Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Good news everyone! The Boards.ie Subscription service is live. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

The Irish language is failing.

1…5960626465…94

Comments

  • #1832
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    OK so, can you name anybody here who is against compulsory Irish who isn't "anti-Irish, anti-republican and pro-British and pro-Unionist"?
    This is a self-defining thing for you I'd imagine...

    Whatever about everybody else Sutch is very much pining for the empire.


  • #1833
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,069 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    What is that ^

    Seriously, what is all this Empire stuff about in this thread?

    :confused:

    Looking forward to you answer Eugene, although I guess I'll have to wait while Nodin or one of his cohorts (Fuaranach & Co) prime you with the appropriate reply.


  • #1834
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Why don't you tell us about it as nobody else has mentioned human rights in the entirety of this thread thus far?

    Why are people so upset with a minority language. With the very existence of a language? With its teaching in schools, a few placements on signs, a few reservations?

    Everywhere else these majoritarian beliefs are rejected as fascistic


  • #1835
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    LordSutch wrote: »
    What is that ^

    Seriously, what is all this Empire stuff about in this thread?

    :confused:

    I'm talking about your self declared identity. The dismissal of 1916 as terrorists would imply that all violence against an empire is illegitimate, that any uprising against British supremacy from anywhere is illegitimate. The United Kingdom was an empire, it just spread.


  • #1836
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    LordSutch wrote: »
    What is that ^

    Seriously, what is all this Empire stuff about in this thread?

    :confused:

    Looking forward to you answer Eugene, although I guess I'll have to wait while Nodin or one of his cohorts (Fuerneach & Co) prime you with the appropriate reply.

    I'll answer the second part since you edited it. No idea who the first guy is, don't particularly like many of Nodin's arguments.

    Nobody is priming anybody. There is no conspiracy against you. Play the ball not the man.


  • Advertisement
  • #1837
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,069 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    I'm talking about your self declared identity. The dismissal of 1916 as terrorists would imply that all violence against an empire is illegitimate, that any uprising against British supremacy from anywhere is illegitimate. The United Kingdom was an empire, it just spread.

    THIS THREAD IS ABOUT THE FAILING IRISH LANGUAGE !

    see my posts in this thread . . . . . .

    No mention of an Empire or 1916.


  • #1838
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    Why are people so upset with a minority language.
    We're not.
    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    With the very existence of a language?
    We're not.
    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    With its teaching in schools
    We're not, so long as it isn't compulsory.
    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    a few placements on signs
    You mean "every" when you say "a few"? Bit of a waste yeah, but nobody's that bothered by that.
    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    a few reservations?
    We're not. So long as it isn't just a big freebie for "professional" Irish speakers.
    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    Everywhere else these majoritarian beliefs are rejected as fascistic
    Hang on, so you're saying democracy is fascist, because the majority get what they want?
    Congrats on your win playing strawman bingo anyway. Most impressive.


  • #1839
    Carlos Orange
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭Carlos Orange


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    The dismissal of 1916 as terrorists would imply that all violence against an empire is illegitimate, that any uprising against British supremacy from anywhere is illegitimate.

    Military uprisings in democracies and without large public support don't seem particularly legitimate to me. Something being illegitimate and a terrorist act are 2 different things though.


  • #1840
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,352 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »
    The implication here is that you believe that teaching life skills to kids is an infringement of their human rights...? :confused:

    Nope. I'm just mimicking the behaviour of those who think that teaching a child one language is "forcing" it on them, but teaching the child another one isn't, for no other reason than their own prejudices. They might think they're being rational or consistent, but they aren't.

    No-one is perfect, and we all have to have things that maybe we're not so good at and/or don't like so much. I get that, but I'm just pointing out that basing public policy on the fact that some people can't cope with and don't like something isn't a good idea.

    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »
    The stance is simple: let teenagers who have attained an ability to operate in the real world in a certain subject choose whether or not they wish to continue learning it. It's that simple.

    Yes, it is that simple; and if we took that approach to education generally our school leavers would be even more simple.
    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    But you brought up human rights, yes?

    No, you did, as did anyone else making the same irrational and emotional line of "argument". They should going on about something being "useless" or "forced on" people just because of their inability and prejudices.


  • #1841
    Carlos Orange
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭Carlos Orange


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I get that, but I'm just pointing out that basing public policy on the fact that some people can't cope with and don't like something isn't a good idea.

    Basing public policy on an attempt to fulfil some national origin myth or a colonialesque idea of manipulating the countries language isn't either.


  • Advertisement
  • #1842
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Deleted User wrote: »
    No, you did, as did anyone else making the same irrational and emotional line of "argument". They should going on about something being "useless" or "forced on" people just because of their inability and prejudices.
    Well in that case you should have no problem quoting where I was talking about human rights to prove you're not just waffling lies. Should be easy right? It would be awfully embarrassing to not be able to though wouldn't it? You'll probably have to "infer" (a.k.a. lie some more) when you fail utterly to find such a quote, yes?


  • #1843
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    Whatever about everybody else Sutch is very much pining for the empire.
    Oh I see, so when he was referring to lots of people he was just lying and was really referring to one single person.
    Got it now. Thanks.


  • #1844
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,352 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    psinno wrote: »
    Basing public policy on an attempt to fulfil some national origin myth or a colonialesque idea of manipulating the countries language isn't either.

    Regardless of whether the currently policy makes sense or doesn't, or is well executed or not, your concern is almost certainly driven by your own inability to come to terms with the language. The same can be said of most people making the argument, and can be easily gleaned from the pejorative and emotional language they use - like the post quoted above.


  • #1845
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,352 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    You'll probably have to "infer" (a.k.a. lie some more) when you fail utterly to find such a quote, yes?

    When you use this kind of pejorative and overly emotional language, you might think it shows some kind of strength in your argument. But all it shows is weakness. If your case was as strong as you claim you would be able to make it with calm, rational and dispassionate language.


  • #1846
    Dughorm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 895 ✭✭✭Dughorm


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Hang on, so you're saying democracy is fascist, because the majority get what they want?.

    On topic, what is the evidence to suggest that the majority do want Irish optional?


  • #1847
    Carlos Orange
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭Carlos Orange


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Regardless of whether the currently policy makes sense or doesn't, or is well executed or not, your concern is almost certainly driven by your own inability to come to terms with the language. The same can be said of most people making the argument, and can be easily gleaned from the pejorative and emotional language they use - like the post quoted above.

    You don't think giving legal ascendancy to the language of a tiny minority has a colonial tinge to it?


  • #1848
    Dughorm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 895 ✭✭✭Dughorm


    psinno wrote: »
    Basing public policy on an attempt to fulfil some national origin myth or a colonialesque idea of manipulating the countries (sic) language isn't either.

    Who wants to manipulate here? There isn't a Gaelgóir conspiracy that I'm aware of...


  • #1849
    Dughorm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 895 ✭✭✭Dughorm


    psinno wrote: »
    You don't think giving legal ascendancy to the language of a tiny minority has a colonial tinge to it?

    Are you suggesting Irish speakers are trying to colonise their own country? Seriously?!!


  • #1850
    inocybe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 505 ✭✭✭inocybe


    Deleted User wrote: »

    No-one is perfect, and we all have to have things that maybe we're not so good at and/or don't like so much. I get that, but I'm just pointing out that basing public policy on the fact that some people can't cope with and don't like something isn't a good idea.

    Why is Irish necessary to gain entry to the NUI? And why do kids with dyslexia and ADD get exempted from it, even though they are allowed to take up another language subject in its place.


  • #1851
    Carlos Orange
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭Carlos Orange


    Deleted User wrote: »
    If your case was as strong as you claim you would be able to make it with calm, rational and dispassionate language.

    What are the rational dispassionate reasons for mandating Irish in schools?


  • Advertisement
  • #1852
    Carlos Orange
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭Carlos Orange


    Dughorm wrote: »
    Are you suggesting Irish speakers are trying to colonise their own country? Seriously?!!

    You can call it a reconquista if you prefer.


  • #1853
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Deleted User wrote: »
    When you use this kind of pejorative and overly emotional language, you might think it shows some kind of strength in your argument. But all it shows is weakness. If your case was as strong as you claim you would be able to make it with calm, rational and dispassionate language.
    Translation: no actually, I can't back up my claim about what you said with a quote, but here's some vague waffle instead.
    Nailed.


  • #1854
    Wright
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,120 ✭✭✭Wright


    Un Croissant wrote: »
    Just watching the news and the Irish language is failing, even in the Gaeltacht.

    I dont want to get into a debate with the misty eyed brigade about Irish being our first language etc.

    Languages are only relevant if they are used. History or nationalism doesn't appear to be enough.

    So with that in mind, how can we improve the position of Irish? Do we want to?

    While it will never be our first language again, considering mass culture and the internet age, is there a case to be made for a strong second language?

    Or should we look elsewhere? I guess I'm inviting the "let's all learn Chinese" gang to join the discussion.

    Irish has been dead a long time. Now it simply serves as an annoyance on Public Transport, a financial drain on the government (translation etc.) And most importantly, a ball and chain around the throat of every student in the country. Away with it I say.

    (Having a far eastern language in your skillset is an excellent advantage for what is to come ;) )


  • #1855
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,069 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    Dughorm wrote: »
    On topic, what is the evidence to suggest that the majority do want Irish optional?

    I think a national debate needs to take place, and I would guess that if that debate did tak e place, it would lead to Irish being 'optional' after the inter cert! (But that's just my wish & my opinion).

    I have no idea how people would actually vote. It's been mentioned many times before about Enda & Fine Gael suggesting that Irish need no longer be mandatory after the Inter Cert, but they were shot down in flames (pre election) by the "keep Irish mandatory" brigade who are very strong in their own right.

    So the status quo continues . . . . . .
    The language is in decline, and most of us don't speak it, yet its still compulsory I'm school, right up . . . .


  • #1856
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    inocybe wrote: »
    Why is Irish necessary to gain entry to the NUI? And why do kids with dyslexia and ADD get exempted from it, even though they are allowed to take up another language subject in its place.
    Or why are foreign born people not required to have Irish to get into NUI? It's either important to be able to follow a university course or it isn't.
    (Of course it isn't!)


  • #1857
    Dughorm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 895 ✭✭✭Dughorm


    inocybe wrote: »
    Why is Irish necessary to gain entry to the NUI? .

    For similar reasons that a foreign language is necessary to gain entry to the NUI I imagine...


  • #1858
    Dughorm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 895 ✭✭✭Dughorm


    LordSutch wrote: »
    I think a national debate needs to take place, and I would guess that if that debate did tak e place, it would lead to Irish being 'optional' after the inter cert! (But that's just my wish & my opinion).

    I have no idea how people would actually vote. It's been mentioned many times before about Enda & Fine Gael suggesting that Irish need no longer be mandatory after the Inter Cert, but they were shot down in flames (pre election) by the "keep Irish mandatory" brigade who are very strong in their own right.

    So the status quo continues . . . . . .

    I genuinely don't believe the majority would support optional Irish to be honest...
    I'm sure everyone would welcome better teaching of course! And that's not to blame teachers in general - many do inspire a love of the language!


  • #1859
    inocybe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 505 ✭✭✭inocybe


    Dughorm wrote: »
    For similar reasons that a foreign language is necessary to gain entry to the NUI I imagine...

    why are students with disabilities granted exemptions from Irish rather than other subjects?


  • #1860
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Nope. I'm just mimicking the behaviour of those who think that teaching a child one language is "forcing" it on them, but teaching the child another one isn't, for no other reason than their own prejudices. They might think they're being rational or consistent, but they aren't.

    No-one is perfect, and we all have to have things that maybe we're not so good at and/or don't like so much. I get that, but I'm just pointing out that basing public policy on the fact that some people can't cope with and don't like something isn't a good idea.

    Then the Scandanavia exmple you listed is ridiculous for reasons previously explained.

    FTR - I think all subjects should be optional after Junior Cert, english included. If, at the age of 15, we don't trust a student to be able to choose what they study, something has gone wrong long beforehand.
    Yes, it is that simple; and if we took that approach to education generally our school leavers would be even more simple.

    The idea that letting students choose what they study makes them "simple"? :confused::confused:

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Advertisement
  • #1861
    Dughorm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 895 ✭✭✭Dughorm


    inocybe wrote: »
    why are students with disabilities granted exemptions from Irish rather than other subjects?

    I don't know - perhaps their disability makes it more difficult for them to learn Irish? I'm not an educational psychologist or medic...


Advertisement