The Status Of Irish.

deise go deo

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

I'll conceed that the advantages listed all apply to Irish, but would you not agree that it would also apply to French or Spainish as well? In which case, given there is a far greater majority of the later two languages on a global scale, does it now make far more long term sense to use this fact to encourage the teaching of those foreign languages rather than Irish?

I'm of the opinion here that a second language should be compulsory, given the advantages listed via your own link. And while I think Irish is better than nothing, I cannot see the benifit of having it over a more global language other than a nostalgic desire to hold on to something which doesn't have practical implications on the largest global scale.

Indeed I would concede that the Advantages of bi-Lingualism apply Equally to all languages and to Irish no less and no more than any other,

This dose then raise the Question Why Irish?



Irish has a long connection with Ireland and the Irish people, and is in my opinion an important part of Irelands identity, Irish is needed to understand fully the store of literature associated with Irelands past.(As well as present and future)

When considering what language should be compulsory in schools it is important to consider what language is most likely to be useful to students after School, English is compulsory for this reason, Though is in need of reform to be relevant to peoples lives in my opinion, After this the fact is that There are more Jobs available in Irish and opportunities to use Irish in Ireland than any other second language.


In terms of promoting Bi-Lingualism in general, Irish is the language that can be most successfully implemented as the structures and supports are already in place for it to be learned by the entire student population, and widely enough to make Ireland its self a bi-lingual nation over time(if implemented correctly) rather than a monolingual nation with partially bi-lingual individuals in different languages. This is benifical as it would allow people to use their second language actively throughout their lives allowing them to retain their second language rather than the slow loss of their second language due to lack of use that would be the case otherwise.


It is true that for economic reasons, as well as for broadening the students horizons and understanding of other cultures, it is important that Irish children learn Foreign languages, But I don't see learning Irish as a barrier to this, I would advocate that a system of Mother tongue plus two be implemented as proposed in this
ie, that English, Irish and a foreign language be compulsory in the education system. With class time also being given to teach students how to learn languages so they will be better able to learn languages after they leave school.

marienbad

But Deise go deo

Why compulsion ?? you are giving no valid reason in defence of it. As far as I can see in your arguments there can be only one reason for compulsion, and it is as follows, your first and primary goal is to have every Irish citizen attempt to learn Irish because this is Ireland and they are Irish citizens or aspire to be (we hope).

A secondary step in to have all those kids become fluent in the language,I fully accept that also, but the main goal is for everyone to try and only compulsion can achieve that.

That is a perfectly valid point of view, but there are other views also that are equally valid. But if this is your point of view- say it , you wont lose the argument, but it might be a different argument.

All the points about more jobs for Irish speakers is really just smoke and mirrors , of course there are more jobs as there is an industry built around it, just the same way in Orwells 1984 or the Soviet Union there were loads of jobs rewriting history ,As soon as history was allowed to stand on its own two feet all those ''jobs'' disappeared.

I think what annoys some about these discussions is the vague impression of a hidden agenda, because some of the arguments just dont make sense.

If you feel speaking/learning Irish is a broader cultural imperative , just say so.

Dannyboy83

deise go deo wrote: »

I provided evidence that shows quite clearly the negative effects of making Language learning optional and

Agreed.

another set of evidence that shows that a substantial majority want Irish promoted and preserved.

And this evidence was shown to be flimsy and biased.
You haven't shown the majority want it to be preserved and promoted.
The figures put forward suggest otherwise - i.e. over 60% of the population claim they do not speak it.

The response to this was ad hominum as to the validity of the Evidence I put forward but no counter evidence was ever provided despite the fact that I asked for it several times.

And as I pointed out, nobody was going to counter it, as my goal is not to increase the number of Irish speakers. That is your goal.

I fully accept the language uptake will decline.
This is precisely the point I have argued throughout this thread.

Furthermore, you have now just massively undermined your own position.
You claim that everyone is open to learning it and want it promoted and preserved.
Now you are claiming that making it optional will destroy the language even if it's reformed, thereby contradicting your original statement. (Try to draw that on a venn diagram)

I am glad that you have acknowledged this at last.
Now we are making progress.

And that has uet to be contested by any poster here.

It's an opinion, a point of view, not a fact.
What is there to contest?

Actually, my argument was that as was shown in the study I linked to in the OP, Making a language optional reduces the Status of that language causing a domino effect and damages the language beyond the area that was originally affected, This was shown by a similar case in Britain where language learning was made optional in one stage of Education and the result was a collapse in the noumbers studying languages across the education system in Britain.

I can think of an easy way to remedy this.
Making learning a language compulsory, but make the choice of that language entirely optional.
How does that sound to you?

As for the second part, The argument has been put forward that learning Irish is useless, That is not the case, in terms of Employment oppertunities, there are more jobs requiring Irish than any other second language in Ireland,

Yea, due to compulsion, we covered it.
You're misrepresenting the consequence of compulsory Irish and trying to portray it in a matter which attempts to validate compulsion.

I also said that I dont believe that the sole or primary focus of the Education system should be Job training but rather should be about developing the Childs mind and ability to learn in a well rounded fasion, a systerm to which Language learning is vital.

Well, at least nobody can report me anyway!:D

The argument was put forward that the increase in people getting exemptions shows that the majority are not open to learning Irish, 10% was the figure suggested for the section of the Student population that this increase showed were not open to learning Irish. I countered this claim of 10% saying that of that 10% only 5% were doing a second language. It is unclear why the 5% that were not doing a second language had the Exemption but I think thaat it is fair to assume that a proportion of them have learning dificulties that preclude them from learning languages.

Nope, that's an assumption, not a fact.
I can just counter by assuming they hate learning Irish. Also not a fact.

Besides, it's a strange conclusion to draw, given the method of opting opt of compulsory Irish was 'feigned learning disabilities' as implied by the article.

Of the other 5% who are Exempt from Irish but are studying Irish some are getting Exemptions from Irish because they are 'Not open to it' But I think the majority of this 5% are the children of immigrants who came during the boom at the age of 12 and now 4-5 years later are geting an exemption from Irish for the LC as they did not study it in primary school but can do another language because they either studyd it in their own country or are already fluent in the language.

More assumptions based on no evidence, but why is the number of 'immigrants' getting exemptions continuing to grow year on year, when other demographics suggest the a mass exodus of the same immigrants since 2008?

Indeed, People like myself who are actively interested in Learning Irish in school by and large fail to pick up the language in School, The only possible explanation for this is a poor curriculum as Compulsion makes no difference to someone who is actively interested in a subject, As this is the case, someone not learning Irish in school dose not mean they are not open to learning it.

Your theory is flawed in that it is based on the axiom that 2.6 million people want to learn Irish.
Prove it.

The other 'possible explanations' among those who wish to learn it are that; people lose their desire, people never desired it to begin with, people are lazy, people like the idea but not the application, people cannot become immersed i.e. there are hundreds of plausible explanations.

As regards those who want to learn Irish - I agree the syllabus is crap, but I really didn't want to learn it and I still got a Hons B3 or something.
That would seem to suggest, contrary to your claims of overwhelming support (95% plus among LC students), that 'lack of desire' is a major component which you are (inexplicably) failing to address.

That the Curriculum is poor is evidient and the fact that it has failed over 90 years to teach people how to speak Irish is testament only to the fact that something that dosent work will not work no mater how long it is operated over.

Yea, such as compulsion.........

It is not a fact that there are virtually no chances to use the language, post-schooling. There are many.

So I guess it's just unusual in my case, that I never had a single one instance in the decade since I graduated.

Even more unusual that I have never used it outside the education system.

There are more jobs and opportunities to use Irish than any other second language in Ireland.

There are however not enough oppertunitied to use Irish to prevent the average person losing the limited amount of Irish that they currently learn in school.

Well, its the average person who is being compelled to learn it, not the native speaker. So you agree there are limited jobs and opportunities, then why compell 55,000 kids per year to learn it???

The link to Nematon was just to show an example of companies that successfully operate through Irish, Countering the claim that All jobs that need Irish are 'artifical'
[/quote[
But how about the worrying trend in the Gaelteacht that even native speakers are not finding work and having started emigrating?

It has yet to be shown that there has been any rejection of the Irish language by anything more than a small minority of the Irish population.

emmmmm..........no.
2.6 million people don't speak it according to the 2006 CSO figures.
i.e. 60% of the population.

Only 61,000 native speakers in the country.
A self evident postulation.

In light of this it is an entirely different situation, One is a powerful state forcing its language on a neighboring states population against their will, the other is a state promoting the revival of a native language in line with the populations wishes.

Incorrect.
It was the LSSR forcing the language on their native population, not the RSFSR.
Of course, that was ostensibly "in line with the population's wishes" also;)

If the Curriculum was reformed, people who are open to learning it would be able to do so, Compulsion is necessary because there is a general perception that language learning is hard

That justifies the learning of A language being compulsory i.e. choice of language is optional.
Doesn't justify compulsory Irish

and languages would not be chosen because subject choice is much more about the points a student can expect to get from that subject in the LC than it is about what the student actually is interested in learning.

So fix the points system?
Compulsory Irish hasn't worked.

No, Any argument that has thus far been made against Irish being compulsory can also be made against Maths and English being compulsory, In light of that I questioned why those arguing against compulsion for Irish believed that Maths and English should remain compulsory.

Which is a complete fallacy.
As I already pointed out, the set of subjects where Maths is a necessity truely dwarfs the lilliputian set of subjects where Irish is a pre-requisite (and in these instances, it almost entirely due to legislative preclusion, not knowledge/competency factors).

But yea, I agree that Maths should also be optional at Leaving Cert - which is a completely different debate.

There has yet to be a serious reform of the Curriculum, It has improved over the past 20 years, coporal punishment has been done away with, and Oral has been increased in importance slightly, but the critical failings of the Curriculum remain in place. Until they are reformed fully and effectively there will be no change in the results of the System.

Ok, so now you are putting forward the case, that not only is the learning of Irish compulsory - but in actual fact, the Irish course which student are compelled to learn (i.e against their will), is in actual fact - not fit even for those who voluntarily wish to learn it.

I'm confused as to how this strengthens the case for compulsion.
Have you finally acknowledged the irrationality of compulsive Irish then?

Next time try to understand my arguments before you try to belittle them to others.

If you are displeased by the summarization I made which your responses validated, I can only suggest you make a better effort at maintaining consistency.
And ensure your hypotheses rely on axioms, not conjecture

deise go deo

marienbad wrote: »

But Deise go deo

Why compulsion ?? you are giving no valid reason in defence of it. As far as I can see in your arguments there can be only one reason for compulsion, and it is as follows, your first and primary goal is to have every Irish citizen attempt to learn Irish because this is Ireland and they are Irish citizens or aspire to be (we hope).

Why compulsion? Because language learning is a vital part of Education in my opinion, and making languages optional dose not promote the learning of them as shown in the link I provided in the OP.

The question I would ask you is why not compulsion?

All the points about more jobs for Irish speakers is really just smoke and mirrors , of course there are more jobs as there is an industry built around it, just the same way in Orwells 1984 or the Soviet Union there were loads of jobs rewriting history ,As soon as history was allowed to stand on its own two feet all those ''jobs'' disappeared.

I think what annoys some about these discussions is the vague impression of a hidden agenda, because some of the arguments just dont make sense.

That assumes all jobs needing Irish are artifical, this is not true, there are many jobs that would exist even if Irish was allowed to stand on its own too feet as you put it, But that ignores the fact that 'Artifical' or not, these jobs exist and that is what matters to students, That there are employment opportunities rather than how there are.

If you feel speaking/learning Irish is a broader cultural imperative , just say so.

I did, See.

Irish has a long connection with Ireland and the Irish people, and is in my opinion an important part of Irelands identity, Irish is needed to understand fully the store of literature associated with Irelands past.(As well as present and future)

But that is not the only reason.

deise go deo

Dannyboy

Rather than continue with the monster posts, Lets condense it down to the two main issues, Ie Compulsion, and people being open to learning the language.

Now, You contend that Compulsion has failed. that Compulsion is the root of the problem.

I contend that Curriculum is the root of the problem and Compulsion is not a significant factor. The reason I say this is that I dont believe that students in general care if something is compulsory or not and a subject being compulsory will not greatly affect it. if compulsion is such a problem for Irish, why is it not a problem for Maths and English?

In my opinion, if students were prone to reacting negatively to compulsion they would do so in all cases, not selectively.



As for the Issue of students being open to Irish,

I think students are in the vast majority of cases open to learning Irish in general and it is the poor curriculum that puts them off.

You suggest that the 10% getting exemptions is evidence that students are not open to learning the language, Would you admit that of that 10% there are many factors other than not being open to Irish that can explain why they are seeking exemptions, factors such as learning difficulties, being educated in a different country till after the age of 12 and the poor curriculum of Irish,

I am willing to acept that a proportion of the 10% seeking exemptions do so because they are not open to Irish, but I don't think that the proportion is any greater than 3-4 of the 10% that are seeking exemptions.

As for your suggestion that people not speaking Irish means they are not open to it, Are you suggesting that unless someone claims to have some Irish then they can not want it to be promoted?

marienbad

Deise go beo ,

Mon ami, My ability to use the quote function is very (very) limited so I will have to reply to you in this manner. You made 4 points in reply to mine as follows.

I You say language learning is vital to the whole learning experience, Ok
I will accept that up to a point. ( I actually believe the classroom is the worst place to learn a language, but separate discussion). But that applies to any language. So why priviledge Irish ?

2 In answer to my question on why compulsion , you say why not.
Ok, here goes , In any free society the starting point must be absolute freedom and we work in from there . By that I mean it is up to the restrictor of that freedoms to outline the benefits that will accrue to society by any limitation to that ideal state. Freedom of choice is a fundamental freedom and it is up to the proposer (you) to outline to society (me:)) the benefits in this case. Why should you compel me
(a) to learn a language (b) as a subset of that why should it be Irish

So I ask you again why compulsion.

3 In answer to my assertion on jobs you replied that these are valid jobs whether they are ''artificial'' or not . ! That is an extraordinary assertion to make and one that may well be the Achilles heel of this whole industry.
If you use that as any basis for economics we are truly doomed .Jobs can only in the long term survive if the jobholders provide goods or services the public want to buy, not are compelled to buy.

4 On the cultural imperative issue you replied with a vague homily on the nature of Irishness. But I think this is the real nub of the issue.And I would love to discuss it more with you.


You avoided my question on the quantity v quality goal.

So Mon brave to conclude we are still nowhere nearer an argument in favour of compulsion , assertions yes , arguments no,

And to be fair those of us leaning against compulsion have not been made to defend the compulsion on maths and english.

Dannyboy83

deise go deo wrote: »

Dannyboy

Rather than continue with the monster posts, Lets condense it down to the two main issues, Ie Compulsion, and people being open to learning the language.

Now, You contend that Compulsion has failed. that Compulsion is the root of the problem.

Incorrect.
This line of reasoning yet again assumes I wish to increase the number of Irish speakers. That assumption is incorrect - I do not. That is your objective.
Nor do I wish to see it decrease, I do not care about the uptake of the language. It is irrelevant to me.

What I care about, is wheter the subject is voluntary or involuntary.
The evidence proves that students tend to excel in subjects which they voluntarily pick.

I place no value on the number of Irish speakers. You do.
Therefore, I do not see compulsion as the root of some other problem, I see compulsion itself as the problem.

The arguments which have been put forward to justify compulsion have been consistently shown to be illogical.

I contend that Curriculum is the root of the problem and Compulsion is not a significant factor.

The root of a separate problem which I care nothing about.

If people wish to learn the language, more power to them.
I am happy for them.

I do not condone the involuntary forcefeeding of the language.
I believe it should be optional at second level.

The reason I say this is that I dont believe that students in general care if something is compulsory or not and a subject being compulsory will not greatly affect it. if compulsion is such a problem for Irish, why is it not a problem for Maths and English?

It quite evidently is a problem for Maths & has been for some time.
(Do a google search on all the warning over our drastic maths/science results)
Hons Maths now has points incentives to encourage uptake, as do teaching of subjects through Irish iirc?
That is a separate topic tho, I digress.

In my opinion, if students were prone to reacting negatively to compulsion they would do so in all cases, not selectively.

Well, I'm going to ignore the expression 'rebellious teenager' here, but as pointed out, it's not selective, it appears to be part of a trend.

A human trend. Humans desire free will. Deny their free will without a rational cause/explanation and things tend to go haywire.

As for the Issue of students being open to Irish,

I think students are in the vast majority of cases open to learning Irish in general and it is the poor curriculum that puts them off.

Then fix the curriculum and make it optional.
I don't object to people learning Irish, I object to people who do not want to learn it having to learn it involuntarily.

You suggest that the 10% getting exemptions is evidence that students are not open to learning the language, Would you admit that of that 10% there are many factors other than not being open to Irish that can explain why they are seeking exemptions, factors such as learning difficulties, being educated in a different country till after the age of 12 and the poor curriculum of Irish,

Yes, it's one of many credible explanations - such as they are open to Irish but twice as open to something else- but unless there are facts to prove it, it remains conjecture. The facts prove that 5% of them were more open to another language than Irish.

It was you who initially put forward the argument that uptake plummets when compulsion is removed.
I am not trying to be nasty or smart - I really do not know how to make clearer to you the contradiction you are establishing.

I am willing to acept that a proportion of the 10% seeking exemptions do so because they are not open to Irish, but I don't think that the proportion is any greater than 3-4 of the 10% that are seeking exemptions.

It matters not to me what you are prepared to accept, the facts were established based on the evidence from the CSO. Your statement is mere conjecture.
If my ATM displays 0, I don't get more money because I'm not prepared to accept the evidence. To get more money, I need to prove that the evidence is incorrect. i.e. logic & mathematics not philosophy

If 96-97% of students continue to choose the language, your reluctance to make it optional is irrational?

As for your suggestion that people not speaking Irish means they are not open to it, Are you suggesting that unless someone claims to have some Irish then they can not want it to be promoted?

No.
I am claiming that you cannot postulate that 2.6 million who do not speak Irish wish to see Irish promoted.
That is not self evident, it is conjecture.

All I want to see is a non-biased study which proves this and I am happy.

deise go deo

marienbad wrote: »

I You say language learning is vital to the whole learning experience, Ok
I will accept that up to a point. ( I actually believe the classroom is the worst place to learn a language, but separate discussion). But that applies to any language. So why priviledge Irish ?

I did put forward an argument for Irish quite recently, This I think is the relevant Bit.

In terms of promoting Bi-Lingualism in general, Irish is the language that can be most successfully implemented as the structures and supports are already in place for it to be learned by the entire student population, and widely enough to make Ireland its self a bi-lingual nation over time(if implemented correctly) rather than a monolingual nation with partially bi-lingual individuals in different languages. This is benifical as it would allow people to use their second language actively throughout their lives allowing them to retain their second language rather than the slow loss of their second language due to lack of use that would be the case otherwise.

2 In answer to my question on why compulsion , you say why not.
Ok, here goes , In any free society the starting point must be absolute freedom and we work in from there . By that I mean it is up to the restrictor of that freedoms to outline the benefits that will accrue to society by any limitation to that ideal state. Freedom of choice is a fundamental freedom and it is up to the proposer (you) to outline to society (me:)) the benefits in this case. Why should you compel me
(a) to learn a language (b) as a subset of that why should it be Irish

So I ask you again why compulsion.

Why compulsion? Well the best answer i can give to that is that.

A) Language learning is important to a childes development, and that Compulsion is the best way to achieve that in my opinion, The link i provided in the OP showed that in England that when language learning was made optional it fell dramatically and had adverse effects in all parts of the Education system there, beyond where it was made optional,

b) Why Irish?



Irish has a long connection with Ireland and the Irish people, and is in my opinion an important part of Irelands identity, Irish is needed to understand fully the store of literature associated with Irelands past.(As well as present and future)

When considering what language should be compulsory in schools it is important to consider what language is most likely to be useful to students after School, English is compulsory for this reason, Though is in need of reform to be relevant to peoples lives in my opinion, After this the fact is that There are more Jobs available in Irish and opportunities to use Irish in Ireland than any other second language.


In terms of promoting Bi-Lingualism in general, Irish is the language that can be most successfully implemented as the structures and supports are already in place for it to be learned by the entire student population, and widely enough to make Ireland its self a bi-lingual nation over time(if implemented correctly) rather than a monolingual nation with partially bi-lingual individuals in different languages. This is benifical as it would allow people to use their second language actively throughout their lives allowing them to retain their second language rather than the slow loss of their second language due to lack of use that would be the case otherwise.


It is true that for economic reasons, as well as for broadening the students horizons and understanding of other cultures, it is important that Irish children learn Foreign languages, But I don't see learning Irish as a barrier to this, I would advocate that a system of Mother tongue plus two be implemented as proposed in this
ie, that English, Irish and a foreign language be compulsory in the education system. With class time also being given to teach students how to learn languages so they will be better able to learn languages after they leave school.

3 In answer to my assertion on jobs you replied that these are valid jobs whether they are ''artificial'' or not . ! That is an extraordinary assertion to make and one that may well be the Achilles heel of this whole industry.
If you use that as any basis for economics we are truly doomed .Jobs can only in the long term survive if the jobholders provide goods or services the public want to buy, not are compelled to buy.

They are valid in terms of the language being useful for Students leaving the Education system.
Personally I dont agree that jobs that have been derided as artifical are actually artifical, I dont think that jobs such as state services being provided as Gaeilge are artifical.

4 On the cultural imperative issue you replied with a vague homily on the nature of Irishness. But I think this is the real nub of the issue.And I would love to discuss it more with you.

Well what is it you want to discuss on this issue? It is my opinion that Irish is an important part of Irish Culture and Identity and should be preserved and promoted as a result of this.

You avoided my question on the quantity v quality goal.

What question?

Cú Giobach

RandomName2 wrote: »

Err... okay.

Although you were quoting 'me'.

Err....you see when I make a mistake I have no problem admitting it and don't have to have an acknowledgment of such dragged out of me.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

Why compulsion? Well the best answer i can give to that is that.

We can agree that it should be compulsory to learn a second language.

deise go deo wrote: »

b) Why Irish?

It is not essential to speak Irish to form appreciation of Irish literature and history.

deise go deo wrote: »

There are more Jobs available in Irish and opportunities to use Irish in Ireland than any other second language.

The jobs in question are not productive and depend entirely on state funding. This is unsustainable in the current economic circumstances.

deise go deo wrote: »

In terms of promoting Bi-Lingualism in general, Irish is the language that can be most successfully implemented as the structures and supports are already in place for it to be learned by the entire student population,

This ignores the fact that most people do not wish to learn Irish. It's pointless using these structures if they accomplish nothing.

deise go deo wrote: »

It is true that for economic reasons, as well as for broadening the students horizons and understanding of other cultures, it is important that Irish children learn Foreign languages, But I don't see learning Irish as a barrier to this,

We are short of money for foreign language teaching. Huge amounts of money are being spent forcing people to speak a langauge they do not wish to learn. By saving unnecessary expenditure on Irish, more money will be available for foreign langauges.

deise go deo wrote: »

I would advocate that a system of Mother tongue plus two be implemented as proposed in this
ie, that English, Irish and a foreign language be compulsory in the education system.

Mother tongue plus one foreign language would be a more achievable goal. Irish should be among the 'foreign' choices. No reason to compel people to learn Irish if they do not wish to. It is, of course, understandable that CnAG will never agree to giving people a choice.

deise go deo wrote: »

Personally I dont agree that jobs that have been derided as artifical are actually artifical, I dont think that jobs such as state services being provided as Gaeilge are artifical.

The jobs only exist as a result of the Official Languages Act. Everyone in Ireland speaks English, we can save money by providing services and documents in English only. That way, Irish speakers can make a positive contribution to national recovery, by helping to reduce the cost of public services. Some of the money saved could be used for Irish langauge promotion.

deise go deo wrote: »

It is my opinion that Irish is an important part of Irish Culture and Identity and should be preserved and promoted

Yes, but not at the human and econimic cost of (futilely) attempting to force everyone to speak Irish.

RandomName2

deise go deo wrote: »

b) Why Irish?


Irish has a long connection with Ireland and the Irish people, and is in my opinion an important part of Irelands identity, Irish is needed to understand fully the store of literature associated with Irelands past.(As well as present and future)

Not really getting into the debate fully again just wanting to point this out.

There really isn't any old literature written in Irish (for the sake of Cú Giobach: very, very, very little).

Not that there weren't any poems or stories in Irish.

Unfortunately, by-in-large they weren't written down or otherwise recorded. They simply don't exist anymore. Which is a shame - but the myth about the vast stores of literature as Gaeilge is simply that; a myth.

A bit of Peg anyone?

Lord TSC

(Typed this up in notebook so the formatting is a tad akward at first. Apologies.)

Jaysus, fell asleep last night so am waking to find myself with a lot to quote now...

Something that hit me last night after I had left the discussions in favour of sleep was you

made one claim off the back of another you offered proof with. You said...

The benefits listed here all apply to Irish, Gaelscoileanna have shown this, They often

perform better than the national average

Presumably making a statement that gaelscoileannas preform better than English speaking

schools can be backed up in a simple manner, by providing evidence of results in school

following their time there. Presumably since you make a statement such as this one, you have

figures to back up that those who attended Gaelscoileanna do indeed preform better than the

National Average. The best way of proving this would obviously be to link some studies which

show higher JC and LC results, higher uptake of jobs, etc. Or at the very least, provide me

some stats to show that they do better on nationally standardised tests. Even then, make sure that it actually takes into account other factors such as family background, quality of teacher, etc. Not just a single aspect of a single stat that can be twisted.

Moving on to new stuff...

Irish has a long connection with Ireland and the Irish people, and is in my opinion

an important part of Irelands identity,

See, this seems to be the crux of the debate in my eyes. Those who are pro-Irish seem

desperate to cling on to this connection with a nostalgic past and claim Irish is an

important part of Ireland's identity. I disagree there, but ultimatly, that's an opinion (as

you admit) and there's little we can do to change each other's minds on that. My worry is

that in order to save this identity that a huge chunk of the population seem quite connent

to let die, the pro-Irish brigade will force everyone to learn it. But I'll come back to the

compulsory arguement a bit further down...For now, let's say that's your opinion. Mine is

that the Irish language is not an important part of Ireland's identity at all, since chances

are if I asked a non-Irish person to make a list of what makes someone Irish Irish, the

language will be coming pretty far down the list, behind Alcohol, Riverdance and Economic

Crisis...

Irish is needed to understand fully the store of literature associated with Irelands

past.(As well as present and future)

Not really true. Thankfully, those who do speak Irish are able to translate those texts

which are not already translated into English for us. Furthermore, what texts are not

avialable nowadays to those who cannot speak Irish? As someone who did his Masters around

colonial and postcolonial texts in Ireland, I never found my resources limited because I

couldn't speak Irish. What literature exactly cannot be understood nowadays in terms of

actual literal importance and not a nostalgic desire? It's like saying Christians cannot

fully understand the literature associated with their religion cause they cannot speak the

languages the bible was originally written in...

There are more Jobs available in Irish and opportunities to use Irish in Ireland than

any other second language.

I'd despute this fact as well, to be honest. I'm currently unemployed and thus am checking

jobseeker's sites constantly. And constantly, the jobs I am seeing available in Ireland are

ones working on phone lines for companies who want people with French/Spanish/Russian etc.

Rarely do I see jobs out there for Irish speakers, other than the odd Irish teacher. But as

has been stated constantly, the jobs whihch do exist seem to only exist to justify the

compulsion of Irish. That makes no sense when you step back and think about it. There are

only jobs out there for Irish speakers cause people are forced to speak Irish. If Irish

wasn't compulsory, then these jobs wouldn't be needed in the slightest. Furthermore, one

could state at this stage that the same opportunities would thus exist if French or Spainish

was subbed into Irish's place. If people spoke French, there would be more jobs available in

French in Ireland. Furthermore, given that the government seem quite happy to be letting the

youth of Ireland emigrate, one would imagine it would make more sense to learn a language

which would find more jobs available in numerous countries than to learn one which is only

used by a small minority in this one.

In terms of promoting Bi-Lingualism in general, Irish is the language that can be most successfully implemented as the structures and supports are already in place for it to be learned by the entire student population, and widely enough to make Ireland its self a bi-lingual nation over time(if implemented correctly) rather than a monolingual nation with partially bi-lingual individuals in different languages. This is benifical as it would allow people to use their second language actively throughout their lives allowing them to retain their second language rather than the slow loss of their second language due to lack of use that would be the case otherwise.

Supports are already in place at a primary level, but I can't see how it would cost too much more to implement the teaching of French/Spanish etc into schools, since there's an overabundance of qualified yet unemployed teachers out there at the moment. Furthermore, whatever cost would ultimatly be recouped given than if kids were learning these languages from a young age, they would better be able to deal with people on a larger scale once they leave school, would thus be able to not only obtain but be better at their jobs in the future, and would thus be bringing more money into the system. For a small short term price, the long term gain would be astronomical. Furthermore, while again I admit that all the advantages you point out to English/Irish are true, it still doesn't change the fact that English/French or English/Spainish would be far more benifical in the long run and on a global scale.

It is true that for economic reasons, as well as for broadening the students horizons and understanding of other cultures, it is important that Irish children learn Foreign languages, But I don't see learning Irish as a barrier to this

It's a barrier when people insist it should be a first or second language and thus insist the time is spent on it. When this order of priority is given at the most important stages (primary school), it can have a detrimental effect to attempts to study the language at the next level. It's not that I don't think three languages can be learned. It's more that I think they should be prioritised based on which is going to be of the most importance on a global level in the future, and when you do that, Irish comes lower down the list again.

That assumes all jobs needing Irish are artifical, this is not true, there are many jobs that would exist even if Irish was allowed to stand on its own too feet as you put it, But that ignores the fact that 'Artifical' or not, these jobs exist and that is what matters to students, That there are employment opportunities rather than how there are.

Name one Irish speaking job out there that would go exist if Irish did actually die off? Pretty much all of the jobs for Irish speakers out there are teachers (which, obviously, would not be needed should Irish disappear) and translators (who aren't really needed since everyone who can speak irish can speak English). After that, you've got vanity projects such as TV stations or attempts at newspapers which are not vital to the everyday life but exist rather so people can maintain some link to the past they claim to cherish. Of course, the problem here is how selective people seem to be when it comes to choosing what relics of the past are maintained; we don't live in mud huts or wear lionclothes. We don't run through the fields like wild men, hunting our dinner. We don't have a barter system like in the past. People have evolved, and in doing so, they've chosen what is vital to future success, and what is no longer nessecary to survive. Given that Irish is not actually nessecary to survival, it really is not needed outside of a desire to maintain a link to the past. And while that desire is admirable, it should not be forced on people. People should be given a choice as to whether or not they keep learning a language that the vast majority of the country has decided is unnessecary on a daily basis.



Marienbad actually asked a lot of the questions I was going to, so I'll start by wrapping this post up.

Over the last two days, I've read every single post in here. What strikes me is that, constantly, there is two answers given to the question "Why should Irish be complusory?".

1. Bilingual status can help a child.

Which i agree with, but does nothing for the pro-Irish arguement since it can easily be used for a pro-French or pro-Spanish arguement as well.

2. Why not? When English and Maths are, why not Irish?

Given that this point falls apart when one admits that neither English or Maths should be complusory either, it does seem to have flaws. Even apart from that, this strikes me as a poor excuse. "Why not?" is not an answer but a blatent dodge and admital there is no legit answer to hand.

The burden of proof as to why it should remain as it is in terms of compulsion lies with the pro-Irish side of this debate. The pro-Irish point to studies which seem to have loaded questions and a belief that there are people "open" to learning a language, whatever that means. (I'd imagine everyone would be "open" to learning a second or third language, but that does not mean there is a desire to do work to achieve this goal). The anti-Irish group can point to the real world, where only a small minority of people actually speak the language and where, outside of Ireland, it holds absolutly no use. We can point to a world where everything from television, newspapers, even food wrappers are displayed in English in the vast majority of stores. We can point to reality instead of a belief and an opinion of what people might want, and state that if people actually wanted to maintain the Irish language, we would not even be having this conversation.

Ultimatly, I do believe people should have a choice. They do to an extent at Primary level currently, as the popularity of GS schools start to grow. Those who wish for their children to be educated through Irish can have them done so, and that is their right. But it strikes me that come Leaving Cert time, so too should people have a choice to choose what language they wish to study and continue. A language should be compulsory. The arguements from both sides strongly suggest this. However the fact remains that not a single arguement has been made to state that Irish should be this language has been made. Not one benifit has been offered, outside a desire to insulate the country by studying a historic relic instead of searching for a way to make out land more globally successful, as to why Irish should be prioritised over French/Spanish etc.

sadly, being the internet, it is unlikely anyone will change their positions The joy of anonymoity is that people can make wild claims and hold beliefs without having to back up their positions. Instead, we can simply all start shouting the same one or two lines for 30 pages without really furthering the discussion.

Ok, I'll stop now. Wonder if anyone will bother to read all of that <_<

LordSutch

So here we are thirty five pages into the age old argument & neither side is giving way, the Pro-compulsive Irish brigade insist that Irish must continue to be a mandatory subject in order to keep the language in its current 'life support' status, some other posters want the Irish language abolished altogether, and the rest of us still want some flexability regarding the teaching of Irish, so that Irish is promoted in a positive light without being force fed to all & sundry. Sadly, if the powers that be in Government are of the same mind as some of the Pro-compulsion posters here, then things will never change, and we will be having this same old argument again in twenty years time

There must be some flexability in the curriculum going forward, in order for the status of the language to change. P.S I was Christmas shopping in Dublin City Centre yesterday for the whole afternoon, not a peep of Irish to be heard anywhere, & yet, everybody's children MUST LEARN IRISH

'Learn' in this particular instance meaning force fed, with negligible results.

petroltimer

hi,

Just like to say, i made it to university okay, but all i can say the time spent on Irish from primary school to junior cert was a total waste and of my time and caused me to struggle with my other subjects. Until a little research which blew the myth about having to have Irish for the leaving cert,

So for all the kids out there you have the option of going to UL or DCU with English and another language(French, German, Irish etc), so i told my principle I was no longer to attend Irish class(he was not happy but what could he do) and so I had an hour everyday in the study hall for my other subjects,

I still look at pride at my leaving certificate with six good grades and an NG for Irish, that got me into University of Limerick, and the rest is history.

I think i beat the system, but i should not have had to, Ireland has a long history of resistance then they force Irish on kids, so kids just be patriotic and resist.

David

RandomName2

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

1. Bilingual status can help a child.

Which i agree with, but does nothing for the pro-Irish arguement since it can easily be used for a pro-French or pro-Spanish arguement as well.

2. Why not? When English and Maths are, why not Irish?

Given that this point falls apart when one admits that neither English or Maths should be complusory either, it does seem to have flaws. Even apart from that, this strikes me as a poor excuse. "Why not?" is not an answer but a blatent dodge and admital there is no legit answer to hand.

The point is that Gaeilge, rather than Spanish or French, is supposed to reflect the Irish 'identity'. Thus children learning Gailge get an idea about one of the core aspects of their nationality as well as learning another language. There is also the argument that it is helpful in supplying people with the qualifications to get artificial jobs sponsored by the state (or EU). Also there is the argument that it helps promote.... communication(?)... with our gealtacht brethren.

1. It is not part of the Irish identity, no more than Polish is. It is a part of Irish cultural history - but that is a separate thing altogether.
2. These artificial jobs should be removed and tax-payers money should be spent better.
3. We can communicate with the Gaelteacht folk just fine in the natural medium of the island.... English.

From my experience I believe teaching a second language comes a little too early in primary schools. It should start two years later imo and be a bit more intensive (the curriculum for French in second level - particularly JC - might actually be worse than Irish, but that is a separate discussion, perhaps). At the age of 8/9/10 the child can have some input into deciding what second language he might want, and his literacy skills in English would be better honed. Moving onto 2nd level s/he can then adopt a third and perhaps fourth language (I did a total of 4 languages in my JC... my best result was in Latin!.. okay same result in English, but the point still stands).

This would be a far more pleasant - AND PROFITABLE - arrangement as far as I can see, and I would be envious of children benefiting from this system, if it ever comes to pass.

RandomName2

petroltimer wrote: »

hi,

Just like to say, i made it to university okay, but all i can say the time spent on Irish from primary school to junior cert was a total waste and of my time and caused me to struggle with my other subjects. Until a little research which blew the myth about having to have Irish for the leaving cert,

So for all the kids out there you have the option of going to UL or DCU with English and another language(French, German, Irish etc), so i told my principle I was no longer to attend Irish class(he was not happy but what could he do) and so I had an hour everyday in the study hall for my other subjects,

I still look at pride at my leaving certificate with six good grades and an NG for Irish, that got me into University of Limerick, and the rest is history.

I think i beat the system, but i should not have had to, Ireland has a long history of resistance then they force Irish on kids, so kids just be patriotic and resist.

David

I didn't know about DCU!

I wanted to go to UCD, so that was that option blown out of the water for me. Useless 7th subject
(I would have read Geography instead had I had a choice)

Lord TSC

At the age of 8/9/10 the child can have some input into deciding what second language he might want

While I agree with pretty much everything else you've said, I do disagree with this idea that a few anti-Irish people have tbh. At a young age, a kid will have no real clue about what language would serve him or her best in later life, so cannot really make an informed decision. For me, if a choice is to be made at this stage, it makes more sense that the parents get to choose at that stage what language is taught since they can make more informed decisions.

With regards the LC and if it should be optional there then, I'd argue that the teenager should be sitting down with his parents, asking advice from people as to what the best choice would be, and then making an informed decision if he wanted to carry on learning the language or not.

The key, either way, is choice. People should be allowed choose Irish, French, Spenish, multiple languages or none at all. Choice means options. Languages should not be forced on them without good reason...

cyclopath2001

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

While I agree with pretty much everything else you've said, I do disagree with this idea that a few anti-Irish people have tbh. At a young age, a kid will have no real clue about what language would serve him or her best in later life, so cannot really make an informed decision.

It's a fair viewpoint and maybe the best approach is to improve how English grammar is taught so that the children will be better prepared to learn the grammar of other langauges later.

PS: I think you've fallen into the trap of classifying people who disagree with CnaG's hardline views as being 'Anti-Irish', there's more than a whiff of McCarthyism at play there.

Lord TSC

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

PS: I think you've fallen into the trap of classifying people who disagree with CnaG's hardline views as being 'Anti-Irish', there's more than a whiff of McCarthyism at play there.

Yeah, I know while using the terms "pro-" and "anti-Irish" fall into dangerous categories, it's easier in the context of this debate than typing out "pro-compulsion of Irish in schools" and "anti-compulsion of Irish in schools" every time I need to categorise people <_< Apologies for that. Truth be told though, if THAT's the part of my post they focus in on, then it only shows there's no retort for the actual points I made. I did laugh when I spotted the attempt a good few pages back at shifting the discussion with the Joe Duffy post...

compaqlaptop1

deise go deo: You say a foreign language should be compulsory ---- (let's say I agree to this, which I dont as {a} some people have zero aptitude for languages and would be better of studying something that suits them and {b} the vast majority of people get by just fine with only speaking one language for their entire lives) ----

Well, say I am a student who has completed the junior cert and I would like to do French for the Leaving but drop Irish as I have no interest in it. Explain to me then why you think I should be forced to learn Irish in this case? Please explain how forcing a student to learn a language they dont want to learn is justified?

Focalbhach

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

All I want to see is a non-biased study which proves this and I am happy.

I've been checking in on this thread from time to time. I have no particular intention of getting involved, for several reasons - mainly that the conversation is going round in circles and I could probably write the next few posts for each 'side' fairly accurately, though the cynicism and dishonesty of one poster in particular remains disappointing (that's not directed at you, Dannyboy83).

However, I've come across a 2004 survey of the Irish public's views on the education system which may be of interest to contributors here, and I hereby throw it into the mix.

You're free to read through it all, but among the more obviously relevant findings are:


i) Views on the adequacy of emphasis placed on 'transmitting Irish language and culture' in primary schools: Too much = 8.2%, Too little = 35.0%, Just right = 50.5%.

ii) Views on the adequacy of emphasis placed on 'transmitting Irish language and culture' in secondary schools: Too much = 8.6%, Too little = 34.0%, Just right = 50.8%.

--- (These figures are compared with a similar survey in 1974, showing that the percentage claiming too much emphasis has declined from 38% to 8-9%, too little emphasis has increased from 18% to 34-35%, and just right has increased from 42% to 51%.)


iii) Views on the importance of proposing that Irish be made an optional subject after the Junior Certificate: Very important = 34.0%, Important = 32.8%, Neither important nor unimportant = 13.3%, Unimportant = 10.7%, Very unimportant = 5.2%.

--- (The authors note that, albeit with a strong majority, this proposal attracted the least support of the fifteen proposals presented to the public. The list of other proposals is in the report.)


At this point, I'll make my escape... :pac:

RandomName2

Leto wrote: »

I've been checking in on this thread from time to time. I have no particular intention of getting involved, for several reasons - mainly that the conversation is going round in circles and I could probably write the next few posts for each 'side' fairly accurately, though the cynicism and dishonesty of one poster in particular remains disappointing (that's not directed at you, Dannyboy83).

However, I've come across a 2004 survey of the Irish public's views on the education system which may be of interest to contributors here, and I hereby throw it into the mix.

You're free to read through it all, but among the more obviously relevant findings are:


i) Views on the adequacy of emphasis placed on 'transmitting Irish language and culture' in primary schools: Too much = 8.2%, Too little = 35.0%, Just right = 50.5%.

ii) Views on the adequacy of emphasis placed on 'transmitting Irish language and culture' in secondary schools: Too much = 8.6%, Too little = 34.0%, Just right = 50.8%.

--- (These figures are compared with a similar survey in 1974, showing that the percentage claiming too much emphasis has declined from 38% to 8-9%, too little emphasis has increased from 18% to 34-35%, and just right has increased from 42% to 51%.)


iii) Views on the importance of proposing that Irish be made an optional subject after the Junior Certificate: Very important = 34.0%, Important = 32.8%, Neither important nor unimportant = 13.3%, Unimportant = 10.7%, Very unimportant = 5.2%.

--- (The authors note that, albeit with a strong majority, this proposal attracted the least support of the fifteen proposals presented to the public. The list of other proposals is in the report.)


At this point, I'll make my escape... :pac:

That survey didn't specify whether those queried were in favour of making Irish optional did it? Just whether or not it was an important issue?

Focalbhach

RandomName2 wrote: »

That survey didn't specify whether those queried were in favour of making Irish optional did it? Just whether or not it was an important issue?

Page 4:

Respondents were asked to indicate the degree of importance they would attribute to 15 proposals designed to achieve the objectives of schooling (e.g., reduce the size of classes in primary schools).

cyclopath2001

I think you have to read those answers in the context that prior to the survey, the pupils had already been subjected to many years forced indoctrination in Irish and having invested so much in tolerating the lessons and complying with the demands of the teachers, they probably want to reap some gain from all the effort. Making Irish optional would make their travails pointless.

Leto wrote: »

i) Views on the adequacy of emphasis placed on 'transmitting Irish language and culture' in primary schools: Too much = 8.2%, Too little = 35.0%, Just right = 50.5%.

ii) Views on the adequacy of emphasis placed on 'transmitting Irish language and culture' in secondary schools: Too much = 8.6%, Too little = 34.0%, Just right = 50.8%.

The above demonstrates little support for CnaG's curriculum reform, the kids mostly don't want a greater emphisis. (50% - no change, 8% - too much)

Leto wrote: »

iii) Views on the importance of proposing that Irish be made an optional subject after the Junior Certificate: Very important = 34.0%, Important = 32.8%, Neither important nor unimportant = 13.3%, Unimportant = 10.7%, Very unimportant = 5.2%.

A rather indirect question, they're not actually asked if they would agree/disagree with compulsory lessons. Instead, they're asked about the importance of a proposal, a rather odd way of putting it.

Bottom line, is that while surveys are interesting, look at the outcome - very little Irish spoken after many years of expensive compulsory lessons.

Focalbhach

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

I think you have to read those answers in the context that prior to the survey, the pupils had already been subjected to many years forced indoctrination in Irish and having invested so much in tolerating the lessons and complying with the demands of the teachers, they probably want to reap some gain from all the effort. Making Irish optional would make their travails pointless.

"Pupils"? Did you bother to look at it? The 1,511 respondents were aged 15-65+.

As for your rather convoluted post hoc 'explanation', I think it's more prudent to take the answers of these (mostly) adults at face value given that their brief was to give their views on "the education system and its future development" (p. 2), with questions applying to much more than the state of Irish. I'm sure this brief was of the utmost relevance to those with children, and to those who were employers.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

The above demonstrates little support for CnaG's curriculum reform, the kids mostly don't want a greater emphisis. (50% - no change, 8% - too much)

'Curriculum reform' does not equal 'change of emphasis' in the overall schooling system, so that's a bit of a nothing point. I assume the point you were trying to make was that 58% don't want any more emphasis on Irish, to which one could say that an equally valid interpretation is that only 8% of people want less emphasis on Irish, and a substantial minority actually want more.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

A rather indirect question, they're not actually asked if they would agree/disagree with compulsory lessons. Instead, they're asked about the importance of a proposal, a rather odd way of putting it.

Bottom line, is that while surveys are interesting, look at the outcome - very little Irish spoken after many years of expensive compulsory lessons.

Bottom line is that you asked for a survey ("Where does it ask if people agree with compulsory Irish teaching?") and now that it doesn't seem to support your position you're dismissing it. That's helpful.

cyclopath2001

Leto wrote: »

'Curriculum reform' does not equal 'change of emphasis' in the overall schooling system, so that's a bit of a nothing point.

The thread started with Deise asking us to agree to CnaG's proposal to retain compulsory Irish and to reform the curriculum.

As you point out, this survey does not address 'curriculum reform' and on that point is irrelevant to the proposals.

Leto wrote: »

Bottom line is that you asked for a survey ("Where does it ask if people agree with compulsory Irish teaching?") and now that it doesn't seem to support your position you're dismissing it. That's helpful.

The survey does not ask if people agree or disagree to compulsory teaching of Irish. But, the survey indicates that the question of whether or not it should be optional is considered by most, to be important.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

The thread started with Deise asking us to agree to CnaG's proposal to retain compulsory Irish and to reform the curriculum.

As you point out, this survey does not address 'curriculum reform' and on that point is irrelevant to the proposals.

Indeed Reform of the Curriculum is not mentioned, But Emphsis on Irish in the education system is, with the vast majority either wanting the same emphsis to be maintained or for it to be increased with only a small minority wanting a decrease in Emphisis on Irish in the Education system.

This would suggest to me that the majority want Compulsion to be maintained.

The survey does not ask if people agree or disagree to compulsory teaching of Irish. But, the survey indicates that the question of whether or not it should be optional is considered by most, to be important.

Indeed you are correct, It dose not ask wether or not they agree with Compulsion but rather if they thing Irish being optional is an important Issue. It being proposed that Irish being made optional is concidered as something Important by most, But is the least important Issue for most.

This however seams to suggest that the majority favour Irish being made optional. An Interesting result.

Focalbhach

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

As you point out, this survey does not address 'curriculum reform' and on that point is irrelevant to the proposals.

That is true. It is relevant to the long-running discussion in this thread of the Irish public's views on the teaching of Irish in school, and is offered to inform that debate.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

The survey does not ask if people agree or disagree to compulsory teaching of Irish. But, the survey indicates that the question of whether or not it should be optional is considered by most, to be important.

Indeed - post-Junior Certificate, at least. The wording is not as direct as we might have liked for this discussion, but it's something.

RandomName2

Leto wrote: »

The wording is not as direct as we might have liked for this discussion, but it's something.

As good as it is to have a source, I'm afraid that the wording is probably too ambiguous to be of any real use.

I am not even sure if that is (Irish language) and (Irish culture - as in culture of Ireland) or Irish (language and culture - as in culture of Gaeilge) that is being talked about. If it's the former, even I might have spoken for an increased emphasis! (but would probably have said 'fine the way it is' due to ambiguity)

Besides which, whether people want it to be compulsory or not is surely irrelevant to the side advocating compulsion. The entire point of compulsion is to make people learn it whether they want to or not.

marienbad

I have little faith (pro or con) in any of these studies, they are all to bound up with vested interests. The only thing we can say with certainty is that after 80 years and millions spent the policy is a complete failure.

Now why would you task the bodies responsible for such a comprehensive failure in the past with the job of mapping out the future ?

Surely if the language is to be saved we must start with a clean slate and set aside vested interests and this kind of historical political correctness that is acting to the detriment of the revival of the language.

We might start with realistic goals - the Irish language is never, ever going to replace English .

Next we should dispense with the condescension inherent in the ''cupla focal'' mentality. ''Domo arigato'' and ''konichiwa'' are just a few japanese expressions I picked up reading Shogun all those years ago. I am under no illusion I have a cupla focal in japanese !

Give me 100,000 committed language warriors any day rather than a few million maudlin romantics pining after some non-existant past with their 'cupla focal' !