Can Irish be saved?

SeanW

New_Departure06 wrote:

To reclaim that which has been lost due to centuries of oppression

Ancient history.

our native language. It is a matter of national pride, and protecting our separate identity.

The Americans, Canadians, Swiss, Austrians etc don't seem to think so. Not even the craziest flag-waving neo-con.

Most Irish people share this view. So why do you think you have the right to forcibly impose an identity on people that they don't hold?

New_Departure06

Most Irish people share this view. So why do you think you have the right to forcibly impose an identity on people that they don't hold?

We have an Irish identity. The Irish language is a natural expression of that. Identity is about what makes you different from others. We are not English, just because we speak English.

Ancient history.

I wouldn't call 1841 - when 3.5 million spoke it as their main language - ancient history. I wouldn't call 1921, when the number was 240,000, ancient history.

I think some of the anti-language mentality is a throwback to the imperial days when native cultures worldwide had to listen to endless and hateful British govt propaganda about how "backward" native languages and cultures were. We need to be proud of our traditions and throw off the continuing inferior complex that resides in the minds of some.

The Corinthian

SeanW wrote:

Um ... yes, school should prepare young people for real life, including the world of work, it benefits the individual to be able to obtain a higher-value, higher-paid job.

TBH, that’s a questionable educational philosophy. Vocationally orientated subjects only appear towards the end of secondary school, otherwise education is geared towards developing literacy and basic the general knowledge needed to function within Society on an intellectual, rather than vocational, level.

New_Departure06 wrote:

To reclaim that which has been lost due to centuries of oppression - our native language. It is a matter of national pride, and protecting our separate identity.

Nationalism or patriotism alone is not going to cut it - it would be like trying to argue that Italy (or for that matter much of the EU) should revive and adopt Latin as an official language. It’s a cute idea on paper, but even a patriot has to realise when one battle is lost rather than risk continue sacrificing resources to it and ultimately losing the war.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

New_Departure06 wrote:

We have an Irish identity. The Irish language is a natural expression of that. Identity is about what makes you different from others. We are not English, just because we speak English.



I wouldn't call 1841 - when 3.5 million spoke it as their main language - ancient history. I wouldn't call 1921, when the number was 240,000, ancient history.

I think some of the anti-language mentality is a throwback to the imperial days when native cultures worldwide had to listen to endless and hateful British govt propaganda about how "backward" native languages and cultures were. We need to be proud of our traditions and throw off the continuing inferior complex that resides in the minds of some.

For the love of GOD will you please stop doling out the bezzwords like 'history', 'culture' and 'national identiy'? I have a PERSONAL IDENTITY and it says that I do NOT need a language to express it. I like watching Star Trek and consider myself a fan, but do I need to speak Klingon on order to express it? No!

The language IS history. It's in the past. That is because it's where the advocates CHOOSE it to be.

Can it be brought back? Yes.

WILL it be brought back? No. Much as I'd like to see a renaissance, I'm a realist. And the fact is that the people who really want it back cannot transcend 1916 and move into the 21st century. That's what it's going to take. Then and only then do you have a chance.

flogen

[QUOTE=SeanWHowever the old ultranationalist DON'T LET THE CROMWELL BEAT US and THE ANCIENT GAELS SPOKE IRISH 1000 YEARS AGO type nonsense being emitted by flogen, diorraing et. al. needs to take a back seat to modern reality and peoples needs.[/QUOTE]

Cromwell? Wha?
I don't see it as ultranationalist to say that one reason for not letting Irish die is the fact that it's our historical language, it should be part of our national identity, and as I said before in a world where an EU superstate is a high possibility within our lives there's nothing wrong with having something to identify ourselves from everyone else, and having something that is unique to us... anyway, you seem to have assumed by my support of the survival of the Irish language that I'm a die-hard "ultranationalist". I'm not.
I'd support making Irish voluntary from Secondary onwards but not before the entire sylabus is overhauled... I also appreciate that there is little reason for most people to learn Irish other than a personal interest, that's not something that will change quickly but I think the Government can do a lot to bring it back into day to day usage; if they don't and no one bothers complaining, so be it.

One thing that annoys me about the whole thing, when the census results come out it will say that a huge percentage of people in the country can speak Irish, which the Government will hop on as proof that their system works; but there's no break down of ability, speaking Irish could be the ability to string a sentence together for one man, and the ability to write a thesis in the language for another... anyway...

luckat

I completely agree with icky that Irish needs to be made seductive rather than shoved down people's throats.

And with Diorraing - it's actually easy enough to get work if you're hardworking and intelligent; schooling should be about lighting a fire, not filling a bucket, as they say.

The whole question of nationalism needs to be disentangled from the question of speaking Irish, because it makes people go all foggy.

MontgomeryClift

Ireland is an English-speaking country. GET OVER IT.

Fighting Irish

New_Departure06 wrote:

To reclaim that which has been lost due to centuries of oppression - our native language. It is a matter of national pride, and protecting our separate identity.

:rolleyes:

Diorraing

MontgomeryClift wrote:

Ireland is an English-speaking country. GET OVER w
IT.

Well observed. Now if you read through the other posts you will see that the debate is about how we can change that.

The Corinthian

Diorraing wrote:

Well observed. Now if you read through the other posts you will see that the debate is about how we can change that.

Actually much of the debate is if there really is a point to changing that.

Sand

We have an Irish identity. The Irish language is a natural expression of that. Identity is about what makes you different from others. We are not English, just because we speak English.

So would we be any more Irish just because we spoke Gaelic?

I think some of the anti-language mentality is a throwback to the imperial days when native cultures worldwide had to listen to endless and hateful British govt propaganda about how "backward" native languages and cultures were. We need to be proud of our traditions and throw off the continuing inferior complex that resides in the minds of some.

TBH Dept, dont take this personally but the only throwback to imperial days/inferiority complex is deep rooted insecurity over Irish identity and a desperate desire to underline at any cost how different we are, for fear someone should forget. Lets face it, its a ludicrous proposition to invent a new identity for Irish people because they dont measure up to someones standards of what Irishness is. Most Irish people dont have to "try" to be Irish, they simply are Irish.

Irish society has never been fixed, static and unchanging. At every juncture in history a new wave of settlers/inmigrants have arrived and the culture has changed with them. Irish people and Irish society today are not the Irish people and society of 100 years ago, let alone 500 or 800 years ago. Pointing a finger at a timeline and saying "right, in 1841 x amount of people spoke this language - we need to return to the culture of 1841 as its superior to 2006" doesnt make any sense. The language collapsed between 1841 and 2006 much as the British Empire collapsed in the same period. Both are mourned by various Irish and English commentators respectively but theyre gone, and thats that. Irish long ago collapsed below the critical mass required to regenerate. The whole purpose of language is to communicate. Irish is not useful for communication when no one speaks it willingly. Chinese is a bigger language in Ireland today, and Polish is another. The definition of what it is to be Irish has changed since 1841.

Its like Father Ted - 40 years ago a show poking fun at Irish society and establishment figures like that would have led to rioting in the streets. Now we laugh along with it because were not so desperately insecure that we seek the insult in every little thing. Well generally, anyway. Id hope so at least. Alright, who am I kidding, plenty of people pore over every BBC broadcast looking for an potential insult but other than them weve moved on.

New_Departure06

The definition of what it is to be Irish has changed since 1841.

I disagree. Poles and Poles. Chinese are Chinese. In a recent supplement in the Irish Times, it asked about what it meant to be Irish. One Baltic person said that you are what you are, that you don't "become" something else. And I agree with that.

A TCD study a few years back showed 78% of Southern Irish men born here are descended from the first male inhabitants of the island. Now they didn't study the X chomosone but if they did I imagine the % of descent from the first inhabitants would be much higher.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ti=41&ca=9&si=175861&issue_id=1882

We should protect and resurrect our native tongue - that being Irish. If we get newcomers, we should require them to join the effort too. Assimilation is needed to preserve the native identity. I don't subscribe to elite fetishes like post-nationalism.

RedPlanet

Maybe they could require competency in Irish as a precondition to citizenship.
Oh, and i'm not talking about just the newcomers to this island, but everybody; including those persons born on the island, even those with centuries of family roots here.

SeanW

RedPlanet wrote:

Maybe they could require competency in Irish as a precondition to citizenship.
Oh, and i'm not talking about just the newcomers to this island, but everybody; including those persons born on the island, even those with centuries of family roots here.

Wonderful, then about half the Irish population or more would become Stateless Persons. I think the UNHCR might have something to say about that.

This is proof of the kind of craziness - this is linguistic fascism at it's absolute worst. The ultimate in ramming the language down people's throats.

I would gravely fear for the future of this country if you ever became Taoiseach.

The Corinthian

New_Departure06 wrote:

I disagree. Poles and Poles. Chinese are Chinese. In a recent supplement in the Irish Times, it asked about what it meant to be Irish. One Baltic person said that you are what you are, that you don't "become" something else. And I agree with that.

Well that’s not strictly true or clear cut. Poles are not simply Poles; a few are also German, Belarusian (and quite a few Belarusians are Poles), Ukrainian and Hungarian. Poland has also changed hugely over the centuries - even the last one. And if people don’t “become” anything what were the Poles a thousand years ago? Like your “Baltic person” both would have been Livonian.

As for the Chinese, that’s an even more ridiculous generalisation. China was historically an empire comprised of various Asian states, many with differing traditions and customs - and languages; after all there is no Chinese language, there are several.

Nations change and mutate and evolve. This is not always a good thing, but nether is denying that it can, and in some cases, should happen.

A TCD study a few years back showed 78% of Southern Irish men born here are descended from the first male inhabitants of the island. Now they didn't study the X chomosone but if they did I imagine the % of descent from the first inhabitants would be much higher.

What study?

And even were that so, what baring does that have on language? If anything it would mean that we need not depend upon language for national identity.

We should protect and resurrect our native tongue - that being Irish. If we get newcomers, we should require them to join the effort too. Assimilation is needed to preserve the native identity. I don't subscribe to elite fetishes like post-nationalism.

No, but you are subscribing to the fetish of orthodox nationalism and you’ve yet to present a differencing argument to say why your approach is any better.

MontgomeryClift

I blame the school's failure to teach Irish. People leave school with the impression that we're supposed to be speaking Irish, but they can't, and they carry that guilt around with them afterwards, with that nagging voice that tells them they must attend Irish classes sometime, someday, and learn to speak Irish. Every time they speak it's tinged with the guilt of linguistic transgression - "Am I speaking the wrong language? Should this all be in Irish?" Enough, I say! We don't need to carry around that shame.

Fighting Irish

RedPlanet wrote:

Maybe they could require competency in Irish as a precondition to citizenship.
Oh, and i'm not talking about just the newcomers to this island, but everybody; including those persons born on the island, even those with centuries of family roots here.

:rolleyes: That is one of the worst ideas i have ever heard. Well done

New_Departure06

What study?

I have left a link.

I reject notions of "inevitability". I believe in democracy and making decisions. I don't believe in being lulled into a sense that "you must accept this" because it's fashionable among a certain elite group some of whose motives may be more about self-aggrandissement than the national interest.

Now can we get back to the Irish language please. Why should it be allowed to die?

flogen

New_Departure06 wrote:

We should protect and resurrect our native tongue - that being Irish. If we get newcomers, we should require them to join the effort too. Assimilation is needed to preserve the native identity. I don't subscribe to elite fetishes like post-nationalism.

Irish people have been required to do Irish for decades and where has it gotten us??
I think foreign nationals will learn the language if it's of benefit to them, as in if on a day to day basis it's better to know it than to not; at the same time I'd prefer to see a situation where Irish people were fluent in Irish and English; lets not be ignorant, Ireland wouldn't have had nearly as much success were it not for the language we speak.

New_Departure06

flogen wrote:

Irish people have been required to do Irish for decades and where has it gotten us??
I think foreign nationals will learn the language if it's of benefit to them, as in if on a day to day basis it's better to know it than to not; at the same time I'd prefer to see a situation where Irish people were fluent in Irish and English; lets not be ignorant, Ireland wouldn't have had nearly as much success were it not for the language we speak.

I am not advocating we abandon English. I want to see a bilingual society in which incentives are given to use Irish in interaction with the organs of the State. On the "if its of benefit to them", then such incentives should be geared towards making it beneficial to them. Businesses should get tax breaks for using the Irish language. It should not be forgotten the role that the Gaelic revival played in rousing Irish nationalism and liberating us from Britain.

The Corinthian

New_Departure06 wrote:

I have left a link.

The figures you gave were not mentioned in your post. Indeed, they’re discussing percentages of men with certain surnames and not a percentage of all Southern Irish men, as you claimed.

And you still haven’t explained what this has to do with language?

I reject notions of "inevitability". I believe in democracy and making decisions. I don't believe in being lulled into a sense that "you must accept this" because it's fashionable among a certain elite group some of whose motives may be more about self-aggrandissement than the national interest.

That’s a very erudite argument but lacks any substance. The history of civilisation has repeatedly shown that societies evolve, not always for the better, but they do evolve. All you’ve managed to do is deny this socio-historical fact.

Not only that but you’ve then managed to somehow emphasise language as integral to this and have failed to demonstrate how, especially in light of all those nations that do not need to rely upon a common language to maintain a cultural identity.

Now can we get back to the Irish language please. Why should it be allowed to die?

Because it is already? Because it represents Irish identity no more than Latin might represent Italian identity or Swiss German represents the Swiss? Because for the resources that are being spent on it to keep it on life support, so that a few thousand can come out with a few cúpla focal we could actually encourage a national identify that is relevant? Because we’ve reached a point where it frankly can no longer be saved?

But mainly because no one can come up with a better reason to keep it alive than some vague patriotic argument that makes no sense and cannot stand up to even the most perfunctory of scrutiny?

New_Departure06

Okay Corinthian, the 78.1% figure on Southern Irish men is to be found on this site which also covers the study. http://www.insideireland.com/sample19.htm

I hope we have settled that issue as it isn't the main emphasis of this thread. I only brought it up because someone was talking about Ireland changing over hundreds of years. I was making the point that this has been exaggerated in the South (though not in the North - and look at them).

Because it is already? Because it represents Irish identity no more than Latin might represent Italian identity or Swiss German represents the Swiss? Because for the resources that are being spent on it to keep it on life support, so that a few thousand can come out with a few cúpla focal we could actually encourage a national identify that is relevant? Because we’ve reached a point where it frankly can no longer be saved?

That's a weak argument for me. It can be saved. Hebrew was resurrected after dying. You cite the existing resources spent on it, and a supposed lack of return in terms of fluency. Well that has more to do with HOW it is taught, and the lack of incentive to use it. As such. those are the areas we should work on language policy, rather than throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The Swiss are different because they never had a common language. Latin is actually an evolved form of Latin, as are French, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, Catalan, Galician and Rhaetian, so that is also a weak argument imho.

[qupte]But mainly because no one can come up with a better reason to keep it alive than some vague patriotic argument that makes no sense and cannot stand up to even the most perfunctory of scrutiny?[/QUOTE]

Patriotism does make sense. A common sense of being part of the one community helps promote social-solidarity. I reject the thesis that patriotism is a relic of another age.

flogen

New_Departure06 wrote:

I am not advocating we abandon English. I want to see a bilingual society in which incentives are given to use Irish in interaction with the organs of the State. On the "if its of benefit to them", then such incentives should be geared towards making it beneficial to them. Businesses should get tax breaks for using the Irish language. It should not be forgotten the role that the Gaelic revival played in rousing Irish nationalism and liberating us from Britain.

As you can see by my first post on this thread I support such incentives, infact I specifically mentioned the idea of tax breaks... anyway, that's neither here nor there; you said:

We should protect and resurrect our native tongue - that being Irish. If we get newcomers, we should require them to join the effort too. Assimilation is needed to preserve the native identity. I don't subscribe to elite fetishes like post-nationalism.

By Newcomers I assume you mean foreign nationals/immigrants? Making Irish a requirement is going backwards; a language can only survive when it is being used on a daily basis in general conversation/business. If the government reformed the education system and employed a system of benefits to companies that use Irish, employ fluent speakers and market etc. in Irish it would encourage the use of the language; in such a situation Irish could be made optional in schools and people would choose to learn it because they could see a potential use for it; at present your average kid in a Dublin (or most other counties) school sees Irish as a fact of school but not life, TG4 and RnaG etc. have helped change that but not in a way that encourages use of the language.
Again, in this situation "newcomers" wouldn't need to be required to do anything; they'd eventually find it worthwhile to learn the language after spending some time in the country and being greeted in shops, by people etc. in Irish.

SeanW

You cite the existing resources spent on it, and a supposed lack of return in terms of fluency.

Gaeilgeoirs and their ultra-nationalist fetishes have been running the show since the foundation of the State.

The Swiss are different because they never had a common language.

And Ireland has not had Irish as its language in the lifetimes of most of its people. There is little difference.

BTW the Swiss don't need a language it seems, neither do the other countries I mentioned earlier, which are doing fine without "their" language. And most Irish people who don't speak Irish also seem quite secure in their identity.

Current Gaeilgeoir arguments basically come down to 2 things: hatred of the Brits and "I'll impose my identity on you because, just because" type arguments.

Diorraing

SeanW wrote:

Current Gaeilgeoir arguments basically come down to 2 things: hatred of the Brits and "I'll impose my identity on you because, just because" type arguments.

*sighs*
The Bearloirs on the thread clearly don't see the arguments of the Gaeilgeoirs. Those are the reasons you would like us to use in support of reviving the language. Sadly for you, no-one used those arguments and if they did please quote them.
You assume that because I believe that Irish people should have their own identity that I hate the Brits. There is no logic there. Speaking Irish shows no more resentment to Britain than it does to any other state. In fact, it is entirely an internal thing, it doesn't concern other countries.
I don't advocate imposing my identity on anyone. As I have said to you before, SeanW, I have no problem with compulsory Irish being scrapped after the L.C aslong as you scrap English and Maths aswell. L.C. English doesn't improve your standard of spoken and often written English, therefore it could be argued to be as "useless" as Irish. And who uses L.C. Maths in later life except those going into Engineering or science?
What the whole issue boils down to is whether we see ourselves as truly different to Anglo-Americans or just different in name. The best way to define yourself as a race and people is to have your own language

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Diorraing wrote:

*sighs*
The Bearloirs on the thread clearly don't see the arguments of the Gaeilgeoirs. Those are the reasons you would like us to use in support of reviving the language. Sadly for you, no-one used those arguments and if they did please quote them.

The OP has been using them ever since he started the thread. If not hisotry, national identity and programming (sorry "culture") then what are the arguments? If speaking Irish helps YOU feel Irish then go for it, but it does NOT do that for me so why should I be discriminated against for not speaking it? Why should some people get tax-breaks and not others? According to my passport, I'm Irish too.

As I have said to you before, SeanW, I have no problem with compulsory Irish being scrapped after the L.C aslong as you scrap English and Maths aswell. L.C. English doesn't improve your standard of spoken and often written English, therefore it could be argued to be as "useless" as Irish. And who uses L.C. Maths in later life except those going into Engineering or science?

You could, in all fairness say that about the entire leaving, and probably rightfully so. When you say "cumpolsory Irish after the LC" I assume this is a typo? It should be dropped at the start of secondary school: at that point the students themselves can decide whether or not to keep it.

What the whole issue boils down to is whether we see ourselves as truly different to Anglo-Americans or just different in name. The best way to define yourself as a race and people is to have your own language

Really? I'd say art rather than language. Art is more universal and doesn't descriminate. And how can oneself be a race?

RedPlanet

Sorry SeanW, don't take it so serious.
Check out my earlier post on this thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51241757&postcount=19
I was only interjecting a bit of debate, playing devil's advocate.
I personally disagree with that kind of linguistic fascism.
Yet i think it may be a logical course (for those that promote linguistic fascism) to take. A sort of Carrot and Stick approach.
Like this:
-Compulsory Irish for Leaving Cert
-Only Irish can build or buy homes in "irish speaking" areas (this can be extended)
-Compulsory Irish for employment with National Universities (NUIG)
-Compulsory Irish for employment with State bodies

Now take it a step further (albeit a big one);
-Compulsory Irish to vote in local elections (not European ones)

Who knows, could be where they're going.

The Corinthian

New_Departure06 wrote:

That's a weak argument for me. It can be saved. Hebrew was resurrected after dying. You cite the existing resources spent on it, and a supposed lack of return in terms of fluency.

But as I already pointed out the circumstances were different in that they did not have a common language and Hebrew fitted the bill. Here in Ireland we do; English.

Well that has more to do with HOW it is taught, and the lack of incentive to use it. As such. those are the areas we should work on language policy, rather than throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

The problem is we’ve done this, and redone this and redone this again over the decades and the decline has simply continued. When is it time that we wake up and smell the coffee on the issue and realise that it’s dead?

The Swiss are different because they never had a common language.

And they still managed to have a national identity without one. Go figure.

Latin is actually an evolved form of Latin, as are French, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, Catalan, Galician and Rhaetian, so that is also a weak argument imho.

That’s irrelevant because the point is that it is a dead language. You don’t see the Egyptians trying to readopt Coptic either.

Patriotism does make sense. A common sense of being part of the one community helps promote social-solidarity. I reject the thesis that patriotism is a relic of another age.

Patriotism does, but blind patriotism does not. The former can be a common sense of being part of the one community and help promote social-solidarity, but the latter sends us to fruitless wars, funds follies and ultimately hurts the very patria it claims to love.

So the question that must be asked, especially with the growing belief that the language has run it’s course, whether our patriotism is better employed elsewhere?

SeanW

RedPlanet wrote:

Sorry SeanW, don't take it so serious.
Check out my earlier post on this thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51241757&postcount=19
I was only interjecting a bit of debate, playing devil's advocate.
I personally disagree with that kind of linguistic fascism.
Yet i think it may be a logical course (for those that promote linguistic fascism) to take. A sort of Carrot and Stick approach.
Like this:
-Compulsory Irish for Leaving Cert
-Only Irish can build or buy homes in "irish speaking" areas (this can be extended)
-Compulsory Irish for employment with National Universities (NUIG)
-Compulsory Irish for employment with State bodies

Now take it a step further (albeit a big one);
-Compulsory Irish to vote in local elections (not European ones)

Who knows, could be where they're going.

Fair enough. The post just looked a little nuts.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

RedPlanet wrote:

Sorry SeanW, don't take it so serious.
Check out my earlier post on this thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51241757&postcount=19
I was only interjecting a bit of debate, playing devil's advocate.
I personally disagree with that kind of linguistic fascism.
Yet i think it may be a logical course (for those that promote linguistic fascism) to take. A sort of Carrot and Stick approach.
Like this:
-Compulsory Irish for Leaving Cert
-Only Irish can build or buy homes in "irish speaking" areas (this can be extended)
-Compulsory Irish for employment with National Universities (NUIG)
-Compulsory Irish for employment with State bodies

Now take it a step further (albeit a big one);
-Compulsory Irish to vote in local elections (not European ones)

Who knows, could be where they're going.

Now that's DEFINITELY into the ball park of human rights abuses!!! It'll be linguisitc apartheid next!!