Energy savings, the ESB and Irish language

jank

Camelot wrote: »

Good analogy comparing the Irish language to Maori, the difference being that 'Maori' is not force fed to its school pupils (in the same way that Welsh is not force fed), thus, both Maori & Welsh command respect, acclaim & admiration, with Irish commanding everything from contempt to indifference (because its force fed)! so I say print the leaflet in English only, and if 3% of the population want to read it in Irish then maybe it could appear on the ESB website 'as gaeilge'.

How about not printing the leaflet at all?

jank

djpbarry wrote: »

That could hardly be considered a 'right'.
As I already said to jank, if a similar situation arose in NZ, non-Maori speakers would be quite entitled to question why their taxes were paying for documents to be distributed nationwide in a language that the vast majority of the population do not speak. It's just. plain. daft.

But see you are missing the point. Why would one move to NZ and the complain about the culture and the "Maori" language. That doesn't make sense. It's like moving to the desert to complain about the heat.

No country is perfect but to suggest what you are saying is indicative of the "whiner" element of Irish Society. I am here 6 months now and have never heard a bad word said about the Maori language.

They are quite proud of it. People here accept that there is a minority language and that the government will fund it with their tax payers. It is accepted and they are proud of that fact. End of story!

Grudaire

The question of the 'v' in Irish is a very emotive issue. In my opinion there should be no v in irish, words like votáil should revert to guthaíocht srl. Then again if we take this language puritism to extremes we would be finding fault with anyone who use's a ' after the Ó eg Ó'Briain is wrong in Irish. it's either O'Brien, or Ó Briain. The ' signifies an abreviation of the 'of' which isn't happening in Irish.

Also we'd be rightly fecked for X-gathú! I'd love to debate this further dresden!

NewDubliner wrote: »

Yes & if people don't want to speak English (even though they can), OK, but let them accept the consequences of refusing to communicate in our common language.

"let them accept the consequences"

:D:D:D:D:D:D I had to Lol!

Is that a threat or a promise :rolleyes:

dresden8

dlofnep wrote: »

No, it's not. It's fact. Language immersion is required for a language to survive, and going by the latest survey - 93% of the population want the language to survive and therefore - would obviously support the idea of immersion.

I think it's fair to say you're over-egging the pudding there.

93% might want the language to survive but generally they're happy to let other people, mostly their children, put the time in.

Immersion is definitely not what they want.

dlofnep

dresden8 wrote: »

Immersion is definitely not what they want.

Immersion through schooling - Which in theory, would really only apply to children anyways, wouldn't it? And yes, I'm sure parents would be more than happy to see the curriculum revised to include more practical forms of language education.

Exile 1798

djpbarry wrote: »

How exactly does that set Ireland apart?

Most people support Irish because it is their native tounge and they see a great value in it.

This isn't the case for the Flemmish in Belgium or of the English speakers of Quebec.

djpbarry wrote: »

Anyone who pays taxes in this country is entitled to a say in how those taxes are spent, regardless of their political views.

Anyone can have a say. (even students and pensioners who don't pay tax)

However, not everyone's views deserve consideration or even respect.

What sense does it make to take suggestions on how to better preserve our language from people who hate it and pine for the regime that systematically set about destroying it? Latter day Unionists like our stunningly ignorant friend Camelot.

That would be a bit like consulting Neo-Nazis on the building of Holocaust memorials in Europe.

NewDubliner

dlofnep wrote: »

No, it's not. It's fact. Language immersion is required for a language to survive, and going by the latest survey - 93% of the population want the language to survive and therefore - would obviously support the idea of immersion.

You're still failing to make any form of a point? Where did I state that English wasn't an official language?

For someone for whom Engliish is not their first language, you demonstrate a measure of skill of spinning untruths. Of course, you don't say English is not one of our official languages. you merely say that 'Irish is our official language', which implies that there is no other language.

You also dodge saying if your claimed 93% are aware of the huge costs you want to impose on them in taxes and if they were specifically asked if they wanted to be 'immersed'.

dlofnep wrote: »

Nobody is demanding anything.

Ok, so it's all voluntary? There is no Official Langauges Act?

dlofnep wrote: »

Don't know, don't care. But I'm sure the person who has a job from translating is quite happy to keep that job and I support their future translations.

You don't care about the cost? The taxpayer does. And how many more translators must be hired to fuly implement the OLA? (Let me guess - you don't know and don't care.)

Hookey

Alun wrote: »

Pretty, eh?

Prettier when spoken. Written down it looks horrible (and hilarious at times), but you can't argue with the numbers; more Welsh speak Welsh than Irish speak Irish, and phoneticising it is part of the reason for that; Irish may as well be written in Cyrillic for all the relationship the letters have to most other Western European phonics.

Scofflaw

Rebelheart wrote: »

Christ, you really are a terribly pig-ignorant gob****e.

"force fed" ? Have you read any Irish history? Arsssssssehoooole.

How about you read the forum charter - do not insult other posters. Do that again and you'll find yourself banned.

moderately,
Scofflaw

djpbarry

dlofnep wrote: »

Language immersion is required for a language to survive, and going by the latest survey - 93% of the population want the language to survive and therefore - would obviously support the idea of immersion.

93% of the population would be happy to be “immersed” in Irish? I don’t think so.

dlofnep wrote: »

In the same respect, 93% of the population support the Irish language, and I would assume support Irish to receive funds in areas such as education, like many other subjects.

Hypothetical situation…

Let’s suppose these ESB booklets were distributed by hand, door-to-door, by a representative of the company. Each person receives an English version of the booklet at no charge, complements of ESB. Suppose everyone is also offered an Irish version too, but at an additional cost of € x. How many people do you suppose will pay for the Irish version? I’m guessing very few, regardless of how small x is.

Exile 1798 wrote: »

Most people support Irish because it is their native tounge and they see a great value in it.

This isn't the case for the Flemmish in Belgium or of the English speakers of Quebec.

Eh, what?

I actually work with a Belgian and a Canadian; give me a moment while I explain to them that Flemish and English are not their native languages.

asdasd

while I explain to them that Flemish and English are not their native languages.

he probably meant the Flemish in regards to French and the English speaking Canadian in Quebec also in regard to French.

djpbarry

asdasd wrote: »

he probably meant the Flemish in regards to French...

Fair enough, but the point still stands; Flemish is no less a native language of Belgians than French is. In fact, most Belgians I have met (from Flanders) don't even speak French.

asdasd

In fact, most Belgians I have met (from Flanders) don't even speak French

Do they dislike documents and brochures being in French, in full or in part?

Grudaire

djpbarry wrote: »

Let’s suppose these ESB booklets were distributed by hand, door-to-door, by a representative of the company. Each person receives an English version of the booklet at no charge, complements of ESB. Suppose everyone is also offered an Irish version too, but at an additional cost of € x. How many people do you suppose will pay for the Irish version? I’m guessing very few, regardless of how small x is.

Stelth taxing Irish speakers.

Why do you assume nobody would bother with the Irish version? Is it because nobody actualy reads it in the first place.

There are many read Irish language publications out there, I guess nobody bother with them either.

djpbarry

asdasd wrote: »

Do they dislike documents and brochures being in French, in full or in part?

I don't know to be honest, but I would imagine they would consider it a bit pointless to have French documents sent to their homes.

Cliste wrote: »

Why do you assume nobody would bother with the Irish version?

I didn't say nobody, I said very few. Why? Because the majority of people in this country would not be able to read it. Even those who could read it would probably not be prepared to pay because they would be happy enough with the English version.

Exile 1798

djpbarry,

I don't wish to get off topic.

Camelot, the Dublin Unionist, made the statement that Irish commands "everything from contempt to indifference" and further stated that leaflets such as this should be printed solely in English.

My point is simply that in most every bilingual country there is a certain tension surrounding language.

Knowing something about the legal and political battles that go on in Canada and the deep resentment felt by Flemish people about the status of French in their community and the lack knowledge of Dutch amongst Walloons. There are strong separatist tendancies in both countries defined in the most part by language.

By comparison Irish is wonderfully supported and uncontroversial, as shown by survey after survey. I said that I believe that this is because it is our native tongue. You asked me a rather inane question as to how this sets Ireland apart. I think it is pretty self evident.

There is no serious move by any party to curtail Irish language use in official documents – all there is a small minority sniping from the sidelines.

I wont go on, because as I said before I don't want to stray so badly off topic.

Grudaire

djpbarry wrote: »

I didn't say nobody, I said very few. Why? Because the majority of people in this country would not be able to read it. Even those who could read it would probably not be prepared to pay because they would be happy enough with the English version.

Well now we're talking about open guesswork.

Come on, you've had better arguments then this

Mucco

€3.5 million per annum from translation into Irish at the EU.

Since all EU documentation is available for download, it's very easy to monitor which languages are widely downloaded, and which aren't......

BTW there are jobs going in DG translation if you're interested

djpbarry

Exile 1798 wrote: »

By comparison Irish is wonderfully supported and uncontroversial, as shown by survey after survey. I said that I believe that this is because it is our native tongue. You asked me a rather inane question as to how this sets Ireland apart.

No, I asked you to clarify exactly what it was you were saying.

Exile 1798 wrote: »

There is no serious move by any party to curtail Irish language use in official documents – all there is a small minority sniping from the sidelines.

Sniping? If anyone’s guilty of “sniping” on this thread, it’s you.

Cliste wrote: »

Well now we're talking about open guesswork.

Come on, you've had better arguments then this

I think it’s pretty reasonable to assume that most people will choose not to pay for something that they cannot read, no? Some people might, most people won’t.

dlofnep

djpbarry wrote: »

93% of the population would be happy to be “immersed” in Irish? I don’t think so.

Um - Immersion in "school". Pay attention. And yes, they would support it. Why would they not support the most functional method of language development for their children, given that they already have demonstrated they they support the language?

Never in all my born days have I seen such nitpicking.

There are 2 official languages in Ireland, and therefore - everything is to be made bilingual where required. If you don't like it, tough. Get on with your life.

gaeilgegrinds

Very interesting thread. To be honest I'd question how many people read those booklets, regardless of what language they are written in.

dlofnep

Sin ceart ^

Although, you won't see the typical Gaeilge bashers comment on the fact that nobody reads these booklets at all, and are a waste of money regardless. They just want to use it as an excuse to attack the language.

LordSutch

Rebelheart wrote: »

Christ, you really are a terribly pig-ignorant gob****e.

"force fed" ? Have you read any Irish history? Arsssssssehoooole.

That's a bit harsh isn't it :rolleyes:

What I mean by 'force fed' is that we go to school for eighteen years having to do compulsory Irish lessons for our entire school life, and when we leave school we still can't speak or read the language (Eighteen years is a long time) .................

I think its a waste of paper & money for the ESB to be doing very large & expensive color printing runs 'in Irish', specially with the fact that only 3% of the population are fluent in Irish. I am not against the Irish language per say, I just wonder sometimes about the force feeding aspect, which has failed miserably for 80/90 years, and the massive amounts of money that are being wasted on Irish translations that very few read.

Rebelheart

Well, I got all my correspondence from the Revenue today in Irish - PAYE aon tráth aon lá - as I requested several years ago. If certain people here had their way they'd still be ramming English down my throat this way also.

And make no mistake about it: these are the same sort of people who supported the imprisonment of Irish speakers in the 1970s because they refused to pay their TV licences for English language TV and radio. How quickly people wish to forget all of these basic battles against the fanaticism of these English speakers in Ireland.

Role on more progressive and enlightened policies and stronger watchdogs.

LordSutch

So I take it then that you don't agree with any of the points I made above ? (Post #144).

Grudaire

djpbarry wrote: »

I think it’s pretty reasonable to assume that most people will choose not to pay for something that they cannot read, no? Some people might, most people won’t.

Christ - now we're onto assumptions. Right - here's a deal. We stop printing the stupid leaflets, is ANYONE wants it make them pay. I don't think anyone will bother whichever language they prefer

Camelot wrote: »

I think its a waste of paper & money for the ESB to be doing very large & expensive color printing runs 'in Irish', specially with the fact that only 3% of the population are fluent in Irish. I am not against the Irish language per say, I just wonder sometimes about the force feeding aspect, which has failed miserably for 80/90 years, and the massive amounts of money that are being wasted on translations that very few read.

How is providing a service in both languages force feeding in the slightest?

LordSutch

Cliste wrote: »

How is providing a service in both languages force feeding in the slightest?

Force feeding = Compulsory Irish in school for eighteen years > hundreds & hundreds of hours being made to read Peg & all that crap that bored the pants of everybody in school (apart from a few) & in turn made many of us despise the language for many years after leaving school > That's what I mean by 'force feeding', and I really cant see the point of the ESB or any other body duplicating massive printing runs in a language that very few bother about.

I am not against Irish per say.

Grudaire

Sin sceal eile (That's another story), and I think we've had the debate a few times, and will have it again - but lets stick with the topic?

Camelot wrote: »

I am not against Irish per say.

I will challenge you to show me a single post that you have made that is in favour of the Irish language

djpbarry

dlofnep wrote: »

Um - Immersion in "school". Pay attention. And yes, they would support it.

I still disagree – there is no evidence that suggests the majority of people in this country want their kids “immersed” in Irish.

dlofnep wrote: »

Why would they not support the most functional method of language development for their children, given that they already have demonstrated they they support the language?

You’ve taken that 93% figure to mean whatever you want it to mean, haven’t you?

Analysing the report, Father Mac Greil said that, out of the 93% in favour of Irish, “some 53 per cent wish it to be preserved and 40 per cent would like to see it revived and spoken in the population”.

So those who want the language revived are actually in the minority. Then again, I’d question the validity of any report that claims that 23 per cent of the Irish-born population use the language on a regular basis.

dlofnep wrote: »

There are 2 official languages in Ireland, and therefore - everything is to be made bilingual where required. If you don't like it, tough.

If I don’t like it, I can question it to my heart’s content, thanks very much. Are you honestly telling me that no matter how much the promotion of the Irish language cost the state, you would support it unequivocally?

Rebelheart wrote: »

Well, I got all my correspondence from the Revenue today in Irish - PAYE aon tráth aon lá - as I requested several years ago.

You can have it in Maori for all I care – don’t see why I should have to pay for it though.

Cliste wrote: »

Christ - now we're onto assumptions.

As far as I can see, this thread is full of assumptions about support for the Irish language in this country. The difference is, my assumption is a reasonable one.

Rebelheart

Camelot wrote: »

Force feeding = Compulsory Irish in school for eighteen years > hundreds & hundreds of hours being made to read Peg & all that crap that bored the pants of everybody in school (apart from a few) & in turn made many of us despise the language for many years after leaving school > That's what I mean by 'force feeding', and I really cant see the point of the ESB or any other body duplicating massive printing runs in a language that very few bother about.

I am not against Irish per say.

Yeah, whereas all the other "force feeding" that is education for those 18 years is fine by you. I'm sure you would have volunteered for school every day and wouldn't have been "forced" to go some place where they "fed" you wonderful stuff like Shakespeare's sonnets, calculus, Pythagorean theorem and other joys (and of great "use" since you left school, no doubt)

And you, like most other Irish children, were at your happiest soaking up all of this and didn't yearn for the bell to go and all the "force feeding" to stop. Ah such crypto-scholars are the youth of Ireland.