Is Irish a dead language?

cyclopath2001

Cú Giobach wrote: »

You should try out something a lot of people do. Ignore thing you don't like, instead of going on and on ad infinitum about it

‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’

Bottle_of_Smoke

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Would these be virtual Irish-speakers?

They would but really who cares, you could probably argue we're virtual English speakers.

I am in broad agreement with you in that I resent my taxes paying for Gaelic teachers and classes but fo me it is as much to do with the failure of compulsary Gaelic(and all evidence suggests it will continue to fail) in getting peopel to speak it, as it is to do with simply resenting the funding of Gaelic classes.

cyclopath2001

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

They would but really who cares, you could probably argue we're virtual English speakers.

We're real English-speakers and part of an English-speaking culture. There's something phony about people switching to a language which is not their native language.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I am in broad agreement with you in that I resent my taxes paying for Gaelic teachers and classes but fo me it is as much to do with the failure of compulsary Gaelic(and all evidence suggests it will continue to fail) in getting peopel to speak it, as it is to do with simply resenting the funding of Gaelic classes.

I see nothing wrong with teaching Irish to people who wish to learn it, just as they might wish to learn French or German.

There's more waste involved in making services available in Irish to people who have perfect English and in subsidising cultural activities merely because they're conudcted in Irish.

Cú Giobach

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’

That would be apt if we were talking about genocide, as it is we are talking about a language, and one that by your own volition you have nothing to do with.

We're real English-speakers and part of an English-speaking culture. There's something phony about people switching to a language which is not their native language.

Only in your mind, not reality.

Bottle_of_Smoke

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

We're real English-speakers and part of an English-speaking culture. There's something phony about people switching to a language which is not their native language.

Though what if a so called virtual speaker of Irish raises their kids speaking Gaelic, is the kid a native speaker or a native virtual speaker? Hence it becomes pointless distinction

There's more waste involved in making services available in Irish to people who have perfect English and in subsidising cultural activities merely because they're conudcted in Irish.

Yeah to be honest that is ridiculous. Especially documents being printed in it for the sake of it. If someone wants an Irish version fine, but wtf is with printing every government document in Gaelic when most of the time no one is gonna read it

dubhthach

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Especially documents being printed in it for the sake of it. If someone wants an Irish version fine, but wtf is with printing every government document in Gaelic when most of the time no one is gonna read it

TBH most government documents shouldn't be printed in either English or Irish. This is why we have PDF format and the Internet. Printing another report from a Quango that no one will ever read in English is just as wasteful.

I would think most government reports would have alot wider readership if they were available online and for those who don't have easy access to Internet then an online copy could be made available in local library etc.

Regarding education I think in our current system it would probably be a good idea to remove compulsory Irish from leaving cert cycle. Of course this would be a mute point if the Universities still maintain it as a compulsory matriculation subject.

I think however we need to be able to provide education through Irish (Gaelscoil/Gaelcholáiste) for those who want it for their children. At the moment we have a ridiculous situation of the Dept of Education not recognising parental demand for Irish medium education (no new Gaelscoil/Gaelcoláiste recognised in last 2years).

I think from a planning point of view the Census could be used to plan for Irish medium education. At the moment the census asks about "Irish ability" and "usage". I think having an additional question asking would parents wish to have their children educated through the medium of Irish would be a fairly quick way of determining demand. As a result the Dept of Education would at least be able to plan the provision of schools etc. But given the general incompetence of Government in this country I wouldn't hold my breath for such forward thinking.

Wibbs

deise go deo wrote: »

On the Internet? What do you mean? They would be Native Irish speakers.
I am talking about people who leave Gaeilscoileanna fluent in Irish and go on to raise their children through the language, making their children Native speakers, understand?

Yes but I do see his point in one way. OK lets say I move to France and learn French and in 20 years time I'm gonna be pretty fluent. Great but the second I open my mouth a French person is gonna spot I'm not native French. So lets imagine I come back to Ireland and bring my kids up in French, are they French speakers? Ditto if I learn Irish to the same fluency to a native speaker I'm still going to sound "foreign" if you know what I mean. In my own country. Of course languages grow and change, but is the Irish taught today actually "Irish" or a standardised mish mash of dialects. The virtual language he mentioned. There's been somewhat of a disconnect along the way it seems.

The Gaeilscoil movement should foster the languages growth alright, but what kind of Irish will emerge from it? Especially if there are very few second level schools to continue it. I've mates with their kids in such schools and they speak English at home. Even the ones whose parents have some Irish tend to. Without secondary Gaeilscoils are we not in danger of creating a primary school level Irish in adults down the line without the nuances and sophistication of an "adult" Irish language? IMHO for it to grow and be useful it has to be a sophisticated language as it once was(very). The language of education and scholarship.

dubhthach

Wibbs wrote: »

I learn Irish to the same fluency to a native speaker I'm still going to sound "foreign" if you know what I mean. In my own country. Of course languages grow and change, but is the Irish taught today actually "Irish" or a standardised mish mash of dialects. The virtual language he mentioned. There's been somewhat of a disconnect along the way it seems.

One could argue the same for any "Standard language" for example "Standard German" doesn't exactly match with the default home language of most Germans. The same of course applies to English in England. The general "Standard" that was always pushed is called "Received Pronunciation" (BBC english of old!) because it's the pronunciation that you received in education (well in "Public school").

With regards to Irish and a "standard language" one has to remember Irish did have a standard "Register" for several hundred years. this was the language of the political/literate elite. Of course with the destruction of this elite by the end of the 17th century the individual dialects came to the forefront. In general though there is very little in way of difference between them, generally accent/vocabulary. From a point of view of English I would compare it to difference in someone from Cork talking to someone from Newcastle (England), same language just each locality has its own local "flavour"

I do think one of major threats we see in Irish at the moment is the usage of English Phonology when speaking Irish (eg. english vowel sounds aren't exactly equivalent to irish ones etc.). Part of the issue here no doubt has to do with standard of "Irish language teacher" training. It doesn't help also that we no longer teach the alphabet in Irish. For example TG4 shouldn't really be pronunced as "Tee-Jee Ceithre" more as "Tay-Gey Ceithre". After all one of first things you learn when learning German is the alphabet.

cyclopath2001

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Though what if a so called virtual speaker of Irish raises their kids speaking Gaelic, is the kid a native speaker or a native virtual speaker? Hence it becomes pointless distinction

'Virtual' Irish speakers are those who don't use Irish for the most part of their daily lives. But whose numbers are used to inflate numbers used by the Iriish langauge lobby to support demands for state money.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

If someone wants an Irish version fine, but wtf is with printing every government document in Gaelic when most of the time no one is gonna read it

Printing is the least of the costs. Translating and verifying updates costs quite a bit, as does maintaining bilingual staff.

deise go deo

Wibbs wrote: »

Yes but I do see his point in one way. OK lets say I move to France and learn French and in 20 years time I'm gonna be pretty fluent. Great but the second I open my mouth a French person is gonna spot I'm not native French. So lets imagine I come back to Ireland and bring my kids up in French, are they French speakers? Ditto if I learn Irish to the same fluency to a native speaker I'm still going to sound "foreign" if you know what I mean. In my own country. Of course languages grow and change, but is the Irish taught today actually "Irish" or a standardised mish mash of dialects. The virtual language he mentioned. There's been somewhat of a disconnect along the way it seems.

The Gaeilscoil movement should foster the languages growth alright, but what kind of Irish will emerge from it? Especially if there are very few second level schools to continue it. I've mates with their kids in such schools and they speak English at home. Even the ones whose parents have some Irish tend to. Without secondary Gaeilscoils are we not in danger of creating a primary school level Irish in adults down the line without the nuances and sophistication of an "adult" Irish language? IMHO for it to grow and be useful it has to be a sophisticated language as it once was(very). The language of education and scholarship.

The newer Irish outside the gaelthachts as ''foreign'' to Gaelthacht Irish? Its not much of a problem really. Irish speakers outside the Gaelthacht will have their own local varitions of Irish just as there is local varitions of English. There is already a standard version of Irish. Who is to say the Irish found in galway is better than that found in Donegall, The same applies with speakers outside the gaelthacht.

dubhthach

Do we have any exact breakdown prices on cost of translation? I see there is a BBC article from November 2009 that states that over a 6year period that €6 million was spent on translation (don't know if this includes printing cost). Another article I've seen (Irish Independent) puts part of high cost down to the fact that a large proportion of the translating was outsourced to external companies. As we all know contractors always charge a premium!

I would assume if all translation was done inhouse by one centralised organisation that cost would be 10-20% cheaper at least?

Just as a comparison the base TD salary (excluding expenses/minister pay) of €100k for 166 TD's works out as a bill of €99.6 million over 6 years!

catbear

Gotta keep this alive or it will go the way of the Irish language!

ShamoBuc

catbear wrote: »

Gotta keep this alive or it will go the way of the Irish language!

Well, over 2500 posts - This thread is alive and kicking - just like the Irish Language;)

MysticalRain

Language plans said to be the 'most significant in 90 years'
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1119/1224283710863.html

dubhthach

MysticalRain wrote: »

Language plans said to be the 'most significant in 90 years'
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1119/1224283710863.html

No doubt it's more of the same rubbish (rámeis) that the politicians have been waffling on about for years. The comment about irregular verbs is abit un-informed as there are only 11 in Irish (over 370 irregular verbs in English!)

Personally though I do think we need some orthography review of Irish. The fact that there are only 17 letters reflects the fact that Irish became a written language in the 6th century a time before such letters a V or W existed in Latin alphabet.
At the moment we only use one diacritic (the fada) I would think adding a couple new diacritics would make writing/reading system easier for beginners. Tbh you wouldn't have to do anything drastic.

For example: To mark unstressed vowels you could use the breve (romanian uses breve: ă for this)

In an Irish context you'd have: ă, ŏ, ŭ, ĭ, ĕ
Eg.(examples taken from Wiki)

mála /ˈmˠaːl̪ˠə/ -> málă
míle /ˈmʲiːlʲə/ -> mílĕ
faoistin /ˈfˠiːʃtʲənʲ/ -> faoistĭn
cothrom /ˈkɔɾˠəmˠ/ -> cothrŏm
agus /ˈaɡəs/ -> agŭs

Personally I'd also bring back the punc eg.
bh -> ḃ
ch -> ċ
dh -> ḋ
fh -> ḟ
gh -> ġ
mh -> ṁ
ph -> ṗ
sh -> ṡ
th -> ṫ

It removes uncertainty among people as to whether they need to pronounce the two letters separately as you'd teach it as one letter. For example alot of people see "Sh" and think it's a shuh sound like in english. Of course what sh (ṡ) really means is that s sound is deleted + replaced by a h. Whereas fh (ḟ) means complete deletion of f-sound.

[Pipe-dream]
If you wanted to go abit more extreme you could introduce a diacritic to represent slenderness of a consonant (like in russian). At the moment this is marked by vowels. As a result you get vowel diagraphs/trigraphs which as there to maintain consonant slenderness/broadness but where only one vowel is actually pronounced. (eg. aoi -> pronunced as í)

Eg. Şán instead of Seán anybody? or Tíşăch/Tíşăċ instead of Taoiseach. (broad T -> t, slender T -> ţ)
[/Pipe-dream]

Krusader

dubhthach wrote: »

No doubt it's more of the same rubbish (rámeis) that the politicians have been waffling on about for years. The comment about irregular verbs is abit un-informed as there are only 11 in Irish (over 370 irregular verbs in English!)

Rinne mé gáire

deise go deo

No its not a dead language, but mere facts wont stop people claiming that it is.:rolleyes:

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

No its not a dead language, but mere facts wont stop people claiming that it is.:rolleyes:

True, as long as there's laws to force people to speak it and money to pay others to enforce it...Irish will always be alive.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

True, as long as there's laws to force people to speak it and money to pay others to enforce it...Irish will always be alive.

Oh give it up cyclopath, The evidence clearly shows that the majority of People are in favor of the Irish language.

Carlow

''Laws to force people to speak it'':rolleyes:

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

'Laws to force people to speak it''

1: The Official Languages Act. 2: Compulsory lessons in Irish for all school children.

deise go deo wrote: »

Oh give it up cyclopath, The evidence clearly shows that the majority of People are in favor of the Irish language.

That's what you want is it not? - To shout down the truth.

While many, many people have goodwill towards Irish, the evidence is that the majority of the people do not speak Irish in their in their daily lives and make no effort at all, ever, to learn it, except when compelled to do so. Worse, still, the use of the language is declining in the ethnic native-speaker communities. Numbers are only being bolstered by non-native speaking, part-timers speaking 'official Irish'.

A living language is spoken as the common tongue as an integral part of the daily life of a community.

MysticalRain

deise go deo wrote: »

Oh give it up cyclopath, The evidence clearly shows that the majority of People are in favor of the Irish language.

Carlow

''Laws to force people to speak it'':rolleyes:

That doesn't mean most Irish people support the compulsory teaching of Irish in schools.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

1: The Official Languages Act. 2: Compulsory lessons in Irish for all school children.

That's what you want is it not? - To shout down the truth.

The official languages act dosent force anyone to speak Irish, It gives people the right to use Irish with the state should they chose to. This is the truth.
Irish being compulsory is not a law.

While many, many people have goodwill towards Irish, the evidence is that the majority of the people do not speak Irish in their in their daily lives and make no effort at all, ever, to learn it, except when compelled to do so.

I dont deny that Most people dont speak Irish, but your suggestion that this means that they reject Irish is ridiculous,
In areas where there is a group taking action to promote the language, they have success, Carlow for example, In the 70's its people had little interest in Irish. Since then however, A group called Glór Chearleach started promoting the language, at first they mostly came accross opinions like 'What good is Irish, Why have it at all' They persevered though, they set up a festival called Éigse Chearleach, They set up Gaelscoileanna and Gaelcolaiste and now Irish is relativly strong in Carlow, More and more people are able to use It and almost Everyone has some Irish and are positive twords it.

The same has happened is several areas, Irish is growing and will continue to grow.

Worse, still, the use of the language is declining in the ethnic native-speaker communities. Numbers are only being bolstered by non-native speaking, part-timers speaking 'official Irish'.

Ethnic? Thats a very interesting term to use, Do you think Irish speakers are of a different ethnicity to the rest of the Country? Not all Gaelthachts are declining, Personally I think the Fior-Gaelthachts have stabilized, thats why the boundaries need to be redrawn, so the Real Gaelthachts can be worked with and the Brac-Gaelthachts can be encourage to work on regaining Gaelthacht status.

A living language is spoken as the common tongue as an integral part of the daily life of a community.

I know, I have done some research on the subject, and in no way is Irish a dead language, Its not even a moribund language(Dying) there are almost 20 languages in Europe that are worse off than Irish, By the common factors that are used to judge how healthy a language is, Irish is actually in quite a good position, It is being transmitted to the next generation, there is good political support for it, the vast majority are positive twords it, it is an economically attractive option. The factors that influence weather a language will be revived or not are going well for Irish.

That doesn't mean most Irish people support the compulsory teaching of Irish in schools.

I know, that isent what this thread is about.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

The official languages act dosent force anyone to speak Irish, It gives people the right to use Irish with the state should they chose to. This is the truth.

The Irish Language Commissioner can designate any public service post as Irish-speaking, if the holder of that post does not speak Irish or does not learn to speak it, he loses that post.

deise go deo wrote: »

Irish being compulsory is not a law.

Then, how is it compulsory in schools?

deise go deo wrote: »

I dont deny that Most people dont speak Irish, but your suggestion that this means that they reject Irish is ridiculous,

Why is it laughable? Let's say they don't reject Irish - let's say they choose to make absolutely no effort at all, whatsover to learn it, at any time in their life, and put it at the very bottom of their personal priorities.

deise go deo wrote: »

In areas where there is a group taking action to promote the language, they have success,

So, Irish is now the common language in Carlow, spoken as an integral part of daily life there? How many people?

deise go deo wrote: »

The same has happened is several areas, Irish is growing and will continue to grow.

Pure rhetoric.

deise go deo wrote: »

Ethnic? Thats a very interesting term to use, Do you think Irish speakers are of a different ethnicity to the rest of the Country?

I was referring to ethnic native speakers. The new Irish speakers are, of course, originally ethnic English speakers who have for their own reasons decided to speak a different language to their friends, neighbors and relatives.

deise go deo wrote: »

it is an economically attractive option.

Explain how Irish increases our GDP and how this exceeds the cost of its promotion?

deise go deo wrote: »

The factors that influence weather

What effect does Irish-speaking have on the weather? This is a new claim.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

And the Irish Language Commissioner can decide that any job requires Irish if an Irish-speaker complains about it.

Indeed, but then Irish speakers have the right to state services through Irish, so in that context it makes sense.

It's still an unavoidable compulsion imposed by the state.

Moving the goalpost are we?

It's a very reasonable explanation.

Ah, yes, that would be from the survey that was organised by the Irish Language Lobby. The obvious evidence is that the 'support' does not include taking any action at all to speak Irish.

Not at all reasonable given that every survey taken on the matter agrees that the vast majority are clearly in support of Irish.

One survey can throw up inaccurate anomalous results, but there is more than just one. There have been several surveys, and they all agree with each other,
But I suppose we are supposed to believe that is all just a big conspiracy cooked up by the Irish language Movement because you say so.

I stated native speakers and if you look up any definition of ethnicity, you'll find that the common language of a group is a factor in ethnicity.

I know it is, But that is a Factor not the only criteria,:rolleyes:
What has made the Population of the Gaelthacht's and the rest of the nation diverge ethnically in the 180 or so years since English overtook Irish as the main spoken language of Ireland?

Your suggestion that the people of the Gaelthacht are an ethnic group distinct from the rest of Ireland would be offensive if it wasent so ridiculous.

You mean paying people to speak Irish. it's economically beneficial for them and means more taxes and less services for the rest of us. Yet again, you lose sight of the big picture & the economic well being of the country. Your patriotism seems limited to Irish-speaking and little else.

Dear oh dear, I am not advocating that 'people be paid to speak Irish':rolleyes:
I am saying that speaking Irish is economically attractive, an important factor in the revival of a language. You can dodge and mud sling all you want, it dosent change the fact that Irish is growing.

Irish language enthusiasts want the Language to grow, and have successfully put in place the necessary conditions for this to happen, and it is happening, in many areas of Ireland Irish is more widely spoken than it was in previous years, The population is very positive towards the language today, the gaelscoil movement is growing steadily, there will be native and fluent speakers of Irish in many areas that there haven't been for many years.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

Indeed, but then Irish speakers have the right to state services through Irish, so in that context it makes sense.

Since we all speak English and we're rather strapped for cash, it would be sensible and considerate for Irish-speakers not to impose such an expensive demand on the state and their fellow citizens.

But, thank you for finally agreeing that we do have a law that can force an otherwise competent person to speak Irish or risk losing their position.

deise go deo wrote: »

Moving the goalpost are we?

You're hiding behind a nuance. It's still state-imposed. Without it, the inflated numbers of 'Irish speakers' would fall hugely.

deise go deo wrote: »

Not at all reasonable given that every survey taken on the matter agrees that the vast majority are clearly in support of Irish.

It's perfectly reasonable to 'support' Irish and not speak it. You're attributing way too much meaning to the word 'support. Did the surveys ask if people were prepared to learn the language immediately or pay money to support it?

deise go deo wrote: »

What has made the Population of the Gaelthacht's and the rest of the nation diverge ethnically in the 180 or so years since English overtook Irish as the main spoken language of Ireland?

Thank you for asking - the genuine economic benefits of speaking English.

deise go deo wrote: »

Your suggestion that the people of the Gaelthacht are an ethnic group distinct from the rest of Ireland would be offensive if it wasent so ridiculous.

Well when it comes to facing economic logic and speaking our common language (English) Irish-speakers do seem to be from another planet.

deise go deo wrote: »

I am saying that speaking Irish is economically attractive, an important factor in the revival of a language.

Only because of taxpayer's money being used to pay for those artificial jobs. Those jobs are sinecures. They're not economically viable and and are just sinking us deeper in debt.

A true measure of the language's vitality would be if the Irish langauge would pay its own way and not be reliant for its existance on state funding.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Since we all speak English and we're rather strapped for cash, it would be sensible and considerate for Irish-speakers not to impose such an expensive demand on the state and their fellow citizens.

Its not an expensive demand, its a cheap demand, A very cheap demand really, And anyway its their right to have services provided in their native language, but I suppose you dont care about their rights do you?

But, thank you for finally agreeing that we do have a law that can force an otherwise competent person to speak Irish or risk losing their position.

Its not the law that forces people to speak Irish, its the demand for services in Irish, Same reason there are services provided in English, Demand.

You're hiding behind a nuance. It's still state-imposed. Without it, the inflated numbers of 'Irish speakers' would fall hugely.

Ya, like the nuance of CnaG wanting Irish to be 'The' common language rather than 'A' common language.

It's perfectly reasonable to 'support' Irish and not speak it. You're attributing way too much meaning to the word 'support. Did the surveys ask if people were prepared to learn the language immediately or pay money to support it?

They do pay money to support it, its called tax, yet they still support the language time and again, any rational thinking person will realize that there is a cost involved to supporting Irish Yet the fact is they still support the language. No room for misinterpretation there, They support Irish,

Thank you for asking - the genuine economic benefits of speaking English.

What exactly has that to do with Ethnic groupings? DO you think that Ethnic ties can change in the space of a few generations?

Well when it comes to facing economic logic and speaking our common language (English) Irish-speakers do seem to be from another planet.

No, Irish speakers can Speak English, And get the economic benefit of speaking English(Its called Bi-Lingualism)

Only because of taxpayer's money being used to pay for those artificial jobs. Those jobs are sinecures. They're not economically viable and and are just sinking us deeper in debt.

A true measure of the language's vitality would be if the Irish langauge would pay its own way and not be reliant for its existance on state funding.

You clearly have no understanding of how languages are revived, Its funny really.:rolleyes:

Irish is not reliant on the state for its existence, Almost the entire Irish language movement is in the voluntary Sector, This wont disappear without state support, it will just be frustrated by it.
Not that state support can be entirely removed without being completely discriminatory.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

Its not an expensive demand, its a cheap demand, A very cheap demand really,

How much exactly does it cost?

deise go deo wrote: »

Its not the law that forces people to speak Irish, its the demand for services in Irish, Same reason there are services provided in English, Demand.

Demand yes, but not need. If we look at the commercial sector, 'demand for Irish' is not obvious. Name a daily Irish-language newspaper? Name a private Irish language TV station?

deise go deo wrote: »

Ya, like the nuance of CnaG wanting Irish to be 'The' common language rather than 'A' common language.

There is a huge meaning in CnaG's determination to making Irish The Common Language of Ireland. It's far more than nuance. You may wish to play this concept down, so as to make Irish-learning appear to be no more than a hobby, but it is highly significant.

deise go deo wrote: »

They do pay money to support it, its called tax,

Did the survey inform those surveyed as to just how much of their money was being given to Irish-language causes? Were they asked if how they ranked the importance of 'support' for Irish compared to support for the sick, the unemployed, the disadvantaged? The language-lobby surveys are drafted to get the language movement the answers that support its agenda.

deise go deo wrote: »

What exactly has that to do with Ethnic groupings? DO you think that Ethnic ties can change in the space of a few generations?

Yes, especially if people align their social activities along language boundaries.

deise go deo wrote: »

You clearly have no understanding of how languages are revived, Its funny really.:rolleyes:

I have a clear understanding of how money is siphoned from the Irish taxpayer.

deise go deo wrote: »

Irish is not reliant on the state for its existence, Almost the entire Irish language movement is in the voluntary Sector, This wont disappear without state support, it will just be frustrated by it.

Good, we all need to save money. Let's reduce state funding. It will only cause frustration.

deise go deo wrote: »

Not that state support can be entirely removed without being completely discriminatory.

True, we must make provision for any native Irish speakers who cannot speak English.

Thomas828

The Irish language has become more popular in the North. Radio Ulster has its own programme, Blas, and there's a local radio station in west Belfast, Failte FM, which broadcasts in Irish. And there's An Culturlann in the lower Falls Road (It used to be the Broadway Presbyterian Church) that comprises an Irish language bookshop, a cafe and an Irish cultural centre.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

How much exactly does it cost?

I am not sure of the present figure, but in an article on the reform website, they broke down the costs of Irish language funding the figure for the OLA they gave was 150m, but they admitted that this was likely exaggerated since it was based on a newspaper claim and reports were that it wasn't costing that much in practice. These were 2006 figures.

Demand yes, but not need. If we look at the commercial sector, 'demand for Irish' is not obvious. Name a daily Irish-language newspaper? Name a private Irish language TV station?

Again this just shows that you no very little about language revival, services need to be supported by the state until they grow to an extent that they can survive in the world of private business.

There is a huge meaning in CnaG's determination to making Irish The Common Language of Ireland. It's far more than nuance. You may wish to play this concept down, so as to make Irish-learning appear to be no more than a hobby, but it is highly significant.

Not really, even if they did mean that they wanted Irish to actually replace English, We would have to go through Bi-Lingualism to get there, now If people are bi-lingual can you explain to me why they would want to become monolingual when there are proven benefits to bilingulaism?
So whats the problem?

Did the survey inform those surveyed as to just how much of their money was being given to Irish-language causes? Were they asked if how they ranked the importance of 'support' for Irish compared to support for the sick, the unemployed, the disadvantaged? The language-lobby surveys are drafted to get the language movement the answers that support its agenda.

Your just making unfounded claims, you have provided no evidence for this, every piece of evidence from every source contradicts you, yet you continue with this unreasonable line of burying your head in the sand and mud slinging.:rolleyes:

Yes, especially if people align their social activities along language boundaries.

Bizare, Have you anything to show that this is an accurate interpretation?
Align along language boundaries? Or would it be that they happen to be in an Irish speaking community? Would it not be odd if they went out of their way to speak English?
None of this has any bearing on their Ethnic Grouping, You are the only person I have ever come across that thinks Irish people living in the Gaelthacht are a different Group.

Ethnic groupings are far more broadly based than one factor, it has to do with perceptions of self among communities, family ties, culture and historical associations.
That you think Irish people liveing outside the Gaelthacht have changed their ethnicity in 180 years simply because of a language shift is laughable really.

I have a clear understanding of how money is siphoned from the Irish taxpayer.

What has NAMA got to do with this?

If you think providing services to citizens of the state equates to siphoning off money from the tax payer then I think you have a very odd perspective on things, What I find most incredible however are your dubble standards, Take a comparable situation, would you say the Luas, Something relatively few tax payers use day to day would equate to siphoning off money from the tax payer?

Good, we all need to save money. Let's reduce state funding. It will only cause frustration.

Why should we target Irish language funding disproportionately to all other services? Every party supports the Irish language, the vast majority of the population also support Irish, so where is the mandate for this?
There is none, if you have a problem with Irish being promoted then do something about it, start a party to campaign against it, start a campaign to reduce funding for it, start a petition to show support for reducing funding for it, you could even just set up a facebook page as a start, something.
But no, thats where your arguments stop, deep down you and other Gaeilgephobes know that there is no widespread support for your objections to Irish.

True, we must make provision for any native Irish speakers who cannot speak English.

I was actually referring to Gaelscoileanna and Gaelcholaiste specifically.

deise go deo

Thomas828 wrote: »

The Irish language has become more popular in the North. Radio Ulster has its own programme, Blas, and there's a local radio station in west Belfast, Failte FM, which broadcasts in Irish. And there's An Culturlann in the lower Falls Road (It used to be the Broadway Presbyterian Church) that comprises an Irish language bookshop, a cafe and an Irish cultural centre.

It certainly has, there is also a Cultúrlann in Derry city on Great James street, As well as a growing Gaelscoil movement.

For those that think Irish will die without Government Support, just look north, Irish gets only minimal (and begrudging even at that) support from the Government up there, yet it is still growing.