking about with relation to them. Thats fine, I did not and don't know where you live or what you do or don't know and as such it was hardily an outlandish suggestion that you may have just been wrong.

Who the hell do you think you are?

Calm down dear.

Curly Judge · 29-10-2013 1:32pm

mariaalice wrote: »

Dose any one think the obsession with grammar and linguistic purity, place names, and road signs, and so put a lot of people off official Irish.

Deffo!;)

Red Pepper · 29-10-2013 1:34pm

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 1:35pm

mariaalice wrote: »

Dose any one think the obsession with grammar and linguistic purity, place names, and road signs, and so put a lot of people off official Irish.

To be honest, the kind of person whos nose gets bent out of shape over a few road signs was prpbably never going to be to much of a fan of the language anyway.

No point in walking on eggshells for fear of turning off a few people who were unlikely to ever support the language anyway.

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 1:42pm

Red Pepper wrote: »

Look, you are just being an idiot and you know it.

In not the one calling others names on the internet.

I know exactly what I am talking about because I pass these signs EVERY DAY and I can see you want to undermine the fact because I presume it makes your "cause" look stupid. I get it.

So you say. I did not and don't know this. In responding to the post to give possible reasons for why these signs were painted over in the last few years, that you were just wrong about when it happened was a posibility.

All I wanted to know was who did it; you say it was the state/council and yet it looks so 'messy' that I thought it must be a local nut. Maybe you did it. Who knows.

Maybe it was some local nut, but in the case of signs showing Gaeltacht placenames, there is official direction that only the Irish language version will be used, and in most cases the local authorities just covered over the English name rather than replace the signs.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 29-10-2013 1:47pm

An Coilean wrote: »

To be honest, the kind of person whos nose gets bent out of shape over a few road signs was prpbably never going to be to much of a fan of the language anyway.

No point in walking on eggshells for fear of turning off a few people who were unlikely to ever support the language anyway.

What kind of person gets their nose bent out of shape when a guy gets detailed for refusing to answer a question from a Guard because it was posed in English, mmm?

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 2:00pm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

What kind of person gets their nose bent out of shape when a guy gets detailed for refusing to answer a question from a Guard because it was posed in English, mmm?

The kind of person that believes that Irish people have the right to speak Irish in Ireland.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 29-10-2013 2:05pm

An Coilean wrote: »

The kind of person that believes that Irish people have the right to speak Irish in Ireland.

We've been over this many times, my friend and this is not what you really want though, is it?

An Coilean · 29-10-2013 2:12pm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

We've been over this many times, my friend and this is not what you really want though, is it?

Go on why don't you tell me what I really want.

What I really want is for people who want to access public services through Irish to have the same access and be treated with the same basic respect and decency as as anyone looking for the same services in English.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 29-10-2013 2:18pm

An Coilean wrote: »

Go on why don't you tell me what I really want.

What I really want is for people who want to access public services through Irish to have the same access and be treated with the same basic respect and decency as as anyone looking for the same services in English.

Bull**** - roadsigns are a public service. QED.

What you want is language superiority for Irish and those speaking it, not equality.

Curly Judge · 29-10-2013 2:25pm

An Coilean wrote: »

Go on why don't you tell me what I really want.

What I really want is for people who want to access public services through Irish to have the same access and be treated with the same basic respect and decency as as anyone looking for the same services in English.

How about a little Parity of Esteem for the majority who pay the taxes that keep you all with a cosy lifestyle in your little fiefdom?

mariaalice · 29-10-2013 2:35pm

An Coilen, far play for sticking at it. I am curious about something if you came across an native Irish speaker who was happily speaking Irish with the odd English word mixed in, what would you do, would you feel the need to talk to them about the superiority of the Irish language their culture heritage etc.

Living languages change all the time.

awec · 29-10-2013 2:52pm

An Coilean wrote: »

Well, I'm not going to stop you, the State won't be doing so any thime soon though.

The state should though, right? While we're on the topic of getting rid of obsolete and pointless names on signs.

shruikan2553 · 29-10-2013 2:56pm

An Coilean wrote: »

The kind of person that believes that Irish people have the right to speak Irish in Ireland.

He was given that right, they just had to get a garda that could speak Irish. If I just decide not to communicate with a garda when I have the means to I would be surprised to be treated with such kindness.

How to revive the Irish language.

Comments