Is it no really time to assess how much the irish language costs us all?

nesf

ei.sdraob wrote: »

which makes you wonder why someone can learn English so quickly but not Irish after 12 years?

Since my son was born Irish is spoken constantly in my home. I've learned more about the Irish language and its grammar in particular in the past 3 years through this than I did in school to be blunt about it. There's an enormous difference between total immersion in a language and just hearing it in class.

nesf

Herbal Deity wrote: »

+1

nesf, that's like saying kids whose parents teach them French or a higher standard of Maths than the school curriculum from a young age should have to sit a harder exam in those respective subjects.

It's not at all. Do you think it's fair for native German speakers to be allowed to do German at Leaving Cert Level? They are at present, but it seriously should not be allowed.

LordSutch

According to the BBC five cash machines in east London will be displayed & talking
in cockney for the next three months. The cash machines belong to Bank Machine’s
ATM's. Customers will be able to choose 'Cockney' as a language option. Customers
can expect to see phrases such as ‘please enter you huckleberry Finn’ rather than
‘pin’ and they will have to select how much ‘sausage and mash’ (cash) they want



The above option looks like a whole lotta fun, and dare I say, most of us
would be hard pressed not to take the Cockney option (even for a laugh).

We now have the 'Gaeilge' option on our ATM machines, but has it the
same appeal? I suspect not, and in fact I'd be very curious to know
how often the Gaeilge option is used here (if at all), is there a demand
for the 'Gaeilge' option?

Obviously I'm not comparing Irish to Cockney, just pointing out the fact
that people might be drawn towards one option & not the other. The same
goes for translation of all documents into Irish > is there a demand?

Herbal Deity

nesf wrote: »

It's not at all. Do you think it's fair for native German speakers to be allowed to do German at Leaving Cert Level? They are at present, but it seriously should not be allowed.

I do think it's fair. In the LC, you're exhibiting your academic skills and knowledge. If you're bilingual, you should be rewarded for that. Keep in mind that that German student is going to have to do all their other exams through English, and will have to do a high standard English paper also.

nesf

Herbal Deity wrote: »

I do think it's fair. In the LC, you're exhibiting your academic skills and knowledge. If you're bilingual, you should be rewarded for that. Keep in mind that that German student is going to have to do all their other exams through English, and will have to do a high standard English paper also.

You should not be rewarded for the accident of birth that is being bilingual.

Herbal Deity

I disagree.

Plenty of people get headstarts in life based on the circumstances in which they were born.

So what if it's down to luck? It's an extra academic skill.

Aard

Nesf, what you are saying is that you shouldn't be tested on something that you learnt outside of the school-system. However, there are many cases where things you know that you didn't learn in school has a greater or lesser effect on the final mark. I'm thinking of English essays - teachers don't teach you how to write, it's something you picked up from reading. They don't teach you about current affairs, yet many manage to include such topics in the final exam.

What about me? I'm not a native speaker from birth, but I for the LC I had fluent Irish thanks to all my schooling being through the language. Should I be excluded from taking the exam? Or, just because I've got a higher level, should I have to sit the "Irish Lit" exam, rather than the "Irish language" exam?

Grudaire

nesf wrote: »

It's not at all. Do you think it's fair for native German speakers to be allowed to do German at Leaving Cert Level? They are at present, but it seriously should not be allowed.

nesf wrote: »

You should not be rewarded for the accident of birth that is being bilingual.

Huh - what about kids who's father is a carpenter being allowed do woodwork, or well anything.

Thats a non-argument - The leaving certificate is meant to test ability, as much as it is about how well you can learn. Why punish people who have put in work to learn something?

By this reckoning noone of us should be studying pass English!

Camelot wrote: »

We now have the 'Gaeilge' option on our ATM machines, but has it the
same appeal? I suspect not, and in fact I'd be very curious to know
how often the Gaeilge option is used here (if at all), is there a demand
for the 'Gaeilge' option?

I do - the train ticket machines are in Irish, and my Library self check in is also available through Irish.

I would also be curious to find out - if you do find the figures do put them up!

nesf

Aard wrote: »

Nesf, what you are saying is that you shouldn't be tested on something that you learnt outside of the school-system. However, there are many cases where things you know that you didn't learn in school has a greater or lesser effect on the final mark. I'm thinking of English essays - teachers don't teach you how to write, it's something you picked up from reading. They don't teach you about current affairs, yet many manage to include such topics in the final exam.

What about me? I'm not a native speaker from birth, but I for the LC I had fluent Irish thanks to all my schooling being through the language. Should I be excluded from taking the exam? Or, just because I've got a higher level, should I have to sit the "Irish Lit" exam, rather than the "Irish language" exam?

I imagine Gaelscoils would do great business with an Irish Language exam in place. I don't know it seems fundamentally wrong to me to allow a native Irish speaker to sit an Irish Language exam aimed at testing the skills of non-native speakers. It's an unfair advantage given the set up of third level entry (i.e. it's pretty much an automatic A1 for minimal to no effort).

nesf

Cliste wrote: »

Huh - what about kids who's father is a carpenter being allowed do woodwork, or well anything.

Thats a non-argument - The leaving certificate is meant to test ability, as much as it is about how well you can learn. Why punish people who have put in work to learn something?

By this reckoning noone of us should be studying pass English!

Ok, to me anyway your native tongue is fundamentally different to learning a skill like woodwork at home. I appreciate your point, my son will be blessed in the area of Mathematics, Science/Physics, English, Economics etc because of both his parents being academics and having a high level of skill in those areas but it seems different to me for him to have access to this expertise versus being a native Irish speaker which he is.

nesf

nesf wrote: »

Ok, to me anyway your native tongue is fundamentally different to learning a skill like woodwork at home. I appreciate your point, my son will be blessed in the area of Mathematics, Science/Physics, English, Economics etc because of both his parents being academics and having a high level of skill in those areas but it seems different to me for him to have access to this expertise versus being a native Irish speaker which he is.

Actually, I've thought of why it bothers me. My son will have a good standard of spoken Irish (better than most (if not all) students who attain fluency through teaching themselves) without having to expend any extra effort. He will just have it by dint of being raised through the language. To learn Mathematics or whatever from me he'll have to expend effort, he'll have an advantage sure but it isn't a free ride and if he doesn't put in the effort he gains nothing from my knowledge of the subject. The same goes for the carpenter's son.

That's why it feels wrong to me.

Grudaire

Well to be honest it's a subtle problem. I think it's the first realisation for many that life isn't always fair, and some people do get an easier ride.

But there's no way to police it right, what criteria can you use to get people into the right class? location is clearly not a good indicator. Also by giving one course extra points that defeats the purpose...

Perhaps setting up a second subject, called advanced Irish or something, and have that as an optional subject for Irish speakers to be pushed further, and so they can gain further points by doing the advanced course (like maths, and applied maths)

Benhonan

nesf wrote: »

Actually, I've thought of why it bothers me. My son will have a good standard of spoken Irish (better than most (if not all) students who attain fluency through teaching themselves) without having to expend any extra effort. He will just have it by dint of being raised through the language. To learn Mathematics or whatever from me he'll have to expend effort, he'll have an advantage sure but it isn't a free ride and if he doesn't put in the effort he gains nothing from my knowledge of the subject. The same goes for the carpenter's son.

That's why it feels wrong to me.

Some people are naturally very musical, they will get higher marks in the music exam without having to expend any extra effort. the same goes for anyone with higher intelligence in a given area. Do you really think there is no extra effort necessary to become bilingual? Just because the work is put in as a small child it doesn't mean it isn't put in.

By a similar token should children whose families bring them to the Gaeltacht for two months every summer and at Christmas have extra standards imposed on them, but not to the same degree as the bilingual kids?

Scofflaw

Cliste wrote: »

Well to be honest it's a subtle problem. I think it's the first realisation for many that life isn't always fair, and some people do get an easier ride.

But there's no way to police it right, what criteria can you use to get people into the right class? location is clearly not a good indicator. Also by giving one course extra points that defeats the purpose...

Perhaps setting up a second subject, called advanced Irish or something, and have that as an optional subject for Irish speakers to be pushed further, and so they can gain further points by doing the advanced course (like maths, and applied maths)

Do you not still get extra points for doing your exams through Irish entirely?

cordially,
Scofflaw

galwaytt

nesf wrote: »

You should not be rewarded for the accident of birth that is being bilingual.

...by which token, you should not be penalised for the accident of birth of that is being mono-lingual, either.

And in the exam process we have in this country, you are. Not being able to 'compete' in a foreign (as in foreign-to-the-user), irrespective of birthplace/birthright, and having the likes of you're going/not going to Uni hanging in the balance because of it, is, frankly, discriminatory.

Grudaire

Scofflaw wrote: »

Do you not still get extra points for doing your exams through Irish entirely?

cordially,
Scofflaw

In my future proposed system - or in real life?

I'm not entirely sure how that works, my understanding is that you can get 10% of the marks you missed - as long as you got under 70% - very open to correction though! (Which isn't as great as it sounds)

T runner

sceptre wrote: »

Let's have a quick look at what would now be considered Gaeltacht: 2007. Compare it with what would have made the grade in 1926 if we'd defined the areas then. Bit of a difference, huh?

Ofcourse the massive assumption here is that the poor teaching of Irish is directly responsible for its decline.

Look at these factors:

1. The fall from pre famine 1845 to 1926 (81 years) is much more significant than the rate of fall shown in these graphs.
2. Prevous (pre independence) state policies had targetted Irish in such a way that it was economically extremely difficult for people to survive while speaking Irish.
3. The only people wealthy enough to "afford" to speak Irish already spoke English.
4. Due to the civil war and economic situation in Ireland it was difficult for the government to halt the decline in Gaeltacht populations until relatively recently. The decline didnt stop but the rate of decline was slowed
5. Note: The way compulsory Irish is taught in school (good or bad) will NOT halt the shrinking of Gaeltacht areas.
6. In NI where the state remained hostile to the language almost all the Irish speaking areas have completely dissappeared.

I agree that Irish must be taught in a better manner, but it is too easy to lay the blame for the decline of Irish at the governments door (except to some degree in NI).

I believe they succeeded in stopping its death and now with many children learning in all Irish schools there may be a chance and real appetite for its revival.

O'Morris

donegalfella wrote:

This post has been deleted.

It will filter through to the above-average speaker and that will set the standard for everyone else. The quality of a language should be judged by the range of experience and the number of abstract concepts that the most fluent and articulate speakers of that language can communicate. If the masters of the Irish language are not being continually forced to translate the language so that it refers to experiences and concepts in the modern world then the language risks falling behind.

I would much rather see a small educated elite speak high-quality Irish than see the mass of the population speak a sub-standard and archaic version of the language. I think raising standards is more important than preserving number of speakers.

donegalfella wrote:

This post has been deleted.

If the true costs to the English-speaking taxpayer of translating documents into Irish were made known to the English-speaking taxpayer I don't think average English-speaking taxpayer would be too bothered. The average English-speaking taxpayer of this country is pro-Irish and I can't see him objecting to the 2 or 3 euros out of his taxes that the government is spending each year to translate documents into Ireland's native language. If they do object to it though I would have no problem with them being given the option to reclaim that 2 or 3 euros so that they can spend it on something that they consider to be less wasteful.

donegalfella wrote:

This post has been deleted.

It's of much higher quality than the prose produced by the average man on the street who can barely speak the language after spending nios ma na a decade learning the teanga in school.

I think we could easily cut a few million out of the annual budget spent on teaching Irish in secondary school without seeing any noticeable decline in standards. Cutting the million or two million that we spend on translations each year would probably be more damaging to the language.

Scofflaw

Making Irish an elite language would be, I suspect, extremely beneficial for it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Herbal Deity

Scofflaw wrote: »

Do you not still get extra points for doing your exams through Irish entirely?

cordially,
Scofflaw

A very small amount for most people, and it's usually justified given there's an extra effort required. Nothing like the "100 free points" myth which I've seen repeated more than once on boards.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Latin was the language of the educated elite in Europe for the best part of a thousand years, and remains still extraordinarily common for a language whose original linguistic impulse ended 1500 years ago. If one could pull off the same trick for Irish one would really have achieved something!

amused,
Scofflaw

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

NewDubliner

O'Morris wrote: »

If the true costs to the English-speaking taxpayer of translating documents into Irish were made known to the English-speaking taxpayer I don't think average English-speaking taxpayer would be too bothered. The average English-speaking taxpayer of this country is pro-Irish and I can't see him objecting to the 2 or 3 euros out of his taxes that the government is spending each year to translate documents into Ireland's native language. If they do object to it though I would have no problem with them being given the option to reclaim that 2 or 3 euros so that they can spend it on something that they consider to be less wasteful.

What you say is very misleading if not downright dishonest. It's not just the cost of translating documents. The OLA demands that all services be made available in Irish.

How much will it all cost?

The documents and services are already available in one of Ireland's native languages - English.

nesf

Benhonan wrote: »

Do you really think there is no extra effort necessary to become bilingual? Just because the work is put in as a small child it doesn't mean it isn't put in.

Actually watching my son grow, there is no effort involved he's spoken using both language since day 1 and speaks as well in both as a mono-lingual child does in their mother tongue. Bilingualism is actually something the newborn brain seems ready to accept. Having two native languages isn't at all associated with any slowdown of the developement of language skills after 18 months or so. By 3 years the bilingual child speaks as fluently in both as a monolingual child does in their native tongue. So long as the second language is introduced early enough in development it seems to be picked up with minimal effort required or slowing seen.

It's fascinating really (well, for me anyway as a monolingual English speaker from birth).

nesf

Cliste wrote: »

Well to be honest it's a subtle problem. I think it's the first realisation for many that life isn't always fair, and some people do get an easier ride.

But there's no way to police it right, what criteria can you use to get people into the right class? location is clearly not a good indicator. Also by giving one course extra points that defeats the purpose...

Perhaps setting up a second subject, called advanced Irish or something, and have that as an optional subject for Irish speakers to be pushed further, and so they can gain further points by doing the advanced course (like maths, and applied maths)

Perhaps, the issue at the moment isn't critical. Being a native Irish speaker is an advantage but it is most certainly not a guaranteed A1 in Honours. If Irish was changed into something far more basic akin to German or French then this would very much be a problem and the test would be trivial to a native speaker.

I agree life is unfair, but the points system means we do need to give some thought to balancing this.


Oh and as others have said the extra points for doing your exam in Irish only really help those getting lower marks. For an A student they'll gain almost nothing from doing it. For a B student the gain is bigger but really not by much at all. It's only with C students and below that it can make a substantial difference to points.

PaulieD

ei.sdraob wrote: »

and people who were naturalized here after working here for over a decade
are not Irish?

In the eyes of the law, yes. In my view, no.

*back on topic

PaulieD

sceptre wrote: »

My quick view...........

Excellent post, sceptre.

O'Morris

NewDubliner wrote: »

What you say is very misleading if not downright dishonest. It's not just the cost of translating documents. The OLA demands that all services be made available in Irish.

The focus of this thread is on the cost of translating documents into Irish and whether those costs are excessive. I don't think the costs are excessive but I think people who believe otherwise should be given the option to claim back the 2 or 3 euros of their taxes that are spent on those translations each year.

NewDubliner

O'Morris wrote: »

The focus of this thread is on the cost of translating documents into Irish and whether those costs are excessive.

Is this because you want to avoid justifying the much more expensive part of the Official Language Act - the provision of all public services in Irish?