Is Irish a dead language?

gaeilge 1

it's only dead if we let it die.

cyclopath2001

Cú Giobach wrote: »

With that little 12 word sentence the question "Is Irish a dead language?" has been answered.

Would this mean if we stopped forcing kids to learn Irish and if we pulled the plug on the language quangos, that Irish would not die?

Oasis_Dublin

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

By forcing them to learn it at school? Why can't you understand how wrong that is?

That's an irrational and hysterical statement. You'd think that I suggested banning the language. If you think that reforming Irish language policy will kill it off, you are demonstrating no faith at all in the enthusiasm and dedication of the Irish language community.

Reform it first, like I've said 4,675 times.

You are in favour of killing if off though. Why would you argue with such a point?

Oasis_Dublin

femur61 wrote: »

I learnt for 14. I have an honours degree and a post grad but can hardly string "cupla focal" together. And I don't want to, I thought FG in power would make it optional but no, my kids are forced to learn a language which will never be of use to them at all. I feel so let down by the state I have no feelings of loyality to Ireland at all just see we as a nation were used and abused by our own. Now as a consequence our children are being forced to emmigrate.

Country is flat broke, how much does it cost to teach this redundant language every year which I'd say majority of children hate.

Not half as much as it costs to hire a bunch of incompetent former teachers to run the country. There are far bigger fish to fry at the moment.

Oasis_Dublin

hatz7 wrote: »

How do you know what my level of Irish is, the only thing I said was that I have difficulty with understanding Donegal Irish.

The point about the words was that it was the commentators themselves made the words up, they don't come in into usage organically like in english,that was only a small point, I'm fairly sure that the preceding line went more something like this..... On a lighter note

I love the way ye edited out that part ladies!!

lol

ye still haven't made any decent rebuttal to what I argued.
Back to the drawing board. this time, try thinking before typing. Less emotion, try taking a more holistic approach to the issue.

You mean that there were no ancient Irish words for a sport invented in the 19th century. Wow, that is deep stuff there fella.

LOLZ, I didn't edit your comment. I quoted it exactly. Sorry 'bout ya! haha OMG

Oasis_Dublin

Godge wrote: »

This is the insecurity in the heart of the Irish language movement.

Deep down they believe that unless people are forced to learn the Irish language, speak the Irish language and have official documents published in the Irish language, they will lose interest and the language will die out.

The ideal scenario is that people would speak the Irish language at home in the formative years before school, learn a good bit of the language in the early years of primary school before European languages (as the closest family of languages) are introduced to share the time in fifth and sixth class. In this case, Irish is part of the furniture and is loved and accepted by all. By second level, Irish is only taught as an optional subject.

To get to that place, you need to remove the fear and the compulsion, to dilute the hatred that has arisen because of the compulsory nature and build an open friendly approach to the language. However, the childish fear of the unknown and terror of a big leap holds back the Irish language movement from adopting such a policy and the defensive mode of "what we have we hold" takes over and they cling to the repeatedly failed policy of compulsion. You can see it coming through time and again in this thread.

I'm not sure that the proper teaching of Irish has ever been attempted in the history of the Irish state. Lean it more towards oral than poetry and then come back to me in a generation if that fails.

cyclopath2001

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

Reform it first, like I've said 4,675 times.

Choice should be an integral part of the reform.

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

You are in favour of killing if off though. Why would you argue with such a point?

Because it is untrue. There are better ways to preserve and promote Irish than what is done now.

Oasis_Dublin

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Choice should be an integral part of the reform.

Because it is untrue. There are better ways to preserve and promote Irish than what is done now.

Give me a (real) choice not to do English and Maths at LC level as well so. Let's reform ourselves to the British model and end up with an even worse second-level education system.

That, or we could be reasonably minded and just reform the way the language is taught.

Cú Giobach

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Would this mean if we stopped forcing kids to learn Irish and if we pulled the plug on the language quangos, that Irish would not die?

No, It means that with a little 12 word sentence the question "Is Irish a dead language?" has been answered.

cyclopath2001

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

Give me a (real) choice not to do English and Maths at LC level as well so. Let's reform ourselves to the British model and end up with an even worse second-level education system.

Or let's make a second language compulsory, but allow children and their parents to make a choice.

Seanchai

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Would this mean if we stopped forcing kids to learn Irish ....

Alternatively we could stop forcing kids to learn English in the same education system.

Drakmord

Seanchai wrote: »

Alternatively we could stop forcing kids to learn English in the same education system.

That's a really weak argument, especially when it's our first language.

Seanchai

Drakmord wrote: »

That's a really weak argument, especially when it's our first language.

It may be your first language. For very many kids, it's not. Yet you want to force it down their throats and ensure that every school in Ireland does the same.

Drakmord

Seanchai wrote: »

It may be your first language. For very many kids, it's not. Yet you want to force it down their throats and ensure that every school in Ireland does the same.

Fine, if you like we'll just stop teaching the native Irish speakers, English.
If we're spared from Irish, I can't see a problem.

Seanchai

Drakmord wrote: »

Fine, if you like we'll just stop teaching the native Irish speakers, English.
If we're spared from Irish, I can't see a problem.

Or else scrap the compulsory English policy of schools across Ireland and allow children to choose their subjects for themselves. It's revealing how you clearly favour forcing your language down children's throats. Why you feel insecure enough to insist upon every child being forced to learn English is beyond me.

And, of course, it's not as if your forced teaching of English is resulting in less "I seen that" "I done that" "He trone [threw] that at me" and the like. Talk about a failed policy of compulsory English.

cyclopath2001

Seanchai wrote: »

Alternatively we could stop forcing kids to learn English in the same education system.

One our principal economic advantages is our English speaking workforce, that's why so many of us speak English. If English were optional, I suspect many would still choose it.

We could considerably reduce the amount of time spent on Irish with no significant effect on the ability to say the cupla focal after 14 years of lessons.

Seanchai

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

One our principal economic advantages is our English speaking workforce, that's why so many of us speak English. If English were optional, I suspect many would still choose it.

We could considerably reduce the amount of time spent on Irish with no significant effect on the ability to say the cupla focal after 14 years of lessons.

1) I have yet to see any evidence that Ireland being "English speaking" benefits our economy more than, say, Swedes being "Swedish-speaking" benefits them. Moreover, it's amazing how so many non-English speaking countries can, in fact, become economic successes without using English as their main language. The anti-Irish lobby with their "without English we'd be an economic backwater!" (irony, anybody?) never tackle that question. How does, to take one of many countries, Finland, manage it? :rolleyes:

2) If the anti-Irish lobby were confident enough in the value of English to this society they wouldn't insist that it remain a compulsory subject. Yet they do. Go figure.

Oasis_Dublin

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

One our principal economic advantages is our English speaking workforce, that's why so many of us speak English. If English were optional, I suspect many would still choose it.

We could considerably reduce the amount of time spent on Irish with no significant effect on the ability to say the cupla focal after 14 years of lessons.

They absolutely would not at LC level. Once again, the anti anything lobby can't see the wood for the trees. They are completely in favour of forcing us to learn Kavanagh and Othello, but they point blank refuse to even consider the benefits of the Irish language.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Choice should be an integral part of the reform.

Your so close to a reasonable discussion cyclopath, Let me give you a nudge in the right direction, the next line starts with 'Because';)

There are better ways to preserve and promote Irish than what is done now.

Please expand on this point, I would love to hear how you think the Irish language can be promoted differently than it is now that would have in a better result.

Oasis_Dublin

Drakmord wrote: »

Fine, if you like we'll just stop teaching the native Irish speakers, English.
If we're spared from Irish, I can't see a problem.

That is an outrageous suggestion to make. Right now, we're all Irish, we all do the same classes at school and we're all reasonably happy with it. You want to culturally divide the nation in two, a very dangerous policy to pursue. You only need to look to Belgium to see the dangers of having different groups, cut off from each other, speaking different languages. Making native Irish speakers speak only Irish and making native English speakers speak only English is a bad idea.

Focalbhach

Seanchai wrote: »

2) If the anti-Irish lobby were confident enough in the value of English to this society they wouldn't insist that it remain a compulsory subject. Yet they do. Go figure.

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

They absolutely would not at LC level. Once again, the anti anything lobby can't see the wood for the trees. They are completely in favour of forcing us to learn Kavanagh and Othello, but they point blank refuse to even consider the benefits of the Irish language.

This isn't true. A number of posters who'd be in the 'anti-' camp, if we're dichotomising, have said that they see no need for English to be compulsory for the Leaving Cert. Attributing positions to certain posters that fly in the face of their stated views (and, for that matter, talking about pro-this or anti-that 'lobbies' as if we're not all a bunch of strangers who happen to share some overlapping views) is... well, the kind of thing cyclopath2001 does :eek:

Oasis_Dublin

Leto wrote: »

This isn't true. A number of posters who'd be in the 'anti-' camp, if we're dichotomising, have said that they see no need for English to be compulsory for the Leaving Cert. Attributing positions to certain posters that fly in the face of their stated views (and, for that matter, talking about pro-this or anti-that 'lobbies' as if we're not all a bunch of strangers who happen to share some overlapping views) is... well, the kind of thing cyclopath2001 does :eek:

I'm pretty certain you don't have to be best friends with someone in order to share a certain view with them. Some have, of course, but others have not. I've already stated that total choice, in the manner used in Britain, is a terrible idea.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

Your so close to a reasonable discussion cyclopath, Let me give you a nudge in the right direction, the next line starts with 'Because';)

Because, as you have often said yourself, it is wrong to force people to speak a language aginst their will.

deise go deo wrote: »

Please expand on this point, I would love to hear how you think the Irish language can be promoted differently than it is now that would have in a better result.

A better result begins with respecting the choices of children and their parents, and continues with not wasting money spending 14 years teaching a language to people who will only ever use the cupla focal.

femur61

Why do you suppose other countries are successful speaking a dialect and often English, or the language of that country. The reason is they are brought up speaking both at home. Compulsory irish in schools has not worked. An Irish teacher said it is a complete waste of money by the government trying to force kids who can hardly speak English learn a second language.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Because, as you have often said yourself, it is wrong to force people to speak a language aginst their will.

Indeed it is, but that dosent mean that Irish has to be removed as a core subject.

So tell me, why do you favor choice in school but not in later life?

A better result begins with respecting the choices of children and their parents, and continues with not wasting money spending 14 years teaching a language to people who will only ever use the cupla focal.

You shifted the goal posts, You said 'There are better ways to preserve and promote Irish than what is done now'

This s what I would like you to expand upon. How can a better result be achieved in the preservation and promotion of Irish?

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

So tell me, why do you favor choice in school but not in later life?

Iam quite happy for Irish speakers to speak Irish with each other. Unless you intend outlawing English, there will always be times when Irish speakers will have to speak English when speaking with English speakers.

deise go deo wrote: »

You shifted the goal posts, You said 'There are better ways to preserve and promote Irish than what is done now'

What Iave said is perfectly valid unless you believe that Irish should be promoted at any cost, human or financial.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Iam quite happy for Irish speakers to speak Irish with each other. Unless you intend outlawing English, there will always be times when Irish speakers will have to speak English when speaking with English speakers.

But you favor Irish speakers being forced to use English when dealing with the state. Do you not see the contradiction, hypocracy even, in being so strongly in favor of choice for English speakers in School, But favoring English being forced on Irish speakers outside of school?

What Iave said is perfectly valid unless you believe that Irish should be promoted at any cost, human or financial.

You said that there is a better way to preserve and promote Irish than what is being done now.

What is it. What can be done to preserve and promote Irish better than how it is being done now?


This guff about human and financial cost has nothing to do with what you said or the question I asked.
Please stop trying to deflect from my question.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

But you favor Irish speakers being forced to use English when dealing with the state. Do you not see the contradiction, hypocracy even, in being so strongly in favor of choice for English speakers in School, But favoring English being forced on Irish speakers outside of school?

Be sensible, you cannot force a language on people who already speak it. It's a minor inconvenience or irritation for Irish speakers to use English when communicating with their fellow citizens who happen to work in the public sector. It's something they have to accept when they go to an English speaking supermarket, Bank, Insurance company, cinema, car repair....etc.

deise go deo wrote: »

This guff about human and financial cost .

Irish at any cost, is your answer, then?

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Be sensible, you cannot force a language on people who already speak it. It's a minor inconvenience or irritation for Irish speakers to use English when communicating with their fellow citizens who happen to work in the public sector. It's something they have to accept when they go to an English speaking supermarket, Bank, Insurance company, cinema, car repair....etc.

These people choose to use Irish, you are in favor of choice in school, Why are you against it out side of school?

Irish at any cost, is your answer, then?

No, It is just you trying to deflect from the question I am asking you.

You claimed that there is a better way of preserving and promoting Irish.

There are better ways to preserve and promote Irish than what is done now

I asked how? So please stop trying to deflect from that question and answer it.

Godge

deise go deo wrote: »

No, It is just you trying to deflect from the question I am asking you.

You claimed that there is a better way of preserving and promoting Irish.



I asked how? So please stop trying to deflect from that question and answer it.

Godge wrote: »

This is the insecurity in the heart of the Irish language movement.

Deep down they believe that unless people are forced to learn the Irish language, speak the Irish language and have official documents published in the Irish language, they will lose interest and the language will die out.

The ideal scenario is that people would speak the Irish language at home in the formative years before school, learn a good bit of the language in the early years of primary school before European languages (as the closest family of languages) are introduced to share the time in fifth and sixth class. In this case, Irish is part of the furniture and is loved and accepted by all. By second level, Irish is only taught as an optional subject.

To get to that place, you need to remove the fear and the compulsion, to dilute the hatred that has arisen because of the compulsory nature and build an open friendly approach to the language. However, the childish fear of the unknown and terror of a big leap holds back the Irish language movement from adopting such a policy and the defensive mode of "what we have we hold" takes over and they cling to the repeatedly failed policy of compulsion. You can see it coming through time and again in this thread.

You got the answer to your question some pages ago but because it does not fit it was ignored. In fact, something similar was probably posted about 200 pages ago. Ah well, the cycle goes on.