Polish ambassador points to Ireland's road signposting dyslexia

Hagar

MT wrote:

Not if you know anything about the political dispensation in the UK but that would be going way off topic. I’ll just presume you don’t.

Don't presume anything of the sort. Thank you.

MT wrote:

That’s no guarantee of a lack of bigotry towards foreigners. Some people become more xenophobic and nationalistic while working abroad and longing for their homeland.

True, but as I said I'm not a xenophobe or a bigot either. I don't long for Ireland but I would love a packet of King Crisps.;)

MT wrote:

And what has this debate got to do with whether you’re Irish or proud of your country, language and heritage. Are you suggesting that people who oppose your view on bilingual signs aren’t.

I believe our language and historical place names should be preserved. They are a valuable part of what makes us who we are. No, but am I not allowed put forward my view without condemning another's?

MT wrote:

Isn’t that a bit anti-immigrant? It doesn’t do your claim to not being xenophobic much good.

I'm not anti immigrant. I am an immigrant, here in France, check my personal profile. I've come here, made work for myself and learned the language. I don't expect to see Irish translations on French road signs so I think it's laughable for Poles to expect to see Polish roadsigns in Ireland.

MT wrote:

And is Calina any less patriotic than you for supporting the concept of trilingual road signs incorporating Polish?

Not at all, I'm not passing judgement on anybody. I just think the idea is ludicrous.

MT wrote:

Let’s not turn this into a ‘who’s the most Irish’ thread. :rolleyes:

Agreed. I'm quite enjoying your posts. Apart from not agreeing entirely with them they are well worth reading.

Calina

murphaph wrote:

Calina has suggested that all safety related signage is pictorial in form, this is simply untue. ALL roadsigns are safety related and should be as simple to understand in a short a time as possible (remembering you can be passsing these signs at 120km/h). This clearly includes directional signs which should if anything be the most clear of all the signs as they are the ones which distract people the most as they parse them for the necessary information.

Directional signs are not safety related, they are information related. They are necessary for information reasons but the lack of them does not directly impact on safety. Stop and yield signs, no entry signs, one way only signs and traffic lights are all far more critical.

While what you say in terms of parsing the information on them is relevant, I would suggest that the way the signs are laid out is a great deal more important than the languages used on them. For example some of the more recent signs on the N20 bypassing Croom and Patrickswell are very unclear in this respect.

Other countries manage bilingual signs. I take issue with the suggestion that we're some how special and hence, can't.

Calina

MT wrote:

And is Calina any less patriotic than you for supporting the concept of trilingual road signs incorporating Polish?

Actually - you misrepresent me. Grossly. You suggested that based on the fact that quite a few people spoke Polish every day, the case for introducing it to road signs was pretty much equivalent to the case to having Irish on road signs. I stated that it wasn't - the sole support for it should be its official status. As in - I don't believe Polish should be on Irish road signs but if it had official status, then the rules change.

murphaph

Calina wrote:

Directional signs are not safety related, they are information related. They are necessary for information reasons but the lack of them does not directly impact on safety. Stop and yield signs, no entry signs, one way only signs and traffic lights are all far more critical.

While what you say in terms of parsing the information on them is relevant, I would suggest that the way the signs are laid out is a great deal more important than the languages used on them. For example some of the more recent signs on the N20 bypassing Croom and Patrickswell are very unclear in this respect.

This notion that directional signage is not related to road safety is quite literally, fatally flawed. Tonnes of research has been done on this by the likes of the TRL and NHTSA for example. The UK has run many experiments to find the best recipe for all it's road signs, including directional signage. A key requirement of ANY sign is clarity and like it or not, more information = less clarity. When you make a sign unclear for any reason you add confusion and distraction to the driver, needlessly. This is very poor traffic engineering as it can be avoided by keeping the signs as clear as possible. Removing a little spoken language from roadsigns outside the Gaeltacht would go a long way to adding enormous amounts of clarity to signage.

Calina wrote:

Other countries manage bilingual signs. I take issue with the suggestion that we're some how special and hence, can't.

We manage bilingual signs too, I just believe that the research shows them to be less clear than mono-lingual ones and we are a geographically divided (linguistically) country, so use irish placenames only in the Gaeltacht areas and english placenames only in the english speaking parts, just how Switzerland for example signs it's placenames. They don't put up french placename signage in german speaking parts. that's the approach we should take is all I'm saying.

I much prefer the look of Gaeltacht signage than the bilingual stuff found outside the Gaeltacht. I'm just looking for the same clear signage outside the Gaeltacht for the majority of us (english speakers).

This has got absolutely nothing to do with love for the Teanga or anything like it, purely from a traffic engineering POV.

murphaph

NavanJunction1 wrote:

No, I speak Gaeilge daily, recieve and send texts in it, and have also use it in work, and on television and radio.

It isn't dead - you just ain't talking to the right people.

But that doesn't take away from the fact that people like my mother who can't string a sentence together still tick the 'fluent' box, giving the false impression of a thriving language. It is undoubtable that irish is used daily by people like yourself, but that doesn't mean it's prolific.

Victor

ferdi wrote:

i like our road signs, if he dosnt like it, let him **** off back to poland.

Tone it down.

NavanJunction1

murphaph wrote:

But that doesn't take away from the fact that people like my mother who can't string a sentence together still tick the 'fluent' box, giving the false impression of a thriving language.

Ah, sure live and let live

murphaph

NavanJunction1 wrote:

Ah, sure live and let live

Normally I'm a great believer in that sentiment, truly I am, but the census questions are there for a serious reason. If people keep filling them out falsely then funding gets diverted to such things as making irish a recognised language of the EU when in reality a tiny percentage of our population are fluent in it. If people ticked any old box on the census then what little planning does take place beased on it's results would be horribly flawed. Certain things should just be done properly and the old irish way of "ah shure'n it'll be grand, leave well alone" just don't cut it anymore. Transport being a key area where this "ah shure'n it'll be grand" attitude has left us all up sh!t creek without a paddle.

NavanJunction1

murphaph wrote:

Certain things should just be done properly

But I'm of the opinon that bilingual signs is doing things properly..

It might be inconvienient to sign-makers, etc, and maybe they could work on the design to make it easier to read..

Just thinking about my first time in Italy. I thought the signs with 'Senso Unico' were directions to a place..:rolleyes:

I've yet to see a sign in Ireland that would cause that confusion.

Metrobest

murphaph wrote:

Normally I'm a great believer in that sentiment, truly I am, but the census questions are there for a serious reason. If people keep filling them out falsely then funding gets diverted to such things as making irish a recognised language of the EU when in reality a tiny percentage of our population are fluent in it. If people ticked any old box on the census then what little planning does take place beased on it's results would be horribly flawed. Certain things should just be done properly and the old irish way of "ah shure'n it'll be grand, leave well alone" just don't cut it anymore. Transport being a key area where this "ah shure'n it'll be grand" attitude has left us all up sh!t creek without a paddle.

What if the question was:

(1) "Are you capable of conducting a conversation of longer then 5 minutes in duration solely, conveying complex feelings and emotions, through the medium of Irish?"

A small percentage would lie and say yes, thinking back to their long-ago stint in the Gaeltacht. Question 2 would catch them out.

(2) "Translate the following paragraph, word-for-word, from Irish into English, without the aid of a dictionary" .....

murphaph

NavanJunction1 wrote:

But I'm of the opinon that bilingual signs is doing things properly..

It might be inconvienient to sign-makers, etc, and maybe they could work on the design to make it easier to read..

Just thinking about my first time in Italy. I thought the signs with 'Senso Unico' were directions to a place..:rolleyes:

I've yet to see a sign in Ireland that would cause that confusion.

Trust me, Italian signage is not something we should aspire to. Comparing Ireland to other lax countries is rather dodging the issue. It's well known that our nearest neighbours (just 45 mins drive fom here!) are amongst the very best in the world at road signage. Indeed, or own rule book is mostly hatcheted bits of their 'Guildford Rules' which were devised decades ago and are a design icon at this stage. These are the signs we should copy, not lax mediteranean ones. I totally accept that you believe in bilingual signs, so I take it you'd like to see them deployed in the Gaeltacht too?

murphaph

Metrobest wrote:

What if the question was:

(1) "Are you capable of conducting a conversation of longer then 5 minutes in duration solely, conveying complex feelings and emotions, through the medium of Irish?"

A small percentage would lie and say yes, thinking back to their long-ago stint in the Gaeltacht. Question 2 would catch them out.

(2) "Translate the following paragraph, word-for-word, from Irish into English, without the aid of a dictionary" .....

Totally agree, the question as currently asked allows people to use wishful thinking when answering it. It should be a detailed question as above. Far fewer people would tick 'fluent' if they were forced to think about it.

Hagar

Metrobest wrote:

(2) "Translate the following paragraph, word-for-word, from Irish into English, without the aid of a dictionary" .....

That wouldn't be much of a challange on the Irish language version of the Census form now would it?
Also no Irish speaker would translate word for word, that's not how languages work, idomatic use would come into play as would local dialects and expressions. But I digress.. Lean ar aghaidh...;)

mackerski

NavanJunction1 wrote:

Whether you like it or not, you country has a gaelic heritage, and you live in it. Ignore ok, but you are surrounded by it.

I never said it didn't - My (rather mild, I thought) point is that it should be valid to call a place by an English language name if that's the only name it has ever had. Further, that it is pointless (and counter-productive) to try to retrofit a makey-up Irish name.

Dermot (whom the primary school system was legally obliged to call "Diarmaid")

mackerski

murphaph wrote:

Removing a little spoken language from roadsigns outside the Gaeltacht would go a long way to adding enormous amounts of clarity to signage.

Conversely, removing a much-spoken language from road signs inside the Gaeltacht has gone a long way to adding enormous amounts of confusion to signage. Anybody else ever miss the turn to Maam Cross? (I ask that someone with a much above-average command of the Irish language)

Dermot

mackerski

Calina wrote:

On the other hand, everyone calls Cobh Cobh, and Dunlaoighaire Dunlaoighaire and not Queenstown and Kingstown. Care to explain why?

That's not quite accurate - most people say Dunleary and write some variant of Dún Laoighaire. It's one of the rare examples where The Man has managed to erase the English name in favour of the Irish one from which it was derived - even if only on paper.

Dunleary now lives in retirement on the Dunleary Road.

Diarmaid (pronounced "Dermot")

murphaph

You're right of course Diarmaid ;-) Dun Laoighaire is never said as it's spelt on road signs. Certainly not by the majority of people living there at any rate. They (and most anyone I know) says 'Dunleary'. In fact, the only time you might hear it pronounced Dun Laoighaire is on the news.

The other examples given were Cobh and something else, but of course Cobh is the actual name of that town in the english language. It is 'An Cobh' as gaeilge! It hasn'r been called Queenstown for almost a hundred years, same as Maryborough is now defunct (though in my opinion a much nicer name for a town than Portlaois). CIE in fact were still calling it Maryborough for about 50 years after the name change, God bless 'em.

SeanW

Metrobest wrote:

Look, let's get real about the language situation here. Every single holder of an "Eire" passport reads, reads their car handbook in english, listens to the traffic reports in english, calls the AA if they break down in english, calls 999 in english if in a roadside emergency.

We are living in pretend land if we think that putting confusing, italicised quasi-Gaelic names on our roadsigns do anything to help anyone get where they're going. Isn't that what signs are for - clear directions and road safety messages, not meaningless de Valera-style political statements about Ireland's cultural identity.

Travel anywhere in the world and Irish is no good for you - unless you want to have snide conversations about foreign nationals who you know won't understand it :rolleyes:

Putting a language on roadsigns that barely anyone speaks and that none of our hundred thousand odd migrants understand is so... well...Irish

Well put Metrobest

What about the proposal recently to have signs in Polish on Irish roads?

Actually makes more sense as there are likely more people speaking Polish, Portugese, Chinese etc in modern Ireland that those who speak Irish.

The point of road signs and other official paraphernalia is to INFORM, that is their ONLY usefulness. Not to make some ridiculous "HEY LOOK WE'RE NOT BRITS" statement which is what the gaeilgeoiri seem to be after.

When a soviergn, independent country chooses to be multilingual, they do so out of practical necessity. Like Belgium, one half it's population speaks French, the other Dutch. Similar story in Switzerland, some speak French, some German, some Italian, and some other language. It's absolutely necessary for these countries to be multilingual.

Can those who favour retaining Irish on roadsigns please show us an example of one other independent European country that maintains official multilingualism simply to make an ultra-nationalist cultural statement?

parsi

murphaph wrote:

It's well known that our nearest neighbours (just 45 mins drive fom here!) are amongst the very best in the world at road signage.

Hmmm...these are people who put up signs with distances in Miles and Yards - saw one last year somewhere near Pembroke. I wonder how the rest of metric Europe deal with that ?

I don't see the point in putting up signs in a language that is not the official language of the country - what do we do when the Polish community leave ? Tear down the signs and put up new ones with whatever is the next group?

I think generally our signage is clear but we could do with a bit more - coming down from Dublin yesterday I noticed that there aren't all that many signs saying how far it is to Cork once you get off the M7.

Pfungstadter

Metrobest wrote:

Travel anywhere in the world and Irish is no good for you - unless you want to have snide conversations about foreign nationals who you know won't understand it :rolleyes:

Putting a language on roadsigns that barely anyone speaks and that none of our hundred thousand odd migrants understand is so... well...Irish

Yep and I suppose Polish is a stupid language to speek, and Dutch and Danish and Lao and Thai and Italian and Malay cos Travel with these languages and they are no good outside of their countries,

you are a muppet

Being branded an English speaker is not pleasent when abraod (in a non english speaking country) and it comes with the tag of ignorant of other languages. I suppose this is true for you.,

SeanW

Nobody said those languages were "stupid" so thanks for putting words in my/Metrobest et als. mouths. That's a really mature thing to do.

you are a muppet

Attack the post, not the poster?

Quite to the contrary, large numbers of people speak the languages, and in some cases more people in Ireland speak some of those languages than speak Irish.

Being branded an English speaker is not pleasent when abraod

So you'd rather be ... an Irish speaker abroad? That should be fun. When travelling the best thing is to have some of the destination country's language.

murphaph

Pfungstadter wrote:

Yep and I suppose Polish is a stupid language to speek, and Dutch and Danish and Lao and Thai and Italian and Malay cos Travel with these languages and they are no good outside of their countries

I know that the languages I have highlighted (don't know anything about the others) are useful outside their national borders. Polish is mutually intelligible with some of the other slavic languages in central Europe. Dutch is mutually intelligible with Afrikaans and is also used in the former dutch colonies in the Caribbean and of course half of Belgium speaks it! Danish is mutually intelligible with Norwegian (so much so that many products only have instructions in 'Danwegian' on them!) and Swedish. Italian is actually spoken in Switzerland and parts of Austria and is mutually intelligible (to a degree) with Romanian. And you called him a muppet :rolleyes:

Apart from this fact, all these major languages are fully understood WITHIN their own geographical borders, something that definitely cannot be said of Irish.

mackerski

murphaph wrote:

Italian is actually spoken in Switzerland and parts of Austria

The only parts of Austria that I can think of where Italian is spoken would be restaurants and consular buildings. Though there are parts of Italy where German is spoken.

Dermot

Pfungstadter

Lao comes from Lao, Hello!!!
Thai comes from Thailand, Hello!!!
Malay comes from Malaysia!!!!!!

Need to get that thinking cap on.

So should you tell the Swiss to stop speaking Swiss-German, (which is not german) cos no one else can speak it.

Everyone here hates Irish, big chip on their shoulders. i used to hate it too. Infact loads. And I still don't underttand why rté have news readers who speak in an accent where I can't even understnd anything.

murphaph

Pfungstadter wrote:

Lao comes from Lao, Hello!!!
Thai comes from Thailand, Hello!!!
Malay comes from Malaysia!!!!!!

I know where they come from thanks, I just don't know anything about their proliferation or lack thereof.

Pfungstadter wrote:

So should you tell the Swiss to stop speaking Swiss-German, (which is not german) cos no one else can speak it.

It's a dialect of german, just like Bayrisch or Swabisch is not intelligible to a Koelner, but they all speak Hochdeutsch too and that is what their national media/roadsigns etc. use. You can write Bayrisch but the Bavarians don't erect roadsigns in it! Anyway, nobody is telling anybody to stop using any language they like, you're making that bit up.

Pfungstadter wrote:

Everyone here hates Irish

I have no hate nor love for it, so you've made something else up.

This thread is about road signage but as usual it turns into some sort of pseudo-political slagging match. A "look how much more irish I am than you" sort of tripe that I can do without.

@Dermot, you're correct of course, got my language overflow the wrong way round on that one!

Pfungstadter

murphaph wrote:

I know where they come from thanks, I just don't know anything about their proliferation or lack thereof.


It's a dialect of german, just like Bayrisch or Swabisch is not intelligible to a Koelner, but they all speak Hochdeutsch too and that is what their national media/roadsigns etc. use. You can write Bayrisch but the Bavarians don't erect roadsigns in it! Anyway, nobody is telling anybody to stop using any language they like, you're making that bit up.


I have no hate nor love for it, so you've made something else up.

This thread is about road signage but as usual it turns into some sort of pseudo-political slagging match. A "look how much more irish I am than you" sort of tripe that I can do without.

@Dermot, you're correct of course, got my language overflow the wrong way round on that one!

Listen, no need to get hostile.

I just get that feeling, you seem to prefer to remove the language from all signage and saying it's of no use (or to that effet) and that noone uses it, (not a direct quote)

Listen, German people would not understand a Swiss german person. The languages are related as much as Dutch is related. Dutch can to some degree understand german but germans cann't understand dutch. And all that stuff you got sounds like it's from whikpedia.

Anyway, i like our signage the way it is, with dual language. The layout can be dodgy, especially that new shight on the M50 and M11 and N2, and soon everywhere else. Can't believe that with all the intelligence in the NRA, and department of transport and local councils that not one person seems to have questioned the drop arrows. Even to me it's strange. A friend of mine was over from abroad and we drove around the M50 to go to wexford and when we got to the new section they said, "change lane" I said it alright, some idiot has designed the wrong signage". They couldn't believe it. I said that it was due to be changed, I lied of course. Thata roads signs are a bit embarassing.:o

murphaph

Pfungstadter wrote:

Listen, no need to get hostile.

I wasn't aware I was tbh.

Pfungstadter wrote:

I just get that feeling, you seem to prefer to remove the language from all signage and saying it's of no use (or to that effet) and that noone uses it, (not a direct quote)

Then that's because you didn't read all my posts. I said it's absolutely fine to use irish on signage in the irish speaking parts of Ireland! The 'usefulness' or otherwise of the irish language is not at issue. The numbers of first language speakers is however.

Pfungstadter wrote:

Listen, German people would not understand a Swiss german person. The languages are related as much as Dutch is related. Dutch can to some degree understand german but germans cann't understand dutch. And all that stuff you got sounds like it's from whikpedia.

No wikipedia used (didn't you see I had an error in that post that was kindly corrected by Dermot?!). All from me own Sallynoggin. A german from a town on the swiss border would understand a swiss person from just over that border in their own local dialect

It is not the point though-nowhere in Germany, Switzerland or Austria will you find roadsigns in local dialects. They are all written in standard german (Hochdeutsch) which is taught to german speakers throughout Europe. This is to ensure sign clarity!!

mackerski

There's an aspect of signing practice from (real) multilingual countries that hasn't been raised here yet - it's the effect of signposts located in an area of the country whose signage is in one language but pointing to destinations in a different language area. As an example, if you were trying to circumnavigate the Brussels ring road and take the Motorway to Liège, you would (last time I was there anyway) have had to look out for a sign pointing to Luik (Dutch for Liège).

Consider what's going on here - people in Liège call their city Liège. So do most people in Brussels. Many visitors, certainly English- or French-speaking ones, will also. However, because Brussels is a French-speaking outpost in the middle of Flanders, the ring road, or the important part of it at least, is in Dutch-speaking territory.

So although I'm an advocate of single-language placenames on signs (except in exceptional cases, where the place in question is linguistically diverse), I'd also consider that it can be applied in silly ways. My earlier example about Gaeltacht signage to Maam Cross is a very similar one, but from home.

Dermot

nordydan

Anyone born in ireland who uses either of the official languages and pays taxes to the state has the right to parade along the queen's highway:eek: , sorry drive on the road network and locate their destination with out having to resort to the language of the imperial sassenach:eek: , sorry other official language.

Good night, guten nacht, bonne nuit, buenas noches, доброй ночи, boa noite, 잘 자, おやすみなさい, buona notte, καλή νύχτα, goede nacht, 晚上好 agus oíche mhaith duit!;)

murphaph

nordydan wrote:

Anyone born in ireland who uses either of the official languages and pays taxes to the state has the right to .. drive on the road network and locate their destination with out having to resort to the .. other official language*

Does anyone born in Ireland who pays taxes and who can't speak irish not also have that same right then? Currently that is not the case as you will be aware. I (and the rest of Leinster and Cork) pay taxes that build roads in the Gaeltacht but I must use a language I am not fluent in to navigate those roads.

According to your above post this should not be the case, is this correct or do you believe in mono-lingual irish language only signage for Gaeltacht areas is appropriate, but believe that bilingual signage should exist elsewhere?






*Humourous bits removed so I could make my point, but the humour was good

nordydan

I do agree with you about the gaeltacht, there should be some indication as to places in english, if not even for the tourists.

MT

Calina wrote:

In terms of the official status - I would have said yes, actually. And incidentally, it has always been the case that legislation has to be published in Irish. Way beyond recent changes there were already problems regarding a massive backlog in translation. And I have already stated that I disagree with monolingual Irish language signage.

If you’d read my comment you’d notice that I never claimed legislation wasn’t published in Irish Gaelic until recently. As for official status conferring the need for a language to be placed on all signage the authorities currently take a different view – Gaeltachts (despite your opposition), yield and stop signs come to mind. But on this we’ll have to agree to disagree, the government and myself take the view that mono-lingualism is acceptable on signage despite there being two official languages. You don’t, fair enough.

You miss the point. The preferred option of UK authorities for a very long time was to restrict bilingual signage so that there was none at all. They have been forced to introduce some over the past I don't know, 20, 30 years depending on the area in question. In other words - the restrictions have been lessened.

No, you do. We were discussing the extent of bilingual signage in the UK in an attempt to draw comparisons with the Republic - not the history of its introduction in those areas. The fact that restrictions were once lessened in those areas is another issue. The point is that such signage remains restricted outside of areas where there is a need for it. This is contrary to the approach in the Republic – the comparison I was drawing.

What's your point? Either that we should be like other countries which manage bilingual signage, or we should pretend that Irish just doesn't exist and ignore it?

My point was that it undermines your previous one. The choice is not simply between bilingual signage or none, and you’ll note that I have no problem with the former. A multilingual approach to signage can be implemented as in countries such as Switzerland or Belgium. I have attempted to highlight that third avenue, you’re the one alluding to there either being one method or another while claiming that Ireland isn’t unique in it’s bilingual approach. There is more than one method and Ireland is unique in its approach, two points that you appear to be confusing.

You seem to imply that dealing with the linguistic chip involves or includes getting rid of it on signposts. Perhaps it is not the Irish speaking minority who have the chip but the English speaking majority.

It might very well be a way of recognising that Gaelic has lost out to English as the language of popular usage and that Ireland has been for some time a predominently Anglophone country – culturally and linguistically. The chip clearly seems to be on the shoulder of those demanding the inclusion of a language on signs in areas where the vast majority of people have no use for it. They shouldn’t impose their lingo-nationalistic insecurities upon the rest of us.

I only made that point today. But by the same token - most safety related signage is graphical, not language based. So the language is a moot point there.

Then I’m sorry, I must have missed it but as you can see I agree. And as for the language on safety signage being a moot point I’d strongly disagree. But if you see no need for text on such signs then you’ll not worry if Gaelic isn’t included. Unless, that is, this isn’t really a debate about proper road signage but instead one about linguistic insecurity and a complex regarding the dominance of English. I see you ignored my point about directional signage.

No, I don't find them difficult to read. I never have found them difficult to read.

Then I’ll rephrase the question – do you think you’d find place names in a mixed case non-italic font easier to read? I certainly do and those that devised road signage in the vast majority of other countries seem to agree.

It says a lot to me that in fact, you consider Irish to be a more exclusive definition than Irish Gaelic.

I’d hope it does – that I’m a tolerant person with a pluralistic view of Irishness. In NI claiming the Gaelic language and heritage as so synonymous with the Irish identity that they are one and the same and that the former can simply be referred to as Irish would deeply offend many. As I’m sure would be the case down there with the Irish population becoming more culturally diverse through immigration. What next, will white skin become similarly bound up with the term? By using Irish Gaelic I’m highlighting that the language is only one subsection of the overall identity and culture. As in there are white Irish people and black Irish people, not Irish people and blacks.

Alun

mackerski wrote:

As an example, if you were trying to circumnavigate the Brussels ring road and take the Motorway to Liège, you would (last time I was there anyway) have had to look out for a sign pointing to Luik (Dutch for Liège).

... and if you're in the German speaking part (yes, there is one!), you'll have to look out for Lüttich !

MT

Hagar wrote:

Don't presume anything of the sort. Thank you.

I’m afraid I’ll have to as you wouldn’t have made the remark had you not been ignorant of the UK’s political dispensation. Retract your imperial comment or you leave me no choice, old chap.

I believe our language and historical place names should be preserved. They are a valuable part of what makes us who we are. No, but am I not allowed put forward my view without condemning another's?

I agree. But that wasn’t how you couched your previous comment. Declaring out of the blue after making the case for bilingual signage that you are ‘Irish and proud of my country…’ would suggest that you were making an insinuation about the rest of us. Why else would you have said it on an Irish board, full of Irish men (and women) and whose posters and their patriotism are unknown to you?

I'm not anti immigrant. I am an immigrant, here in France, check my personal profile. I've come here, made work for myself and learned the language. I don't expect to see Irish translations on French road signs so I think it's laughable for Poles to expect to see Polish road signs in Ireland.

The belief that Polish immigrants should go back to Poland if they seek Polish translations while at the same time supporting even less necessary versions in Irish Gaelic is hypocritical. In the light of your support for the latter you are anti-immigrant. And immigrants can be anti-immigrant. Have you never been on a discussion board where Irish that emigrated to Britain or the US moan on and on about the ‘blacks’ and Eastern Europeans now arriving back home?

Not at all, I'm not passing judgement on anybody.

But you clearly were otherwise you wouldn’t have made that Irish and proud statement. Do you normally announce that in the middle of discussions with fellow Irish people?

MT

Calina wrote:

Actually - you misrepresent me. Grossly. You suggested that based on the fact that quite a few people spoke Polish every day, the case for introducing it to road signs was pretty much equivalent to the case to having Irish on road signs. I stated that it wasn't - the sole support for it should be its official status. As in - I don't believe Polish should be on Irish road signs but if it had official status, then the rules change.

I said that you support the concept of trilingual signage including Polish, and you do. So no misrepresentation – gross or otherwise. You believe all official languages should be on signs, I don’t.

mackerski

Alun wrote:

... and if you're in the German speaking part (yes, there is one!), you'll have to look out for Lüttich !

Right enough - and it's pretty close to Liège too. Though you'd be less likely to miss a turn because of it down there.

Another case of this is Aachen, which the French signs call Aix-la-Chapelle, though the closer you get to the border, the more likely it is that Aachen will appear in brackets.

Dermot

Pfungstadter

murphaph wrote:

Does anyone born in Ireland who pays taxes and who can't speak irish not also have that same right then? Currently that is not the case as you will be aware. I (and the rest of Leinster and Cork) pay taxes that build roads in the Gaeltacht but I must use a language I am not fluent in to navigate those roads.

According to your above post this should not be the case, is this correct or do you believe in mono-lingual irish language only signage for Gaeltacht areas is appropriate, but believe that bilingual signage should exist elsewhere?






*Humourous bits removed so I could make my point, but the humour was good

I'm sorry, I really hate this discussion, but most western european language use the LATIN or some call the Roman alphabet. What can't you read? Because the destination is in Irish doesn't mean you can't understand it. It a place name.

95% of warning signs are pictures so what is your problem.

Europeans are very vrey lucky in terms or language.
In Asian they are introducing the Latin alphabet on their signs cos most countries have their own individual alpdabet. Some like Vietnam and Malaysia use the Latin alphabet in their language already but countries such as Lao (or Laos) Cambodia and Thailand can't read each others language (I'm not talking about understanding it but just to read the names of places). Lao shares some letters with Thai as far as I know but they can't read each others language at all as there are too many letters that are not common.

murphaph

Pfungstadter wrote:

I'm sorry, I really hate this discussion,

You're free to leave it at any time

Pfungstadter wrote:

most western european language use the LATIN or some call the Roman alphabet. What can't you read?

I can 'see' the letters on the sign and can pronounce them, but I don't actually recognise many of the town names in irish. DERMOT Diarmaid gave a great example in Maam Cross (nothing like it's Irish equivalent!)

Pfungstadter wrote:

Because the destination is in Irish doesn't mean you can't understand it.

Of course it does. It means I need a map with translations on it, which is not a problem to me as I'm entering a region of Ireland which speaks irish as it's first language and I respect that. I'm not arguing for english to be included on Gaeltacht signs, I'm argiung for Irish to be removed from english speaking area signs, that is all-parity of esteem and all that!

Pfungstadter wrote:

It a place name.

Just like Dublin is Dublin to most everyone living here but we have to endure biliungual signage all over the city for the benefit of a handful of native Irish speakers. I'd prefer Irish names on signs in irish speaking ireland and English names on signs in English speaking ireland. that is all. You appear to see no problem in Irish only signage in the Gaeltacht but take umbradge at the idea of english only signage everywhere else. So you are not arguing for bilingual signage across the board, just in those places that don't speak the irish language.

Pfungstadter wrote:

95% of warning signs are pictures so what is your problem.

You are horribly mistaken if you believe thye only poorly designed signage that can distract drivers (and cause accidents) is that signage designed to warn of hazards. Any and all roadsignage presents a potential distraction for the driver and that distraction should be minimised, so i say clear up the signage by removing superfluous languages from it.

Pfungstadter

@ murphy sorry, murphaph.

So you seem to know everywhere by their english name,
I suppose you go to germany looking for Munich?

Listen, I think this is really annoying you. Until Irish is removed as the first language in the constitution you gonna have to put up with it being on all signage. Since you need a referendum to do that, I can't see it happening.

good luck good night.

I'm in awe that you know everywhere (only) by it's english name or do you just feel uncomfortable useing the irish name.:rolleyes:

Just agree to dis-agree.

Pfungstadter

murphaph wrote:

You are horribly mistaken if you believe thye only poorly designed signage that can distract drivers (and cause accidents) is that signage designed to warn of hazards. Any and all roadsignage presents a potential distraction for the driver and that distraction should be minimised, so i say clear up the signage by removing superfluous languages from it.

What you said here though!!!!!!!

Seems you haven't got the grasp of the ENGLISH language.
Nearly as bad as all my typo's.:rolleyes:

Listen I'm taking the píss there, but you look at what I said and come out with some other cráp.

Got a chip on the oul shoulder me thinks:eek:

parsi

murphaph wrote:

Just like Dublin is Dublin to most everyone living here but we have to endure biliungual signage all over the city for the benefit of a handful of native Irish speakers. I'd prefer Irish names on signs in irish speaking ireland and English names on signs in English speaking ireland. that is all.

For curiosity sakes - why have you capitalised english but de-capitalised Ireland ?

I don't find that I have to "endure" bilingual signage. If I'm travelling to Dublin I flollow the signs to Dublin. The "ath cliath" bit doesn't impose on me at all...

Once Irish or English is removed as an offical language through a referendum then we can all have signs that don't tax our dinosaur brains and are in just one language ...

mackerski

Pfungstadter wrote:

So you seem to know everywhere by their english name,
I suppose you go to germany looking for Munich?

Munich is signposted under the name the majority of its residents call it by. It's also the name that visitors expect to see on signs. Seems reasonable.

Pfungstadter wrote:

I'm in awe that you know everywhere (only) by it's english name or do you just feel uncomfortable useing the irish name.:rolleyes:

You haven't really addressed the rationale that makes it OK to remove the English language version of a placename (which may be the only one familiar to a traveller) from one signpost but not OK to remove the Irish version from another signpost, even though you will have to look pretty hard for an Irish speaker that can't make sense of a name like Dublin, Blanchardstown, or Beaumont. Or Dunleary, come to think of it.

Or is the majority language not even as important as the minority one?

Dermot

murphaph

parsi wrote:

For curiosity sakes - why have you capitalised english but de-capitalised Ireland ?

Take a look at the rest of the paragragh. There are numeous other mistakes. Here's a clue-not so new laptop! Dodgy shift and space keys, etc. etc. If you think I hate Ireland then why did I capitalise Irish? You'd just love it if there was some other reason that wasn't about signage clarity. There isn't.

parsi wrote:

I don't find that I have to "endure" bilingual signage. If I'm travelling to Dublin I flollow the signs to Dublin. The "ath cliath" bit doesn't impose on me at all...

You're just usedto our rubbish signage. That doesn't mean we can't strive to improve it.

parsi wrote:

Once Irish or English is removed as an offical language through a referendum then we can all have signs that don't tax our dinosaur brains and are in just one language ...

The good people of the Gaeltacht alrady have what you think we should all have though. The fans of bilingual signage on this thread (with the exception of nordydan) cannot see the disparity in having Irish only signage in the Gaeltacht and bilingual signage everywhere else. If people believe this to be some sort of equality issue then surely ALL signage should be bilingual, but it's but it's not an equality issue to those in favour of the status quo, it's a language preservation issue to you guys. This is not acceptable when designing signs for a modern road network. As I have said either stick the signs up in one language or the other or if we absolutely must have bilingual signage then stick it up nationwide (with a full redesign of the fonts used as they are amongst the most difficult to read at speed on anything but the simplest signs).

at pfubngstater, you've admitted you're on a piss take so you can debate with yourself for all I care. Ciao for now.

Pfungstadter

Listen,

go to you TD (oups thats in Irish too) sorry MP and get him to lobby for a referendum to change the status of irish from forst to second language.

At the moment Irish is first
English is Second.

Presume that's why they only post the Irish version for places with their name officially in one language only.

That's all they done, they just done away with having two versions of a name for some places. NOt all in Irish speaking areas.

Get over it:eek:

Metrobest

Pfungstadter wrote:

Yep and I suppose Polish is a stupid language to speek, and Dutch and Danish and Lao and Thai and Italian and Malay cos Travel with these languages and they are no good outside of their countries,

you are a muppet

Being branded an English speaker is not pleasent when abraod (in a non english speaking country) and it comes with the tag of ignorant of other languages. I suppose this is true for you.,

Charming.

And you're wrong.

Speaking fluent Gaelic is not a pre-requisite for being a citizen of Ireland. I'm Irish and proud, but living abroad for a long time has given me a more rounded view of what it means to be Irish. I'm well used to answering questions such as "Does Ireland have the Euro?", "Do you have the Queen in Ireland" and "Do you guys speak gayleek in Ireland?" I'm like an ambassador for Ireland at times. "Yeah, we only drink Guinness and yes, we do have leprechauns. In every town..."

When people ask me what I think of Irish, I give my honest opinion - that it's a dying - nay, dead - language which is spoken for reasons of tokenistic nationalism, outdated de-Valera thinking and acts as a life-support machine for an economically-deprived area of the west of Ireland. There is no practical purpose for speaking Irish nowadays. You don't find many people speaking Irish in Dublin so why are road signs written in a language no-one speaks. I don't mind street signs because they're historic, but there's no excuse for putting Irish translations on the luas or on a newly-built motorway. It's just needless clutter and confusion.

When I lived in Holland, I learnt Dutch because I found it was neccessary and practical to know the language everybody speaks.. No migrant in their right mind would bother to learn Irish - have you seen the film Yu Ming is Ainm Dom? Oh wait.. there might be one reason for learning Irish: a cushy job translating all those road signs, legal documents, pieces of legislation that a few Gaelgoir cranks have decreed that we all must pay for out of our taxes.

Indeed, they [the cranks] weren't only happy forcing the 95% of Irish people who couldn't give a toss about not being able to receive their speeding ticket as gaeilge into paying for this "linguistic equality", they have now forced the overgenerous taxpayers of Holland, Britain and France to sponsor Irish to be an official langauge of the EU. It's the West on Track mentality, only more expensive and more wasteful. When will the madness end?

Yeah, Irish is an "offical language" and the Catholic Church had/has a "special position" in our constitution. These aren't good things. It's time we all moved on.

The Dutch and the Malays and the Thais and all the other countries you care to mention have all got one thing in common - they want to improve their english because english is the language that gets you places. There's random languages in Holland like Fresian but they don't make everyone learn that at school because it's not going to benefit them in later life. We haven't copped on in Ireland, so we make everyone learn Irish at school, making everyone resentful and angry at the very language we're told we should love.

Interesting Liege was mentioned because 20 minutes from Liege, down in the river Maas, is Maastrict in Holland. And two completely different languages. These are examples of real challenges in bilingual signage. Not Ireland's ridiculous, naval-gazing tokenistic inclusion of "official" language nobody speaks or cares about except when confronted by a market researcher with a clipboard.

murphaph

Pfungstadter wrote:

Listen,

go to you TD (oups thats in Irish too) sorry MP and get him to lobby for a referendum to change the status of irish from forst to second language.

At the moment Irish is first
English is Second.

Presume that's why they only post the Irish version for places with their name officially in one language only.

That's all they done, they just done away with having two versions of a name for some places. NOt all in Irish speaking areas.

Get over it:eek:

Again, you conveniently ignore the numerous other examples of multilingual countries in Europe. Switzerland has 4 official languages, German, French, Italian and Romany. Belgium has 2 official languages, Flemish and French. Neither of these modern nations signs in a bilingual fashion the way Ireland does. They sign mono-lingually in the local language ONLY! It's just so simple isn't it!

The other places I can think of with minority local languages such as the UK and France (Breton in Brittany for one, which is very like Welsh incidentally) exist they have the same signage policy, that is to sign bilingually not just in the local language, so you see Ireland is the odd man out in all this as it does it backwards!

Clearly (with your political references) you think this has much more to do with making a language 'statement' than clever road signage. I'll remind you that this is commuting/transport and not politics

Pfungstadter

You don't need to talk to me about living abroad. I've lived abroad for over eight years. "Oh it's so green, we all just get drunk tho, and then shoot each other, bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla....."

I'm not saying you should learn it.

I never said at all

And you are wrong:cool:

All I hate is when people say it is usless,

go and tell that to the people who's first language it is.

Just because your brain is in Anglaphone land doesn't mean no one else uses it.

many people only learned to speak english in their teenage years.

And besides I've made my point before

you have to change to constitution before anything else can change.;)

Pfungstadter

@ murphaph

your the one getting political

Irish is first language,
english second

In switzerland, (how did I ignore it, you seem to be having a bi-polar conversation between your posts). All langages are decided in the Cantons.

Stop being a muppet and get over it.

It's a place name, nothing more nothing less.

murphaph

Pfungstadter wrote:

And besides I've made my point before

you have to change to constitution before anything else can change.;)

Ah yes, that incorrect point you made earlier. I forgot to pick you up on that. That's factually wrong. The constitution does NOT stipulate anything whatsoever in relation to road signage. The requirement for Irish language inclusion on signage is due a simple Statutory Instrument (not even an act of Dail Eireann, but rather a stroke of a dodgy minister's pen!);

2. Article 3 of the Road Traffic (Signs) Regulations, 1962 (S.I. No. 171 of 1962) is hereby amended by the substitution of the following sub-paragraph for sub-paragraph 2 (a) (inserted by article 3 of the Road Traffic (Signs) (Amendment) Regulations, 1970 (S.I. No. 164 of 1970)):—


"2 (a) Subject to the provisions of sub-paragraph (b) place-names on all informative signs provided after 1st January, 1989 shall be shown in italic letters in Irish and in Roman letters in English and where the spelling of a place-name is similar in both languages an Irish inscription in italic letters only need be shown on the sign".


GIVEN under the Official Seal of the Minister for the Environment


this 18th day of November, 1988.


PÁDRAIG FLYNN.


Minister for the Environment.

source

You should really check your facts before spouting a load of rubbish.

Pfungstadter

oh in that case lets use the Thai Alphabet, or even the greek one, that'd be great murphappet wouldn't it.

First language is on all sings
Second language is only on signs where required where it is spoken.

The lower case itallic font is the first language and the upper case one is the second.

On 99% of government stuff that's bilingual, irish is always ontop, it's always there.

Listen, stop and breath. The constitution doesn't say allot of stuff, it never said anything about what the falg means but we all know.


Listen good signage is down to good design, not what dialect is on it.

If they used that Manula properly there shouldn't be a problem.
But they don't and we've got this terrible mess and now they are changing it to this new shooty style a la M50 M11 and N2.