Is Irish a dead language?

deise go deo

Trenchman wrote: »

This thread looks like it's going to run and run. It's gas the way people automaticaly assume that you're either pro-Irish language or anti-Irish language - there's no middle ground. Look, I love the Irish language and I am proud that it is alive and being spoken daily by a minority of people in this country. I fully respect peoples choice as to whether they like the language or not. I have no problem with someone who comes along and says 'I dislike the language and I can't speak a word.' But I do fail to see the fairness in being criticised if I or others like me happen to like the language.

Of course there is a middle ground, The thread happens to polarise people quite quickly into one camp or the other, those who do not fit into one or the other tend to stop posting quite quickly.

I think we should steer away from going back down the compulsory/non compulsory/I hated it in school/I loved it in school debate again. It's kind of been done to death on this thread from what I've seen. I think someone mentioned earlier that we're all in agreement that the langauge has problems in secondary school. Hopefully this will be addressed by the new government.

I tried to start a new thread where compulsion was not the issue, People insisted on moving the thread off topic to discuss Compulsion, and I got band for trying to keep the thread on topic:rolleyes:

dubhthach

aidan24326 wrote: »

There are at least good arguments to be made for English and Maths being compulsory. English because it's not only our first spoken language but the international language of business aswell. You won't get far these days without a good command of English.

The thing is though the English curriculum in the leaving cert has nothing to do with having a command of english. It's a literary subject with emphasis on poetry/prose/plays not hugely relevant to your average LC student. Useful if you want to become a literary critic perhaps.
Likewise standard maths numeracy isn't the goal of the LC (Linear Algebra, calculus etc aren't hugely relevant to your average joe). It's assumed that both (english fluency, basic maths numeracy) is handle at the primary school level. Given that we have one of the lowest levels of spending on primary school education in the OECD it's no wonder there are issues with english literacy/maths fluency in secondary schools.

There's also the point that students get "passive english" in all the subjects. For example if you are doing history and geography you are practising your written english as much as doing the subject (writing essays etc)

In general I have a low opinion of our education system as it's based around learning by rote in general, people prepare by learning off essays / potted answers and regurgitate them on the day of the exam.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

They are both native Irish and native English speakers, they are bilingual. But at least we agree that it is wrong to force anyone to speak a language other than their native language.

Do you know what the term native speaker means?

It is very rare for someone to have two native languages, one is almost always better than the other.

There are children who have not been introduced to English till they go to school, I know of children who do not speak any English till the age of 7, and I have heard of a child who was 12 before starting to learn English.

These people are not Native English speakers.


So do you agree that you are a hypocrite then?

Also language learning in school is not a human rights abuse:rolleyes:

Your membership of CnaG demonstrates support of the Main Aim, it is the expression, by action, of an opinion.

Stop trying to misrepresent my opinion,

Reported again.

Lord TSC

deise go deo wrote: »

This is really the problem, Some people cannot see outside their own opinions.

Perhaps you were subjected to the subject, but Everyone? Far from it, Most people are happy to learn Irish.

Its called catastrophic thinking.

Everyone is out to get me, or You ALWAYS do that.... would be other examples.

Not everyone is out to get you, Some people maybe, but not everyone.
They may do it sometimes, but always? No.

Everyone is subjected to Irish? No, some people are subjected to Irish, not everyone, and from what I have seen, most people are not 'subjected' to it.

So then the issue turns to why some people feel 'subjected' to the subject?

From everything I have seen and heard, by far the biggest complaint is the stupid way it is taught.
That then is the place to start in my opinion, How it is taught.

Ugh, I knew you'd pick up on the negative symantix of that word and ignore the post I made before it. Knew I should have changed the word "subjected", cause you've compeltly misinterpreted how I actually meant the word to be used, opting to pick on that one word and ignore everything else I've said before it.

For the record, I had an amazing teacher for LC Irish.Despite my failings in the subject, she worked incredibly hard to get me to a decent level at Pass and was an amazing teacher. As such, I actually did not find the subject that much of a negative experience.

My problem with Irish in this topic has never been with the language, but on the fact people are not allowed to make their own decisions and prioritise accordingly. I'd argue that you're misrepresenting the majority of students when you say "Most people are happy to learn Irish.". That's not to say "Most are unhappy to learn it". I think the truth lies in that there's extremes at either end, and then the vast majority don't care and just want to get through it as quickly as possible with minimum fuss and the highest grade, just like any other topic. However, I also think that for the majority of students to really be happy, they should get to choose subjects based on their futures and potentials; that they should get to make their own priorities rather than have them thrust upon them.

Now do me a favour, so we don't repeat this twenty pages further down the line. Go back to my previous post (Post 3585) which dealt with your claims about Irish not really being compulsory and answer that instead of pulling me up on the use of a single word...

astrofool

Trinity is in the top 50 colleges in the world, UCD is #114:
http://www.topuniversities.com/ireland/top-irish-universities-continue-climb-world-university-rankings

Do you really, really think that NUI's require Irish because it's useful for their courses? Why don't they require it from foreign students? It's there because the state mandates it, not because it will be useful to have learnt it for the course.

deise go deo

astrofool wrote: »

Do you really, really think that NUI's require Irish because it's useful for their courses? Why don't they require it from foreign students? It's there because the state mandates it, not because it will be useful to have learnt it for the course.

I think NUI set their requirments in the same way everyone else dose,

If the state required it, do you really really think it would not be required of Trinity as well as NUI?

It comes down to this, Can you provide any evidience to support your claim that Irish is required by the state and not NUI?

deise go deo

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Ugh, I knew you'd pick up on the negative symantix of that word and ignore the post I made before it. Knew I should have changed the word "subjected", cause you've compeltly misinterpreted how I actually meant the word to be used, opting to pick on that one word and ignore everything else I've said before it.

Weather the use of the word subjected is in relation to Irish, or compulsion in general the point still stands, Most people, By far the vast majority it seems, do not have a problem with compulsion in general.

It may be an issue for you, but it does not seem to be an issue for most.

NTMK

deise go deo wrote: »

Weather the use of the word subjected is in relation to Irish, or compulsion in general the point still stands, Most people, By far the vast majority it seems, do not have a problem with compulsion in general.

It may be an issue for you, but it does not seem to be an issue for most.

according to the Irish Times 62% of parents would rather their kids study a foreign language than irish

There have been loads of polls on the subject and ive never seen this "vast majority" that you keep talking about

and about the NUI irish requirement NUI uni's recieve more state funding than the others i.e more state involvement and contol over the colleges

astrofool

deise go deo wrote: »

I think NUI set their requirments in the same way everyone else dose,

If the state required it, do you really really think it would not be required of Trinity as well as NUI?

It comes down to this, Can you provide any evidience to support your claim that Irish is required by the state and not NUI?

Trinity pre-dated NUI, and as a result could set their own rules.

Are you really going down the route of arguing that NUI require Irish because it's a useful subject to have in the field of say, Computer Science, Theoretical Physics, Commerce etc.

The IT's generally don't require it, why not?

marienbad

deise go deo wrote: »

So Irish is the only compulsory subject?

Talk about rose tinted glasses.

Show me a single person in the state who was given the option of Not doing English or Maths.

English and Maths are optional? But no option is given, how then are they optional? Its a logical failure.

The Ironic thing is that there are plenty of people who were given the option of not doing Irish, Our only compulsory subject.:rolleyes:

really Deise, this is just so beneath you, you know that Irish is compulsory and you believe it is rightly so, what have the last 200 pages been about otherwise ?

This is what pisses people off all the time , the constant goalpost moving.
Anyways I am finished with this thread, too many of those that believe in the language will not see that at times their views are little different that those of our former colonial masters but just in reverse.

Godge

marienbad wrote: »

really Deise, this is just so beneath you, you know that Irish is compulsory and you believe it is rightly so, what have the last 200 pages been about otherwise ?

This is what pisses people off all the time , the constant goalpost moving.
Anyways I am finished with this thread, too many of those that believe in the language will not see that at times their views are little different that those of our former colonial masters but just in reverse.

You know I was just thinking the same thing. I was wondering whether there was an Irish equivalent of the phrase "little englander". I would see that equivalent as applying to those who believe that the Irish language is an essential part of being Irish and that you cannot be Irish without it. They also believe it necessary to have it compulsory in schools and all over the State. It makes this magnificent country of ours to look insular and introverted and is a rejection of the new Irish. It is beginning to find public expression in groups such as the National Forum, a group which I am very nervous about. Very similar to the English-centric view of our former colonial masters.

The other thing they have in common is that they cannot see beyond their narrow nationalistic viewpoint. A phrase like "De Valera's dancers" in memory of his vision of the maidens dancing at the crossroads could be one equivalent but it probably should be something in the Irish language.

deise go deo

marienbad wrote: »

really Deise, this is just so beneath you, you know that Irish is compulsory and you believe it is rightly so, what have the last 200 pages been about otherwise ?

This is what pisses people off all the time , the constant goalpost moving.
Anyways I am finished with this thread, too many of those that believe in the language will not see that at times their views are little different that those of our former colonial masters but just in reverse.

I have not moved the goalpoasts, I have not claimed that Irish is not compulsory.

I am claiming that all three subjects are. No option, not optional

faobhar

Godge wrote: »

Unfortunately, despite it having been pointed out a number of times on this thread that Irish is the only compulsory language, and being backed up by solid evidence, certain posters continue to insist that other subjects are also compulsory which is factually not the case.

There is a consistent pattern that when certain arguments are disproved and rejected this is subsequently ignored and the same argument resurfaces twenty pages later.

This is all a vicious circle however. I could equally point to several other patterns in this thread - such as certain instances when attention was drawn to spelling errors in a poster's comments and these were argued to support the idea that bilingualism leads to poor language acquistion (something which is a complete lie) while, on the other hand, when another Irish speaking poster dared to note a similar error in another person's comment they were blasted for pedantry. But these things are neither here nor there.

I would be in agreement with Trenchman's view:

Trenchman wrote: »

I think we should steer away from going back down the compulsory/non compulsory/I hated it in school/I loved it in school debate again. It's kind of been done to death on this thread from what I've seen. I think someone mentioned earlier that we're all in agreement that the langauge has problems in secondary school. Hopefully this will be addressed by the new government.

I'm happy to accept that Irish is, to all intents and purposes, a compulsory subject, though would acknowledge that a significant proportion of students manage to avoid taking it. Now I would prefer if we could move the debate forward.

aidan24326 wrote: »

Not saying those two subjects should absolutely be compulsory, just that a good case can be argued for it, especially with English. In the case of Irish language, it's impossible to argue any sort of case for why it should be compulsory at LC level. Because there isn't one.

I think there is a case to argued, if we examine this in objective terms, and that case is that Irish is still, constitutionally, the first official language of our state and it is natural that it should therefore be enshrined in our education system. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with that statement, I'm just merely stating that the argument does exist.

This is why I feel, and I would appreciate some opinions on this, that what we really need is a constitutional referendum on the case of Irish - do we wish to maintain its status as the first official state language, thus entitling it to certain privileges, or do we acknowledge it as a second language within state and afford it recognition but not privilege? Following on such a referendum a government would have a clear mandate to either (a) continue language promotion, invest significant sums of state money in its development and maintain its place in the education system; or (b) limit its official role within the state and the privileges to which it is entitled.

faobhar

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

The amount of Irish fluency possessed by the average Irish person after 14 years of compulsory lessons is far less than the amount of English spoken by a Spanish student after a couple of months in one of our English schools. There is no justification for so many lessons over such a long period of time. it's simply wasteful.

By the way, you are not comparing like with like here. The beauty of language education in certain other districts of the EU is the emphasis they place on learning languages in the countries in which they are spoken. If students of Irish had to spend a couple of months in the Gaeltacht (not something I'm necessarily arguing for) they might show similar progress in terms of language acquisition.

Lord TSC

deise go deo wrote: »

Weather the use of the word subjected is in relation to Irish, or compulsion in general the point still stands, Most people, By far the vast majority it seems, do not have a problem with compulsion in general.

It may be an issue for you, but it does not seem to be an issue for most.

So I take that as a yes, you are going to ignore the rest of my points then, right?

deise go deo

Godge wrote: »

You know I was just thinking the same thing. I was wondering whether there was an Irish equivalent of the phrase "little englander". I would see that equivalent as applying to those who believe that the Irish language is an essential part of being Irish and that you cannot be Irish without it. It is beginning to find public expression in groups such as the National Forum, a group which I am very nervous about. Very similar to the English-centric view of our former colonial masters.

:rolleyes:

And now for 5 threads of pointless and baseless acusations of being the British in reverse.

:rolleyes:


The bit in bold, Can I ask who exactly you are referencing? I think you are talking about a small group of barstool republicens, most of which cannot speak Irish

Do you think its fair to tar everyone on the pro irish side with that brush?

It makes this magnificent country of ours to look insular and introverted and is a rejection of the new Irish.

How? Is Finland Insular and Introverted? Wales, Sweeden, Pourtugal?

They all use their own national language.

Why is it different here? Is there any reason? Lets hear it.

By promoting Irish we are keeping in line with European Guidlines for dealing with minority languages, Are these guidlines Insular or Introverted?


How is using our own national language a rejection of the 'new Irish'?
It is a bad idea to use imigreants as an argument against the Language. Poor form.

The other thing they have in common is that they cannot see beyond their narrow nationalistic viewpoint. A phrase like "De Valera's dancers" in memory of his vision of the maidens dancing at the crossroads could be one equivalent but it probably should be something in the Irish language.

The thing is, DeV never actually said that. More strawmen arguments:rolleyes:

dubhthach

Godge wrote: »

You know I was just thinking the same thing. I was wondering whether there was an Irish equivalent of the phrase "little englander". I would see that equivalent as applying to those who believe that the Irish language is an essential part of being Irish and that you cannot be Irish without it. They also believe it necessary to have it compulsory in schools and all over the State. It makes this magnificent country of ours to look insular and introverted and is a rejection of the new Irish. It is beginning to find public expression in groups such as the National Forum, a group which I am very nervous about. Very similar to the English-centric view of our former colonial masters.

The other thing they have in common is that they cannot see beyond their narrow nationalistic viewpoint. A phrase like "De Valera's dancers" in memory of his vision of the maidens dancing at the crossroads could be one equivalent but it probably should be something in the Irish language.

What a load of horse manure, I never met one of the new irish who had a bad word to say about Irish language. If anything they all thought it was good that we had our own language and saw it as part of our cultural heritage. If you go to any adult Irish language classes there are always plenty of the new Irish attending. Why is this? Perhaps because they don't have hangups about the language and see it for what is is, a part of the entire Irish cultural experience (just as Yeats and Joyce writing in English or Beckett writing in French is)

My partner who is "new irish" herself doesn't understand some of the blind hatred she sees aimed at the Irish language by some of the "old irish" then again she grew up speaking 3 languages herself (regional, "national" and international) so she fully understands the benefits of multilingualism.

Are the welsh seen as been insular/introverted for speaking welsh? Likewise for the Finns or the Estonians and their respective languages? It's kinda ironic that you are using multiculturalism as a reason ṫhat Ireland should be monolingual.

Spend some time in Galway and open your ears ye hear Irish on the streets and in the shops let you couldn't be in a more multi-cultural or inclusive city anywhere else in the country. Here in Dublin people speaking Irish in the street often get told to "Fsck off back to your own country" :rolleyes:

fkt

There's ten year old kids in China who have compulsory English.

To those who want to Keep Irish, good luck to you, but when the Asians are running the top financial centres and controlling big business across the world in twenty years and are creating employment, don't have the hypocrisy and cheek to complain about your Granchildren not being able to find high paid employment because other candidates have wider a range of subjects to their name

Godge

deise go deo wrote: »

:rolleyes:

And now for 5 threads of pointless and baseless acusations of being the British in reverse.

:rolleyes:


The bit in bold, Can I ask who exactly you are referencing? I think you are talking about a small group of barstool republicens, most of which cannot speak Irish

Do you think its fair to tar everyone on the pro irish side with that brush?




How? Is Finland Insular and Introverted? Wales, Sweeden, Pourtugal?

They all use their own national language.

Why is it different here? Is there any reason? Lets hear it.

By promoting Irish we are keeping in line with European Guidlines for dealing with minority languages, Are these guidlines Insular or Introverted?


How is using our own national language a rejection of the 'new Irish'?
It is a bad idea to use imigreants as an argument against the Language. Poor form.



The thing is, DeV never actually said that. More strawmen arguments:rolleyes:

1. I am not talking about a small group of barstool republicans. In fact the comparison had nothing to do with IRA/Sinn Fein and that is a distraction. To keep it simple, I was pointing out the ironic similarities between the "Little Englanders" who yearn for the Empire and the "De Valera's Dancers" who yearn for the restoration of the Irish language. Now don't reply clarifying you only want bilingualism etc., I know that. Reply on the appropriateness of that comparison.

2. Finland, Sweden and Portugal don't have alternative first languages which is the most relevant point. The Welsh language fanatics have the similar "not-English" problem that many of us do. This thread has numerous posts where people defended the Irish language (yourself included) on the basis that is it intrinsic to being Irish. I find that insular and exclusive and rejecting the now established long heritage in the English language (this is not 1798). If you want to respond, address the issue of whether the language is part and parcel of being Irish.

3. Nothing wrong with promoting Irish in accordance with European guidelines. Point me to the bit in those guidelines which says it should be compulsory for terminal second-level exams or where it says that meaningless local authority documents should be bilingual.

4. Nothing wrong with using the example of the new Irish. You dismiss it because there is no possible response.

5. Be pedantic about whether Dev actually said it or not. It is the image of the inward-looking self-sufficient Ireland of the 1930s that he tried to build and which led us to our greatest societal collapse - the emigration and economic ruin of the 1950s. (His successors in FF will run him close after what they have done but that is another story). Just because it is an iconic image doesn't mean it has to be real. Remember that iconic photograph of the second world war soldier kissing his girlfriend which 50 years later was admitted to being staged.

Godge

dubhthach wrote: »

What a load of horse manure, I never met one of the new irish who had a bad word to say about Irish language. If anything they all thought it was good that we had our own language and saw it as part of our cultural heritage. If you go to any adult Irish language classes there are always plenty of the new Irish attending. Why is this? Perhaps because they don't have hangups about the language and see it for what is is, a part of the entire Irish cultural experience (just as Yeats and Joyce writing in English or Beckett writing in French is)

My partner who is "new irish" herself doesn't understand some of the blind hatred she sees aimed at the Irish language by some of the "old irish" then again she grew up speaking 3 languages herself (regional, "national" and international) so she fully understands the benefits of multilingualism.

Are the welsh seen as been insular/introverted for speaking welsh? Likewise for the Finns or the Estonians and their respective languages? It's kinda ironic that you are using multiculturalism as a reason ṫhat Ireland should be monolingual.

Spend some time in Galway and open your ears ye hear Irish on the streets and in the shops let you couldn't be in a more multi-cultural or inclusive city anywhere else in the country. Here in Dublin people speaking Irish in the street often get told to "Fsck off back to your own country" :rolleyes:

1. Horse manure - resort to insults when you can't address the arguments

2. I have many "new Irish" friends who resent their children having to learn Irish. We can all have anecdotal friends and spouses.

3. I have no problem with the language being part of our culture and heritage. Neither do I hate the language. I do not believe the language should be compulsory at Leaving Cert. I also believe the OLA is a complete waste of money and Irish Language expertise. I also believe it is being kept artificially alive in Gaeltacht regions for economic and government subsidy reasons. But it is easy to dismiss the points I make by saying I hate the language.

4. Never said Ireland should be monolingual. In fact people can speak as many languages as they wish. Different parts of the country can have signs in Irish, French, Polish, Estonian or Latin. I just believe that English is the common denominator across all of the cultures and heritages in this country be they African or Eastern European immigrants or Aran Islanders and that English should therefore be the common language of business and public life.

You can call me an Irish-hater or whatever but all of the above are valid positions, opinions and arguments.

P.S. I have spent a lot of my time and life in Galway over the years and don't need to be told to go down there to open my ears.

deise go deo

Godge wrote: »

1. I am not talking about a small group of barstool republicans. In fact the comparison had nothing to do with IRA/Sinn Fein and that is a distraction. To keep it simple, I was pointing out the ironic similarities between the "Little Englanders" who yearn for the Empire and the "De Valera's Dancers" who yearn for the restoration of the Irish language. Now don't reply clarifying you only want bilingualism etc., I know that. Reply on the appropriateness of that comparison.

The restoration of the Irish language is not a negative imposition on the population of this country, or other countries.

It is an aim supported by a very large proportion of the population. You can deny this, you can claim that their opinions are not to count because it would be 'Backward' 'Insular' 'Insert Baseless negative Remark here' but you cannot support such a position with evidence.

2. Finland, Sweden and Portugal don't have alternative first languages which is the most relevant point. The Welsh language fanatics have the similar "not-English" problem that many of us do. This thread has numerous posts where people defended the Irish language (yourself included) on the basis that is it intrinsic to being Irish. I find that insular and exclusive and rejecting the now established long heritage in the English language (this is not 1798). If you want to respond, address the issue of whether the language is part and parcel of being Irish.

I have never believed or stated that Speaking Irish is necessary for Being Irish, That is a strawman argument, and a poor one at that.
I have stated that the Irish language is an Improtant part of Irish culture, and that it is part of my identity, there is a difference.:rolleyes:

3. Nothing wrong with promoting Irish in accordance with European guidelines. Point me to the bit in those guidelines which says it should be compulsory for terminal second-level exams or where it says that meaningless local authority documents should be bilingual.

So how yould you promote the language, while not giving people the choice to use it when dealing with their own government?

4. Nothing wrong with using the example of the new Irish. You dismiss it because there is no possible response.

Yes there is, As outlined by a group called iMeasc, a group of Irishn speaking new Irish.
Using the new Irish as a tool to attack the Irish language will bred resentment against the new Irish, as such it is poor form to atempt to use them as a cheap shot against the language.

You do not speak for them, so stop trying to use them to further your own arguments.

5. Be pedantic about whether Dev actually said it or not. It is the image of the inward-looking self-sufficient Ireland of the 1930s that he tried to build and which led us to our greatest societal collapse - the emigration and economic ruin of the 1950s. (His successors in FF will run him close after what they have done but that is another story). Just because it is an iconic image doesn't mean it has to be real. Remember that iconic photograph of the second world war soldier kissing his girlfriend which 50 years later was admitted to being staged.

And can you show anything at all to suggest that this has anything to do with the promotion of the Irish language today?

I could compare you to a religious extreamist who is intolerante of any opinion other than your own, but just saying it dosent make it true, same applies to you argument that 'DeV's Dancers' has any relevance to this discussion. It a cheap tactic to mud sling, not a logical argument.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

The restoration of the Irish language is not a negative imposition on the population of this country, or other countries.

Restoration to to being The Common Tongue of Ireland, just like in the good old days?

deise go deo

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

So I take that as a yes, you are going to ignore the rest of my points then, right?

The point I made was aimed at the rest of your points, you think that all subjects should be optional at LC level, and you believe that giving choice would create a better education system.

I put forward the position that choice, while important to you dose not seem important to most.

deise go deo

faobhar wrote: »

I'm happy to accept that Irish is, to all intents and purposes, a compulsory subject, though would acknowledge that a significant proportion of students manage to avoid taking it. Now I would prefer if we could move the debate forward.

A noble aspiration, but I don't think it will work out that way unfortunatly:(

I think there is a case to argued, if we examine this in objective terms, and that case is that Irish is still, constitutionally, the first official language of our state and it is natural that it should therefore be enshrined in our education system. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with that statement, I'm just merely stating that the argument does exist.

This is why I feel, and I would appreciate some opinions on this, that what we really need is a constitutional referendum on the case of Irish - do we wish to maintain its status as the first official state language, thus entitling it to certain privileges, or do we acknowledge it as a second language within state and afford it recognition but not privilege? Following on such a referendum a government would have a clear mandate to either (a) continue language promotion, invest significant sums of state money in its development and maintain its place in the education system; or (b) limit its official role within the state and the privileges to which it is entitled.

Well I would welcome a referendum, It would at least put the debate to bed once and for all. But I think it is extremely unlikely. There just isn't enough of a reason to hold one, they are expensive things to hold, Given that it is a foregone conclusion, I don't think the cost would be justified.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Restoration to to being The Common Tongue of Ireland, just like in the good old days?

More pointless sniping.:rolleyes:

I was just using the same word he used. I have outlined my position several times, Continuing to try to misrepresent my opinion like this is just pointless, it is childish and adds nothing to the discussion.

Please just stop.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

I was just using the same word he used.

You said: 'The 'restoration of Irish is not a negative imposition.'

What did you mean by 'restoration'?

or is this something you support but do not agree with?

gimme5minutes

I'll ask deise go deo this question again -

Answer me this. Say I am a LC student. I hate Irish and have always been useless at it. I would like to drop it and do applied maths instead which I am good at and foresee myself using in my future career. Why in the name of god should I be forced to do Irish in this situation? What do you think I should be forced to do Irish instead of Applied Maths?

cyclopath2001

From the Irish Independent:

More than 96,000 overseas students attended the 112 English language schools last year, while 26,000 international students were in third level education around the country....

Under the tagline 'World-class Standards, Warmest of Welcomes', the Enterprise Ireland initiative will promote Irish education across China, India, Saudi Arabia, Brazil and the USA.

Education Minister Ruairi Quinn said: "Ireland's education sector has many intrinsic strengths which give real, lasting value to our international students and that give us a competitive advantage in the international education market.

Great to see our native ability in the English language helping to bring in badly needed foreign income. I wonder if we would fare as well if Conradh na Gaeilge got its way and replaced English with Irish as the Common Tongue of Ireland?

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You said: 'The 'restoration of Irish is not a negative imposition.'

What did you mean by 'restoration'?

or is this something you support but do not agree with?

What it means is that I was posting in a rush because I have course work to do, and I had the word 'restoration' in my head because I had just read it.

Your going on like a bloody conspiracy theorist, there is no big secret. My opinion is exactly that which I have stated it to be, on several occasions, please just get over it.

deise go deo

gimme5minutes wrote: »

I'll ask deise go deo this question again -

Answer me this. Say I am a LC student. I hate Irish and have always been useless at it. I would like to drop it and do applied maths instead which I am good at and foresee myself using in my future career. Why in the name of god should I be forced to do Irish in this situation? What do you think I should be forced to do Irish instead of Applied Maths?

I would ask you two questions, Why do you hate Irish, and why the hell are you studying it?

You don't have to study it, there is nothing the school can do to make you study it, stop studying it, either that or just drop to foundation, which is basically the same thing.

Any more questions?