The Status Of Irish.

Focalbhach

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

To apply this to an Irish speaker, you are suggesting that a native Irish speaker be prevented from sitting Irish - in case they are doing it for points

Is this to achieve equality?
Not being a smart ass, I don't understand your rationale.

Perhaps I'm not explaining it well enough.

To try to clear this misunderstanding up (again) I am not, and have never in this thread, suggested that a native Irish speaker be prevented from sitting Irish in case they are doing it for points. Nor, for that matter, am I suggesting that native Japanese speakers be prevented from sitting the Japanese paper in case they are doing it for points. I have not mentioned issues of equality. I have mentioned issues of comparability. Look over my posts.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I think you are trying to credit me with an argument I never made.
I never introduced the condition of native speakers, you did.

Here is the exact statement I made:


Are you denying this?
Do you deny that, native speaker or otherwise, the stats show that people who choose to do Japanese are excelling in it?

Disagreeing with something else is a strawman argument.
I would really love to hear how I have misrepresented the statisics, do please elaborate.

Your statement was that people who want to do Japanese are excelling in it. The implication in that statement - please correct me if this is not what you believe - is that those people who choose to do Japanese and do well in it are doing well because they want to do it. Is that accurate?

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I have no idea, nor does it concern me.

It should concern you. It's the salient point. I think this is where our wires are crossing.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Granted, but it doesn't change the fact that your hypothesis was flawed.

Well... it does, since the 'flaw' you speak of assumes that the English exams and second-language exams are directly comparable. As we agree, they are not.

Focalbhach

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

The answers are unreliable as most of the respondents were not in education and would have no idea what the current situation was...

If I may ask, are you currently in primary or secondary school?

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

... and, in any case, taking a decision that did not affect themselve personally.

Just their children and future employees.

Lord TSC

He said that I have sang the praises of a survey for 35 pages, I would like to know what survey as I never linked to a survey in the OP, If its the survey that letto put forward about 10 pages back then that was the first time i saw that survey.

So I ask which particular survey have i sang the praises of for 35 pages?

Apologies. I could have sworn that it was said that the survey by the Educational Research Center had been linked to in the opening page. Apologies for accusing you.

Regardless then, what are your opinions on the survey which has been linked and which states over 60% of people asked said they wanted the language to be optional?

DJP

RandomName2 wrote: »

First, it wasn't a part of the existing Irish identity as nobody actually spoke it. It wasn't regulated, within education or any service, and records show that hardly anybody knew it - its speakers were mostly confined to Galway by 1891, and nobody terribly cared either way, at least from a political point of view.

There were 250,000 native Irish speakers in 1922. There were probably more in 1891. How do they constitute "nobody actually spoke it" and "hardly anyone knew it"? And these 250,000 speakers plus were hardly mostly all living in Galway. That is a stupid comment to make. There was even a Gaeltacht in Clare in the early 20th century.

DJP

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Regardless then, what are your opinions on the survey which has been linked and which states over 60% of people asked said they wanted the language to be optional?

What some people are saying on this thread; that Irish should be optional for the Junior Cert as well- and even primary school?- is stupid. Never happen.

Cú Giobach

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

See Cú Giobach's statements above.
He is Pro-Irish and he is prepared to accept the will of the majority.

Excuse me but why do you keep insisting Deise should change his opinion just because I hold a different one. We are different people from very different parts of the country and even different generations.
He is also entitled to have an opinion that differs from yours, a debate isn't about getting someone to change their opinion.

Cú Giobach

Darren J. Prior wrote: »

There were 250,000 native Irish speakers in 1922. There were probably more in 1891. How do they constitute "nobody actually spoke it" and "hardly anyone knew it"? And these 250,000 speakers plus were hardly mostly all living in Galway. That is a stupid comment to make. There was even a Gaeltacht in Clare in the early 20th century.

Actually in 1891 there were nearly 700,000 speakers 14.5% of the population.
You will probably (like I was) be accused of linguistic pedantry for pointing out 700,000 people isn't quite "nobody".
(nobody lives in Dublin )

Lord TSC

What some people are saying on this thread; that Irish should be optional for the Junior Cert as well- and even primary school?- is stupid. Never happen.

Which is why I have really been arguing for it just to be optional at LC. I personally think it's stupid to invest so much time in the language but there you go. I would rather allow them to learn as much as possible and then be given the choice post-JC as does the majority if the survey is anything to go by...

cyclopath2001

Darren J. Prior wrote: »

What some people are saying on this thread; that Irish should be optional for the Junior Cert as well- and even primary school?- is stupid. Never happen.

Why not? There are rational arguments for making Irish optional and none at all for making compulsory.

Lord TSC

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Why not? There are rational arguments for making Irish optional and none at all for making compulsory.

Disagreed.

There are rational arguements for making it compulsory. It just so happens that we differ on which pros outweigh the other...

Cú Giobach

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Which is why I have really been arguing for it just to be optional at LC. I personally think it's stupid to invest so much time in the language but there you go. I would rather allow them to learn as much as possible and then be given the choice post-JC as does the majority if the survey is anything to go by...

I pointed out the contradiction in that survey, but nobody has mentioned that.

the_monkey

One other subject in school to be taught through Irish ??

will this pass ?? in all schools ??


This is a disgrace, this will just degrade the quality of this other subject with most of the pupils.

Why should pupils be fluent in Irish to learn Maths (for example) ?

Oasis_Dublin

The English studied after Primary school level is as bad as the Irish taught. I have no use of Yeats or the Merchant of Venice. Keep them both compulsory but change Irish to a more conversational-led language.

DJP

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Why not? There are rational arguments for making Irish optional and none at all for making compulsory.

Because Irish is important. Our state recognises it as being important and even our first official national language. Any dilution of that in terms of it being optional before Leaving Cert while eight other subjects are compulsory will sent out the message that Irish is not important something that our state does not agree with.

Lord TSC

Darren J. Prior wrote: »

Because Irish is important. Our state recognises it as being important and even our first official national language. Any dilution of that in terms of it being optional before Leaving Cert while eight other subjects are compulsory will sent out the message that Irish is not important something that our state does not agree with.

The "importance" of the language is much debated and is going to vary from person to person.

The whole "offical national language" thing has already been debated, but regardless of what it says on a piece of paper somewhere, English IS our national language. It is spoken by the vast, vast majority of the population and even those who opt to call another their first language can usually speak English, especially in the case of Irish.


On a similiar vien of thought, there was a guy on the news this morning talking about Twitter looking to build a big HQ in Ireland. He said there's three reasons that a big company like them, or indeed the likes of Google, Ebay, Blizzard et al. have already, set up a base in Ireland nowadays. This was the order he said them in.

1. We speak English so there's no worry about communication issues with their home base in America.
2. Good taxes.
3. Other big companies have already set up here and thus shown we are safe.

Obviously, the language thing probably isn't the most important of those factors but I did think it was funny that it was mentioned as one of the top three pros...

Cú Giobach

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

The "importance" of the language is much debated and is going to vary from person to person..

And the number of people here who feel the language is important, far outweighs those who don't.

Lord TSC

Really? I, to be frank, get the opposite feeling...

Dannyboy83

Leto wrote: »

Perhaps I'm not explaining it well enough.

To try to clear this misunderstanding up (again) I am not, and have never in this thread, suggested that a native Irish speaker be prevented from sitting Irish in case they are doing it for points. Nor, for that matter, am I suggesting that native Japanese speakers be prevented from sitting the Japanese paper in case they are doing it for points. I have not mentioned issues of equality. I have mentioned issues of comparability. Look over my posts.

You said you would clarify, then proceeded to tell me what it isn't.
I appreciate that is helpful in establishing accuracy, but you forgot to tell me what your point actually is. (not intended to have a hostile tone btw, I reserve hostility for those who do a thing that rhymes with bowling, I appreciate you are trying to make an actual point here, but just not explaining it very well)

Please just be direct and specific.

I've looked over your posts, and I genuinely still don't see the point you are making here.

Your statement was that people who want to do Japanese are excelling in it. The implication in that statement - please correct me if this is not what you believe - is that those people who choose to do Japanese and do well in it are doing well because they want to do it. Is that accurate?

Here is the exact statement I made:

Dannyboy83 wrote:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69531325&postcount=511
On the contrary - do not ignore it at all.
That's crucial to the debate.

People who want to do the subject are excelling in it.

Nice work, Thank you

The direct implication of this is, in the context of this thread (compulsion or optional) is as follows:
The average results showed, that people who voluntarily select this subject for the leaving cert, do better, on average, than those who are compelled (involuntary) to do other subjects.

I never made a condition as to status of the speaker (i.e. native, secondary), you did.
I have acknowledged and at no stage denied that many of those who performed well were probably native speakers.
They still chose the subject instead of Irish or Latin and they still performed well.

And I added the point that preventing this from happening, in favour of compelling someone to do Irish instead, wheter because of points incentives or not, is irrational.

Again, I would ask you to clarify how I misrepresented the statistics, as I believe that is a Strawman argument and I have not lower myself to the tactics of others of deliberately misrepresenting or being coy with the truth to suit my position.

It should concern you. It's the salient point. I think this is where our wires are crossing.

Ok, please go ahead and state what it is.

Well... it does, since the 'flaw' you speak of assumes that the English exams and second-language exams are directly comparable. As we agree, they are not.

Let me recap your original argument:

Leto wrote:

Is it because they want to learn it?
Or is it because they are already fluent and want to gain the maximum CAO points from that fluency?

If the former, then you're right, it's comparable to people who want to learn Irish doing better than people who don't. If the latter, it is not.

In this case, I suggest that the latter is closer to the truth. A hunch, but a reasonable one.

The argument you gave, implied that people who are fluent only do subjects because they can gain maximum CAO points.

Evidently, that is not true in light of the English LC results.

If you want to stipulate that this is because it's a 'qualitively different' exam, I can agree to an extent and it's also fair to say it of Irish, but you didn't state this in your original observation.

Dannyboy83

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Excuse me but why do you keep insisting Deise should change his opinion just because I hold a different one. We are different people from very different parts of the country and even different generations.
He is also entitled to have an opinion that differs from yours, a debate isn't about getting someone to change their opinion.

Excuse me, but show me one instance where I have insisted Deise should 'change his opinion'?

I have merely show that you are pro-Irish and moderate and that Deise is pro-Irish and extremist/dictatorial.
If he is not, then he can answer the question I have asked him multiple times, which he continually cowers from.

Cú Giobach wrote: »

The majority of people want to see Irish (apparently) to remain compulsory up to JC

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Just accept the will of the majority won't you.

deise wrote:

However, until such time as it is shown that making Irish optional is better than reforming the curriculum then I will not agree with making Irish an optional subject . As I have made clear I believe that the best way forward for irish in the Education system is the proposal put forward by CnaG.

This is my opinion and I am entitled to it.

IN SPITE OF IT BEING THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY

dic·ta·to·ri·al
Having or showing a tendency to tell people what to do in an autocratic way

ex·trem·ist
a supporter or advocate of extreme doctrines or practices.

Your point is what exactly, Cú Giobach?

cyclopath2001

Cú Giobach wrote: »

And the number of people here who feel the language is important, far outweighs those who don't.

And the number of people who don't speak Irish hugely outweighs those who do.

Actions speak louder than words.

Dannyboy83

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Regardless then, what are your opinions on the survey which has been linked and which states over 60% of people asked said they wanted the language to be optional?

He doesn't care.
He has stated he will ignore the will of the majority here:

deise go deo wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69611026&postcount=708

If FG have this as part of their education policy and (as seams most likely) form the next government, then I can only assume that they will implement the policy and make Irish an Optional subject.

If this happens I can only hope they dont regret it in 20 years time, and I certainly hope that they reform the curriculum to give Irish the best chance as an optional subject.

However, until such time as it is shown that making Irish optional is better than reforming the curriculum then I will not agree with making Irish an optional subject. As I have made clear I believe that the best way forward for irish in the Education system is the proposal put forward by CnaG.

This is my opinion and I am entitled to it.

And then threatened to report me for stating the truth here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69608451&postcount=696

Dannyboy83

Cú Giobach wrote: »

And the number of people here who feel the language is important, far outweighs those who don't.

And the number of people, nationwide, who feel the language should be optional at LC level, far outweighs those who don't, based on the evidence put forward in this thread.


As you said yourself

Cú Giobach wrote: »

The majority of people want to see Irish (apparently) to remain compulsory up to JC

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Just accept the will of the majority won't you.

Focalbhach

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

You said you would clarify, then proceeded to tell me what it isn't.
I appreciate that is helpful in establishing accuracy, but you forgot to tell me what your point actually is.

I tried to below explain it beneath - I'll try again

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

(not intended to have a hostile tone btw, I reserve hostility for those who do a thing that rhymes with bowling, I appreciate you are trying to make an actual point here, but just not explaining it very well)

I appreciate that. Likewise.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Here is the exact statement I made:


The direct implication of this is, in the context of this thread (compulsion or optional) is as follows:
The average results showed, that people who voluntarily select this subject for the leaving cert, do better, on average, than those who are compelled (involuntary) to do other subjects.

You're interpreting a correlation as causation. A and B are correlated, but it does not mean that A causes B. There is an underlying factor C causing both A and B. This is my point.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

And I added the point that preventing this from happening, in favour of compelling someone to do Irish instead, wheter because of points incentives or not, is irrational.

For the third time, I have never advocated this. Can we please stop talking about it?

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Again, I would ask you to clarify how I misrepresented the statistics, as I believe that is a Strawman argument and I have not lower myself to the tactics of others of deliberately misrepresenting or being coy with the truth to suit my position.

'Misrepresenting' was probably the wrong word - I did not mean to suggest that you're being deliberately misleading, so apologies if that is how it came across. I do think that you're misunderstanding the statistics, as per my third paragraph.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Ok, please go ahead and state what it is.

You're ignoring the causal factor C. In other words, you're extrapolating from a tiny, specialised subgroup to the general population, and that is not justified.

Cú Giobach

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Your point is what exactly, Cú Giobach?

My point is WTF has my opinion got to with Deise.
You have quoted me in a number of posts.
(to paraphrase) You keep saying Cú thinks this Cú thinks that why don't you?? I find that very annoying. (I hate when people do that in real life also).

DJP

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Really? I, to be frank, get the opposite feeling...

Here is another report from 2005 that was not linked to on the site I believe:

http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=653

57% said that promoting the Irish language is important both to me
personally and the country as a whole and 32% of people said that promoting the Irish language is important to the country as a whole, but not me personally.

That is 89% of Irish people according to this poll who believe Irish is important.

Cú Giobach

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

And the number of people, nationwide, who feel the language should be optional at LC level, far outweighs those who don't, based on the evidence put forward in this thread.


As you said yourself

Since I was commenting on the importance people give the language your post is quite irrelevant to the comment I made. :rolleyes:

Cú Giobach

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

And the number of people who don't speak Irish hugely outweighs those who do.

Actions speak louder than words.

:rolleyes:

cyclopath2001

Darren J. Prior wrote: »

That is 89% of Irish people according to this poll who believe Irish is important.

That's just politeness, nothing more.

Lord TSC

Darren J. Prior wrote: »

Here is another report from 2005 that was not linked to on the site I believe:

http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=653

57% said that promoting the Irish language is important both to me
personally and the country as a whole and 32% of people said that promoting the Irish language is important to the country as a whole, but not me personally.

That is 89% of Irish people according to this poll who believe Irish is important.

And we've also had links to articles which state that while many think it's important, people also think that it shouldn't be compulsory.

That's what bugs me about this entire thing. If Irish were made optional, then the individual would have the power to show if they think its important or not by choosing it. If it were made optional and people were given the choice, we could get an accurate picture of if people really did think it was important. The problem lies with the fact there are many who would likely say it is important for a variety of reasons, but if were asked to back up their words and spend some time learning it, would choose not to.

Regardless, if people thought it was important en masse, then the majority would choose to do it if given the option. That's still what this whole debate boils down to in my eyes. If people think it's important, why not give them the chance to show it in practice? I know it will probably be said "oh, but there could be negative effects", but that goes against the "people think it's important" line.

You can't believe both. It's either important to people and they will choose it when given the choice. Or they would choose something else in which case it could possibly still be seen as important, but not as important as other subjects...

Focalbhach

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

That's just politeness, nothing more.

I'm going to pre-empt Cú here:

:rolleyes: