Is Irish a dead language?

MysticalRain

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

To be fair, no party in the south has ever declared themselves anti-UI and that in and of itself is proof enough. The fact that the intention of a UI is put on their websites shows that it is an important, even if it is not relevant at this time. The UUP, DUP or TUV don't run in the Dublin state for a reason!

I can't find any reference to a UI on FG's website.

Cú Giobach

MysticalRain wrote: »

It's not a "fact" to say people's attitudes to Irish have changed without backing it up with some kind of evidence. Otherwise all your post amounts to is some guys opinion on an Internet message board and should be treated as such.

1. There are numerous surveys posted on this thread showing the majority of people want to keep Irish compulsory, now before you say these are biased try and find one that says otherwise, surely if there was a "silent majority" who don't think this way there would be some trace of them somewhere.

2. Here is a link to a survey on the views of the Irish public on education from 2004 and in it you will find this.....



Note the change in percentage regarding the Irish language and culture between 1974 and 2004.

We didn't have corporal punishment in our time either. But yet we still hated learning the language. If everybody loves Irish so much, then why does only 2% of the population speak it these days?

Please show where I stated "everybody loves Irish".
I hated learning Irish also and failed my leaving in it. Now I'm really glad I learned what I did.

I have clearly stated several times in this thread, and elsewhere, that I do not favour compulsory Irish at second level. Certainly not beyond second year anyway.

Since the majority of people are in favour of compulsion up to junior cert then you are in a minority and will just have to live with that.

I have also stated that European languages should be taught alongside Irish at primary level.

That would be a wonderful idea.

If Irish is to flourish, it should be allowed to succeed on its own merits without the need for excessive state coercion.

Again I'm afraid most people would think differently.

So what? I know plenty of adults who share similar attitudes, and most kids these days do quite a lot traveling anyway. Besides, we all live on a small island with a close-knit population. It's not that hard to get a feel for people's prevailing attitudes.
Now you are avoiding my points.

If you are not aware of how different the perceptions of mature adults and children are, then I would question your age and since I don't converse with children on the internet am considering whether I should continue this conversation.
The only thing one learns about society in general in the schoolyard is about life in the schoolyard.

Yet another fact-free assertion based on your own opinion. If you are so sure, then why don't you provide some evidence?

Your demands for proof on every point you disagree with without coming up with a single piece of evidence of your own showing how wrong I am is most amusing.
I would think that every party's stance on this issue would be proof enough, surely if there were votes to be gained, then at this stage at least one party would have taken advantage of this and be campaigning today with some mention of it.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You mean to say, that for 117 years, the objectives of Conradh na Gaeilge have been mis-translated in English? That an organisation with thousands of well-educated members cannot correctly express its main aim in the English language version of its website? The grammar of the original statement is not very good....You're not their webmaster by any chance?

Gnáth can also mean 'customary' or 'usual'.

What does 'athréimniú' mean?

Has the an 'tuiseal ginideach' been used? I am sure you're aware of the implications for the use of the definite article in such cases.

Cyclopath, there is nothing wrong with the translation provided on CnaG's site, The problem is that you are attributing greater meaning to a nuance that exists in English than you should be, because the original Text is in Irish.

'Ordinary' and 'Common' are very close in Meaning,

The word 'common' has probably been used because it is the usual way of describing a language.
ie a Common Language of a people is more often reffered to than an ordinary language of a people.

The problem arises because when talking about a peoples 'common' language in English, it is assumed that you are also talking about their only language.

While the translation is accurate, that dose not mean that all assoicated nuance with the phrase in English applys to the meaning that they intend to put across.




athréimniú means to Restore.

Oasis_Dublin

deise go deo wrote: »

The problem arises because when talking about a peoples 'common' language in English, it is assumed that you are also talking about their only language.

Incorrect. A common language of a people is a language that is common amongst them not their only language. You may assume it but it is certainly not suggested by saying, for example, "the English language is the common language of Ireland." That more suggests that everyone has English.

deise go deo

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

Incorrect. A common language of a people is a language that is common amongst them not their only language. You may assume it but it is certainly not suggested by saying, for example, "the English language is the common language of Ireland." That more suggests that everyone has English.

Not necessarily their only language, but it dose infer that it is their Primary language.

Oasis_Dublin

deise go deo wrote: »

Not necessarily their only language, but it dose infer that it is their Primary language.

Exactly. Not, as you earlier suggested, their "only language." Of course English is the primary language of my family, friends and education. That doesn't mean I don't have or respect Irish.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

athréimniú means to Restore.

Since the original situation was not one of bilingualism, a bilingual Ireland cannot be restored. It follows that the main aim of CnaG is to restore a situation where Irish and not English is spoken by most of the population as their only language. In other words they wish to replace English with Irish as the habitual, common, ordinary, usual, customary or vernacular language of all of Ireland.

You still have not answered my question about the use of the genitive case. This is an important source of meaning, as literal translations can be unreliable.

Is the constitution of CnaG available online? Perhaps more accurate wording can be found there.

This is an important matter as you have stated that no one wants to replace English, yet is is very obvious.from their web site that this is the primary aim of a group claiming to represent a significant number of people.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Since the original situation was not one of bilingualism, a bilingual Ireland cannot be restored. It follows that the main aim of CnaG is to restore a situation where Irish and not English is spoken by most of the population as their only language. In other words they wish to replace English with Irish as the habitual, common, ordinary, usual, customary or vernacular language of all of Ireland.

You still have not answered my question about the use of the genitive case. This is an important source of meaning, as literal translations can be unreliable.

Is the constitution of CnaG available online? Perhaps more accurate wording can be found there.

This is an important matter as you have stated that no one wants to replace English, yet is is very obvious.from their web site that this is the primary aim of a group claiming to represent a significant number of people.

Clutching at straws cyclopath?

The aim dose not say 'restore Ireland to being Bilingual' It says Restore Irish to being a common or Ordinary language of Ireland.

This can be done by Ireland becoming Bilingual.

RandomName2

kfdb wrote: »

I've been following this thread and was wondering if the pro-compulsion side could answer a question for me. You often use the success and growth of the gaelscoilena movement as proof of a grassroots popularity for Irish.

Would you support a change in education policies that allowed similarly involved and motivated parents that *didn't* want their children to receive any instruction in Irish to found their own schools? Schools where (for example) all instruction might take place in Spanish with no Irish taught at all. I guess I'm wondering if parents that would like this have equal rights to parents that want to found an all Irish school?

Kreb.

I guess the pro-compulsory lot would argue that, with some justification, that Spanish is not the language of the state. However, this sort of runs up against a brick wall when you ask 'well, is Irish a language of the state?'#

The answer to this is not about how many people speak Irish, because you would otherwise have to say that languages such as Polish were languages of Ireland. The only criteria for this is how long some form of Irish has been spoken in some part of the country. In my opinion it's a bit tenuous, and in pragmatic terms neither here nor there - but there you go.

Personally I would be opposed to schools which were total immersion Spanish - not that Spanish isn't worth learning (as far as languages go, at least), but it puts undue emphasis on one element of the curriculum in my opinion, and threatens to establish cultural competition within the state (particularly if other distinguishing cultural aspects come to bear in said schools.)

Not that that really matters - there are very few immersion foreign language schools (St Killians is the only one that comes to mind), and the specific language is optional, naturally, so it's no big deal (thankfully!)

# Disclaimer: Alternatively they might argue that schools should generally be run in languages other than English, or that it doesn't matter either way.

---

Is it about time to wrap up this thread?

MysticalRain

Cú Giobach wrote: »

1. There are numerous surveys posted on this thread showing the majority of people want to keep Irish compulsory, now before you say these are biased try and find one that says otherwise, surely if there was a "silent majority" who don't think this way there would be some trace of them somewhere.

The survey you posted here mentions nothing about keeping the language ccompulsory. It also muddles the figures by lumping in Irish culture with the Irish language. "Culture" can include everything from civics to religion to history.
The "silent majority" reflected by the fact that majority of the Irish public doesn't care enough about the language to actually bother speaking it themselves, and the gaelteacht areas keep on shrinking. The statistics for that are well documented and widely available.

If you are not aware of how different the perceptions of mature adults and children are, then I would question your age and since I don't converse with children on the internet am considering whether I should continue this conversation.
The only thing one learns about society in general in the schoolyard is about life in the schoolyard.

Bitchy and (incorrent) comments aside, I think that perfectly true if you are talking about primary schools kids or even younger adolescents. But we are not just talking about primary schools kids, or kids in their early teens (why you post on boards.ie of all places if you wish to avoid such people is beyond me). I would hardly put leaving cert or college age adults in the same category. Technically they are considered a mature adult at that point as far as our government is concerned, and they generally do form live long views on something if they have been consistently exposed to it for 12 years.

I would think that every party's stance on this issue would be proof enough, surely if there were votes to be gained, then at this stage at least one party would have taken advantage of this and be campaigning today with some mention of it.

Well I'm sorry but, I am one of those people who takes the empty words from a political party's election manifesto at face value. It's a sop to the nationalist crowd and nothing more. I actually have more respect for Sinn Fein for being genuine true believers on the issue than I ever could for the so-called joke of a "Republican party" that is present day Fianna Fail.

Of course whatever their official stance is, it didn't stop the mainstream parties from queuing up to support the removal of any territorial claims to Northern Ireland as part of the Good Friday agreement. That was, in effect, the final nail in the coffin for UI. Unless of course the Unionist community in NI suddenly "see the light" some day and magically start believing they are actually a bunch of paddies like the rest of us.

RandomName2

Cú Giobach wrote: »

The only thing one learns about society in general in the schoolyard is about life in the schoolyard.

Whilst I agree with most of what you say in this post do be aware that similar arguments were made against women and working-class men concerning the franchise at the beginning of the 20th century: 'sure what would a woman/ working class man know about that sort of thing; their heads are just full of how to clean/cook/mine/smelt/insertWhatever. 'We can give them the vote, but will they know what to do with it?' as one poster once put it.

I was very well aware of what I did and did not like to study from the age of about 9 or 10, and the reasons for that. Some subjects I grew to like, later on, but that is because the curricula at primary level for subjects like history and geography are shockingly piss poor.

deise go deo

kfdb wrote: »

I've been following this thread and was wondering if the pro-compulsion side could answer a question for me. You often use the success and growth of the gaelscoilena movement as proof of a grassroots popularity for Irish.

Would you support a change in education policies that allowed similarly involved and motivated parents that *didn't* want their children to receive any instruction in Irish to found their own schools? Schools where (for example) all instruction might take place in Spanish with no Irish taught at all. I guess I'm wondering if parents that would like this have equal rights to parents that want to found an all Irish school?

Kreb.

Well, to be honest this situation would almost be impossible in Reality.

It would require

A) Enough Parents in a Local Area to come together to form a school bassed on Immersion in a second language that wasent Irish.
(Even at this stage we are getting into unlikly)

All of those parents would have to not only not want Irish to be the immersive medium of Education, But also Not Want Irish to be taught at all.
(Even more Unlikly)


C) All of those parents would have to agree which second language they want that school to be. There are quite a few choices out there.
(Now we are getting into almost impossible)




Lets just say that we will cross that bridge if we ever come to it.

RandomName2

MysticalRain wrote: »

Well I'm sorry but, I am one of those people who takes the empty words from a political party's election manifesto at face value. It's a sop to the nationalist crowd and nothing more. I actually have more respect for Sinn Fein for being genuine true believers on the issue than I ever could for the so-called joke of a "Republican party" that is present day Fianna Fail.

Of course whatever their official stance is, it didn't stop the mainstream parties from queuing up to support the removal of any territorial claims to Northern Ireland as part of the Good Friday agreement. That was, in effect, the final nail in the coffin for UI. Unless of course the Unionist community in NI suddenly "see the light" some day and magically start believing they are actually a bunch of paddies like the rest of us.

I was actually once at a closed meeting of Ogra Fianna Fail where the government chief whip said that the next main agenda for the party was a united Ireland. :eek:

I mean, where in Christ's name did they pull that out of? This was about two and a half years ago. Eying the north whilst allowing fiscal policy to run riot? Par for the course, I s'pose. :pac:

Oasis_Dublin

MysticalRain wrote: »

Of course whatever their official stance is, it didn't stop the mainstream parties from queuing up to support the removal of any territorial claims to Northern Ireland as part of the Good Friday agreement. That was, in effect, the final nail in the coffin for UI. Unless of course the Unionist community in NI suddenly "see the light" some day and magically start believing they are actually a bunch of paddies like the rest of us.

That's not fair. The question essentially was, "do you want to end 30 years of violence on our island or do you want to keep it going for the sake of an empty formula in the constitution?" Compromise had to be made and it (rightly) was. The Belfast Agreement also included the Principle of Consent clause, thus allowing the democratic will of the people of the 6 counties to be recognised. Watch this space after the Local Elections in May and this years UK census.

MysticalRain

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

That's not fair. The question essentially was, "do you want to end 30 years of violence on our island or do you want to keep it going for the sake of an empty formula in the constitution?" Compromise had to be made and it (rightly) was. The Belfast Agreement also included the Principle of Consent clause, thus allowing the democratic will of the people of the 6 counties to be recognised. Watch this space after the Local Elections in May and this years UK census.

Sure, but come on? We all know how likely that is to happen.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

Clutching at straws cyclopath?

No, I am looking for the truth. Your evasiveness is quite frustrating.

deise go deo wrote: »

The aim dose not say 'restore Ireland to being Bilingual' It says Restore Irish to being a common or Ordinary language of Ireland.

Read the web site again, it does not say 'a' it says 'the'. We should pay close attention to this, as no doubt CnaG would not make an error in clearly expressing its main aim, to do so would look very stupid.

By your translation it also says 'restore' (or reinstate)_, meaning going back to a previous state of affairs as they existed in the past. This is CnaG's aim, to bring us back to the past.

deise go deo wrote: »

This can be done by Ireland becoming Bilingual.

Bilingualism is not the main aim of CnaG. Indeed, it's founder once lectured on ‘On the Necessity for De-Anglicizing Ireland’.

How's the answer to my question on the use of the genitive case coming? This may help you with accurately translating the Irish version.

deise go deo

RandomName2 wrote: »

I was actually once at a closed meeting of Ogra Fianna Fail where the government chief whip said that the next main agenda for the party was a united Ireland. :eek:

I mean, where in Christ's name did they pull that out of? This was about two and a half years ago. Eying the north whilst allowing fiscal policy to run riot? Par for the course, I s'pose. :pac:

I imagine that that was when FF decided to move North and take in Members from NI? They wanted to take SF's place as the Main Nationalist Party in NI.

MysticalRain

RandomName2 wrote: »

I was actually once at a closed meeting of Ogra Fianna Fail where the government chief whip said that the next main agenda for the party was a united Ireland. :eek:

I mean, where in Christ's name did they pull that out of? This was about two and a half years ago. Eying the north whilst allowing fiscal policy to run riot? Par for the course, I s'pose. :pac:

Like deise said, it probably had something to do with FF plans to dominate the entire island politically. They will be lucky if their vote is not eclipsed by SF in the south the way things are going.

It just goes to show FF's priorities were everywhere except where they should have been at that time.

Oasis_Dublin

MysticalRain wrote: »

Sure, but come on? We all know how likely that is to happen.

It won't happen in the morning, I'll give you that. But us Catholics are famed for reproducing like rats up in the north of Ireland. So much so in fact, that by census 2021 Catholics/Irish may have a majority up there. Sure, there will be those who will lick the soup bowl of the British government until the bitter end but I don't think a UI is totally out of the question.

Cú Giobach

MysticalRain wrote: »

The survey you posted here mentions nothing about keeping the language ccompulsory. It also muddles the figures by lumping in Irish culture with the Irish language. "Culture" can include everything from civics to religion to history.
The "silent majority" reflected by the fact that majority of the Irish public doesn't care enough about the language to actually bother speaking it themselves, and the gaelteacht areas keep on shrinking. The statistics for that are well documented and widely available.

Yes it was about Irish language and culture because that was what I mentioned, ie the changing attitudes of people towards "things Irish" including music, language etc
As I have said there are numerous surveys in this thread showing a majority in favour of compulsion.
Can you find one to refute them.

Bitchy and (incorrent) comments aside, I think that perfectly true if you are talking about primary schools kids or even younger adolescents. But we are not just talking about primary schools kids, or kids in their early teens (why you post on boards.ie of all places if you wish to avoid such people is beyond me). I would hardly put leaving cert or college age adults in the same category. Technically they are considered a mature adult at that point as far as our government is concerned, and they generally do form live long views on something if they have been consistently exposed to it for 12 years.

A fully rounded view of society and life in general cannot be formed until one has experienced more than just school and college life. Only school kids and students would think otherwise.

Well I'm sorry but, I am one of those people who takes the empty words from a political party's election manifesto at face value. It's a sop to the nationalist crowd and nothing more. I actually have more respect for Sinn Fein for being genuine true believers on the issue than I ever could for the so-called joke of a "Republican party" that is present day Fianna Fail......
Of course whatever their official stance is, it didn't stop the mainstream parties from queuing up to support the removal of any territorial claims to Northern Ireland as part of the Good Friday agreement. That was, in effect, the final nail in the coffin for UI. Unless of course the Unionist community in NI suddenly "see the light" some day and magically start believing they are actually a bunch of paddies like the rest of us.

I like many voted in favour of the GFA as a vote for peace, with the full knowledge that there will soon be a majority above who will vote for a UI.
Final nail in the coffin? You obviously don't know much about the GFA. It's actually brought it closer.
You really are clutching at straws now for something to respond to me with.

Cú Giobach

RandomName2 wrote: »

Whilst I agree with most of what you say in this post do be aware that similar arguments were made against women and working-class men concerning the franchise at the beginning of the 20th century: 'sure what would a woman/ working class man know about that sort of thing; their heads are just full of how to clean/cook/mine/smelt/insertWhatever. 'We can give them the vote, but will they know what to do with it?' as one poster once put it.

I was very well aware of what I did and did not like to study from the age of about 9 or 10, and the reasons for that. Some subjects I grew to like, later on, but that is because the curricula at primary level for subjects like history and geography are shockingly piss poor.

In fairness, whatever about developing likes and dislikes at an early age, my point about students was they are not representative of society at large like any minority.
The majority of people are not students, you spend most of you life not being one and people don't really mature properly until (being generous) after their mid 20's

cyclopath2001

Cú Giobach wrote: »

As I have said there are numerous surveys in this thread showing a majority in favour of compulsion.

Strangely, none of them actually ask if they are in favour of people being compelled to speak Irish.

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Can you find one to refute them.

The biggest, most convincing survey of all is that after 80 years of compulsory Irish, English is our common language. Go figure.

kfdb

deise go deo wrote: »

Well, to be honest this situation would almost be impossible in Reality.

It would require

A) Enough Parents in a Local Area to come together to form a school bassed on Immersion in a second language that wasent Irish.
(Even at this stage we are getting into unlikly)

All of those parents would have to not only not want Irish to be the immersive medium of Education, But also Not Want Irish to be taught at all.
(Even more Unlikly)


C) All of those parents would have to agree which second language they want that school to be. There are quite a few choices out there.
(Now we are getting into almost impossible)




Lets just say that we will cross that bridge if we ever come to it.

How will we come to it if its illegal? Say a group of parents wanted an school that was focused on bilingualism in the business languges of the EU in order of size - German, English French etc. That's a wider group of people and a more realistic proposition. Presume your support of bilingualism would put you on their side?

Or do you believe that your viewpoints right you have my children educated in your chosen language trumps my right to choose?

RandomName2 wrote: »

Personally I would be opposed to schools which were total immersion Spanish - not that Spanish isn't worth learning (as far as languages go, at least), but it puts undue emphasis on one element of the curriculum in my opinion, and threatens to establish cultural competition within the state (particularly if other distinguishing cultural aspects come to bear in said schools.)

Agreed - I'd be slow to support immersion in languages other than English. Anything else produces division and offers a route to ghetto-isation of eduction along cultural or religious grounds.

I'm curious how some see it as acceptable for Irish but unthinkable for other languages.

Kreb

Cú Giobach

From the Independent, link.

An MRBI poll of 1,000 people aged 16 and over showed 61pc are in favour of compulsory Irish up to the Leaving Cert. Almost two-thirds of those polled also felt that more subjects should be taught through Irish in primary schools to encourage children to use the language more often.

Awaiting the flurry of claims of bias, without any evidence showing the result of this poll doesn't match the real attitudes of people.

Judgement Day

Cú Giobach wrote: »

From the Independent, link.


Awaiting the flurry of claims of bias, without any evidence showing the result of this poll doesn't match the real attitudes of people.

Strange how polls carried out for particular bodies be it Government, IBEC, Irish language organisations or whatever usually produces the findings that the particular body wants! This poll was commissioned by Comhar na Muinteoiri Gaeilge, Conradh na Gaeilge, Gael Linn, Gael-scoileanna agus Comhdhail Naisiunta na Gaeilge - so it would be strange if the results were to prove that people wanted the Irish language made non-compulsory. Was the survey conducted in the Connemara gaeltacht? :rolleyes:

cyclopath2001

Cú Giobach wrote: »

From the Independent, link.


Awaiting the flurry of claims of bias, without any evidence showing the result of this poll doesn't match the real attitudes of people.

Well, first off you've relied on the Irish Independent, which is really, very unwise. Next we we see that the survey was commissioned by Comhar na Muinteoiri Gaeilge, Conradh na Gaeilge, Gael Linn, Gael-scoileanna agus Comhdhail Naisiunta na Gaeilge.

Is there a link to actual survey, what were the questions? Why does the report not give full details? What unfavourable findings were suppressed? You should never accept a press release at face value, use your critical faculties.

If we trust the report, it also means a significant number were not in favour of children being forced to speak Irish...don't they have rights too?

Cú Giobach

Judgement Day wrote: »

Strange how polls carried out for particular bodies be it Government, IBEC, Irish language organisations or whatever usually produces the findings that the particular body wants! This poll was commissioned by Comhar na Muinteoiri Gaeilge, Conradh na Gaeilge, Gael Linn, Gael-scoileanna agus Comhdhail Naisiunta na Gaeilge - so it would be strange if the results were to prove that people wanted the Irish language made non-compulsory. Was the survey conducted in the Connemara gaeltacht? :rolleyes:

As I said

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Awaiting the flurry of claims of bias, without any evidence showing the result of this poll doesn't match the real attitudes of people.

Judgement Day

Cú Giobach wrote: »

As I said

Great response.

MysticalRain

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Yes it was about Irish language and culture because that was what I mentioned, ie the changing attitudes of people towards "things Irish" including music, language etc
As I have said there are numerous surveys in this thread showing a majority in favour of compulsion.

I'm sorry, are we having a wider discussing here about Irish culture in general, or are we discussing the Irish language? Perhaps you should start another thread about Irish culture if you wish to discuss that.

Can you find one to refute them.

I'll be happy to post one here as soon as I a recent independent poll that isn't done by a group with a vested interest in plugging the language.

A fully rounded view of society and life in general cannot be formed until one has experienced more than just school and college life. Only school kids and students would think otherwise.

I think you are making a big assumption here in assuming that people's views of Irish will become more positive just because they get older.

I like many voted in favour of the GFA as a vote for peace, with the full knowledge that there will soon be a majority above who will vote for a UI.
Final nail in the coffin? You obviously don't know much about the GFA. It's actually brought it closer.
You really are clutching at straws now for something to respond to me with.
Cú Giobach is offline

Actually if you knew anything at all about the GFA agreement, you already know that about a majority of Unionists voted for the GFA agreement because they genuinely believed it would solidify the union between NI and Britain. So while the nationalist community pretends that it brought them one step closer to a UI, the other side pretends otherwise. I can't see the Unionists changing their attitudes any time soon.

cyclopath2001

Judgement Day wrote: »

Great response.

I do hope you're being sarcastic.

What the poll shows is that there are significant numbers of children being taught Irish against their will and that of their parents.

The Irish-language lobby no doubt considers this to be tolerable 'collateral damage' on the path to making Irish the common language of Ireland.