Is Irish a dead language?

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's in response to briany's suggestion that pupils should converse in the irish language with teachers in school.

I don't see any problem with that. I would like to see the Irish language encouraged in school, and for students encouraged (and not forced) to speak it. I think that at least one subject should be taught through Irish (preferably history). Without immersion, we're not going to progress anywhere with the language. Why waste time, when we can use it productively.

Iwasfrozen

Leto wrote: »

I don't really see that as a problem, to be honest. If the intention is for the children to be able to communicate in a language and to appreciate it as a potential means of interaction (which is, really, the point), it seems reasonable that it be used now and then throughout the school day, appropriate to the pupils' proficiency. They can learn history through Irish just as easily as through English, as long as they can follow what the teacher is saying.

But again we get back to parents excercising their consitutional right to demand their children learn other subjects only through the medium of english. One of the official languages of the country.

Iwasfrozen

dlofnep wrote: »

I don't see any problem with that. I would like to see the Irish language encouraged in school, and for students encouraged (and not forced) to speak it. I think that at least one subject should be taught through Irish (preferably history). Without immersion, we're not going to progress anywhere with the language. Why waste time, when we can use it productively.

Because then you are forcing pupils to learn history through irish. So in effect you are pushing the language on young children.

Wolfe Tone

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

But again we get back to parents excercising their consitutional right to demand their children learn other subjects only through the medium of english. One of the official languages of the country.

You could do the opposite there and demand it through Irish?

Focalbhach

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

But again we get back to parents excercising their consitutional right to demand their children learn other subjects only through the medium of english. One of the official languages of the country.

a) Is it a constitional right for a parent to demand that their child be taught through a particular official language, disregarding the desires of other parents and the intended practice of school management and the child's teacher?

b) Again - why is it a bad thing to intersperse Irish with English? To use your phrase, why force English on the child?

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Because then you are forcing pupils to learn history through irish. So in effect you are pushing the language on young children.

Opposed to forcing them to learn history through English?

Look - all nonsense aside, the Irish language is our national language and unless we take it seriously and creating language immersion environments, children just won't learn it.

Iwasfrozen

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

You could do the opposite there and demand it through Irish?

Which is already provided through gealscoil.

Iwasfrozen

Leto wrote: »

a) Is it a constitional right for a parent to demand that their child be taught through a particular official language, disregarding the desires of other parents and the intended practice of school management and the child's teacher?

Good question. I could see it going to the high court.

Leto wrote: »

b) Again - why is it a bad thing to intersperse Irish with English? To use your phrase, why force English on the child?

When did I say that?

dlofnep wrote:

Look - all nonsense aside, the Irish language is our national language and unless we take it seriously and creating language immersion environments, children just won't learn it.

You're right but then I don't believe that young children who are not capable of making up their minds should be forced to learn the language. That should be a decision left for them when they are older. I don't believe that precious resources should be spent on it.

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Which is already provided through gealscoil.

No it isn't. The demand for Gaelscoileanna is so high, that my local Gaelscoil has a 3-4 year waiting list before children can get in.

Not all students have access to Gaelscoileanna and even if they do, everyone should be afforded the opportunity to become fluent in Irish, instead of wasting hours every week memorising poetry and other irrelevant bollocks.

Wolfe Tone

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Which is already provided through gealscoil.

But what if there is none in your area?

EDIT: dlofnep said it better.

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You're right but then I don't believe that young children who are not capable of making up their minds should be forced to learn the language. That should be a decision left for them when they are older.

Left for them when they are older, when school is over and they don't actually have the opportunity to learn it? Are you going to afford them the same privilege to drop English?

Focalbhach

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

When did I say that?

If you object to the teaching of any subject, other than Irish, through Irish, on the sole grounds that that subject is not Irish, then you are forcing English on the child.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You're right but then I don't believe that young children who are not capable of making up their minds should be forced to learn the language. That should be a decision left for them when they are older.

Like the decision to let them learn maths when they're older? Or science? Or English? Or geography? Or nature? Or how to tie their shoe-laces? I don't understand why Irish is being singled out here.

briany

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's there as a subject. Kind of hard to argue with speaking irish during the time allotted to irish as a subject. However the problems will begin to arise if irish is used in any other subject, such as history or geography.

I agree that the last thing we want is to have Irish not only be an unpleasant subject to learn in it's own right but an impedement to learning others that are arguably more important.

But I remember as many others here will going through the whole "An bhfuil cead agam...." routine for going asking permission to use the toilet during class time which was a bit silly if you ask me. Does anyone know why this was ever picked up on? It seems like a half hearted attempt at what I was getting at before but it's almost meaningless by itself. But who remembers "suí sios" or "go raibh maith agat"? Phrases that many people in Ireland still use in their adult lives as part of the old cúpla focal but we learned them young even if we weren't sure what they were about, remember them now and have a pretty direct relationship with them i.e. there's no conscious translation to English everytime we say them because when the teacher said "Suí sios" we learned pretty quick to sit down so associated a word/phrase with an action.

So I'm suggesting we expand upon that when kids are in junior/senior infants just dropping in general vocabulary during the school day not necessarily even teaching Irish as a subject in those first two years but by the time they enter first class they have a whole catalogue of phrases and words that are relevant to them which they can use naturally and then move into the written side in parallel with the oral side and go from there.

Iwasfrozen

dlofnep wrote: »

No it isn't. The demand for Gaelscoileanna is so high, that my local Gaelscoil has a 3-4 year waiting list before children can get in.

Well then you need another gealscoil in your area. That doesn't mean that every school in the country should become a gealscoil. Let demand measure the amount of gaelscoils we need rather then the state.

dlofnep wrote: »

Not all students have access to Gaelscoileanna and even if they do, everyone should be afforded the opportunity to become fluent in Irish, instead of wasting hours every week memorising poetry and other irrelevant bollocks.

And what of those who don't want to learn it? English is afforded the same privileged position as irish in the constitution so if the argument can be made that every child has the right to learn non-language subjects through irish then they also have the right to learn non-language subjects through english.

Gealscoils already provide the former. State run schools provide the latter.

Iwasfrozen

dlofnep wrote: »

Left for them when they are older, when school is over and they don't actually have the opportunity to learn it? Are you going to afford them the same privilege to drop English?

Not true. Many people have learnt irish in their later life rather then in school. So it is certainly do-able.

Leto wrote:

If you object to the teaching of any subject, other than Irish, through Irish, on the sole grounds that that subject is not Irish, then you are forcing English on the child.

English is the de facto language of the country. 99.99% of four-five year olds starting school already speak it. As do their parents and the characters they watch on television. Schools are certainly not forcing english on children.

Leto wrote:

Like the decision to let them learn maths when they're older? Or science? Or English? Or geography? Or nature? Or how to tie their shoe-laces? I don't understand why Irish is being singled out here.

Because it isn't practical. Unlike everything else you mentioned. Although I never learned science in primary school. That must be a new thing.

Focalbhach

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Well then you need another gealscoil in your area. That doesn't mean that every school in the country should become a gealscoil. Let demand measure the amount of gaelscoils we need rather then the state.


And what of those who don't want to learn it? English is afforded the same privileged position as irish in the constitution so if the argument can be made that every child has the right to learn non-language subjects through irish then they also have the right to learn non-language subjects through english.

Gealscoils already provide the former. State run schools provide the latter.

That's a false dichotomy, and I don't understand the motivation behind it. It doesn't have to be one language or the other, and that is not what's been suggested. Both languages can be used, entirely naturally, when appropriate throughout the day. There is no educational downside to the child, and quite a considerable upside.

Wolfe Tone

So, Iwasfrozen, should I have the right to demand that everything be thought through Irish in my local primary school? Due to the fact that there is no Gaelscoil? It is after all the states first language.

Iwasfrozen

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

So, Iwasfrozen, should I have the right to demand that everything be thought through Irish in my local primary school? Due to the fact that there is no Gaelscoil? It is after all the states first language.

As i've said, demand should measure the amount of gaelscoils in the country. As opposed to the state.

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Not true. Many people have learnt irish in their later life rather then in school. So it is certainly do-able.

Ridiculous - Why should anybody be placed in a position to learn the national language outside school? I'm full aware that it's do-able, I learned Irish myself outside of school. But I would have much preferred to actually learn it in school, where I didn't have a million and one commitments - such as work and college.

Focalbhach

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Not true. Many people have learnt irish in their later life rather then in school. So it is certainly do-able.

Many people have learnt more or less anything you care to name in later life, after school. That's not an argument for anything, pro- or anti-Irish.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

English is the de facto language of the country. 99.99% of four-five year olds starting school already speak it. As do their parents and the characters they watch on television. Schools are certainly not forcing english on children.

If pupils have the ability to learn (parts of) other subjects through Irish but you insist that they must be taught solely through English for non-educational reasons, that's forcing English.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Because it isn't practical. Unlike everything else you mentioned.

I don't think that stands up - an argument could be made over the practicality of lots of subjects for 5-year-olds. Regardless, it's much more practical to learn a language at a young age.

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

As i've said, demand should measure the amount of gaelscoils in the country. As opposed to the state.

So you'd be in favour of drastically increasing funding for Gaelscoileanna?

Iwasfrozen

dlofnep wrote: »

Ridiculous - Why should anybody be placed in a position to learn the national language outside school? I'm full aware that it's do-able, I learned Irish myself outside of school. But I would have much preferred to actually learn it in school, where I didn't have a million and one commitments - such as work and college.

You mean one of the national languages. And yes, I don't believe that the state will be able to motivate young children into learning a language their parents don't speak.

They simply won't be motivated untill they are older and able to make their own mind up on the language.

Leto wrote:

If pupils have the ability to learn (parts of) other subjects through Irish but you insist that they must be taught solely through English for non-educational reasons, that's forcing English.

If the children can already speak english then I doubt anyone can make the case that english is being forced.

Leto wrote:

I don't think that stands up - an argument could be made over the practicality of lots of subjects for 5-year-olds. Regardless, it's much more practical to learn a language at a young age.

You're right. It is more pactical to learn a language at a young age. So why not have them learn german or french?

Iwasfrozen

dlofnep wrote: »

So you'd be in favour of drastically increasing funding for Gaelscoileanna?

I'd be in favour of increasing financial support in order to meet public demand. Of course that also will mean decreasing funding on existing primary schools as they loose students.

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You mean one of the national languages. And yes, I don't believe that the state will be able to motivate young children into learning a language their parents don't speak.

Strange, my parents don't speak Irish - and I'm motivated and actively wanted to be able to speak Irish as a child, but never had the opportunity to learn the language properly.

Focalbhach

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

They simply won't be motivated untill they are older and able to make their own mind up on the language.

That's an awfully strong conclusion to draw from zero evidence. I'd posit that denying them the chance to learn properly at an early age, as you suggest, will give you a nice self-fulfilling prophecy. I'm motivated to learn the language; I still wish I'd been taught properly when I was younger.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

If the children can already speak english then I doubt anyone can make the case that english is being forced.

If the children can already speak English why are you so opposed to them also learning Irish? I'll reiterate: it's not either/or.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You're right. It is more pactical to learn a language at a young age. So why not have them learn german or french?

I have no objection to learning a third language at primary level.

Iwasfrozen

dlofnep wrote: »

Strange, my parents don't speak Irish - and I'm motivated and actively wanted to be able to speak Irish as a child, but never had the opportunity to learn the language properly.

That doesn't mean every other subject should be taught through irish.

Focalbhach

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

That doesn't mean every other subject should be taught through irish.

Who said they should be?

Iwasfrozen

Leto wrote: »

Who said they should be?

Ok then other subjects.

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

That doesn't mean every other subject should be taught through irish.

I don't believe I suggested that. I suggested that one additional subject be taught through Irish (I cited History as an example). I believe this is more than fair, considering that every other subject is taught through the medium of English.

Drakmord

I myself have no use for the language, I don't use it or hear it in everyday life.
I speak German and Japanese much better than Irish. I wish the time learning Irish was diverted into a useful language!

If Irish is as vibrant as previous posters have suggested then why does it require such state aid?