The Irish language is failing.

dlouth15

Immersion does work as a language learning technique. If he had not learned Irish at the Gaelscoil he would not have been able to learn other subjects taught through that medium. If he found Irish difficult after 8 or 9 years of schooling primarily in that language then that would be very surprising. Attitude doesn't really come into it.

But the main advantage is that he will get a good result in Honours Irish. I wonder how much he will use it 4 or 5 years from now.

Dughorm

K4t wrote: »

I'm sure he will, though perhaps he could have gone that bit further had a slightly more practical approach been taken by his parents.

Learning irish (or any additional language) does not have to be a zero sum game.

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

Never suggested this. Why does one have to be monolingual?

One doesn't have to be. Still no possible reason to bother learning Irish in that argument I'm afraid for you.

Dughorm

briany wrote: »

To be fair, just because the child of resident non-natives speaks it, or one passes a couple of Spanish people sitting outside a café in Galway speaking it doesn't necessarily lend credence to the idea that foreign people take up the language with any more zeal.

Would that be because there is no such homogenous group of "foreign people"? ... not into imposing identities on any one simply making the point that the approach currently taken to learning irish can be used as a tool of inclusion and can be embraced by all with a positive disposition.

It's confirmation bias to see a few foreign people who are into it (and fair play to them, btw) and assume that means there's a higher proportion of that demographic who are receptive to speaking Irish. I could just as easily form the bias in the other direction in foreign people I've talked to where Irish did not come up. Does that mean they were completely ignorant of the language? Either way, you need hard statistics.

Have I made this assumption? I have simply admired a positive attitude from someone who had to overcome obstacles and has no hangups about the language. This was also my experience in some other similar situations. I haven't labelled anyone or claimed to make statistically significant conclusions.

Aineoil

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Nobody wants to speak it, no matter what their proficiency level is or how easy it was for them to learn.

That's a very sweeping statement. People who live in the Gaeltacht areas of

Ireland speak Irish just as you speak English.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

One doesn't have to be. Still no possible reason to bother learning Irish in that argument I'm afraid for you.

Why is the burden of proof on me to show you why bother learning Irish? You have yet to give a reason other than the circular "it's a waste of time" argument against.

Why would you not want to know what the words of your own national anthem mean assuming youre irish?

briany

Dughorm wrote: »

Would that be because there is no such homogenous group of "foreign people"? ... not into imposing identities on any one simply making the point that the approach currently taken to learning irish can be used as a tool of inclusion and can be embraced by all with a positive disposition.



Have I made this assumption? I have simply admired a positive attitude from someone who had to overcome obstacles and has no hangups about the language. This was also my experience in some other similar situations. I haven't labelled anyone or claimed to make statistically significant conclusions.

There is an accusation sometimes made against Irish people, or native Irish, or however you want to say it, that they have little national or cultural pride because they're being outpaced in uptake of the language, proportionately, by people who come to live here from abroad or the children of those who do. Not trying to put words in your mouth about how you feel over Irish people vs. non-Irish people speaking the language, but I've seen the sentiment used as a segue into talking about the native Irish's perceived negativity toward the language before, and I wanted to nip it in the bud in case that line of logic caught fire (again).

As for the term for a group of people, you yourself said "not native", just meaning non-native as I said or foreign. "Foreign" is also a synonym for non-native, although it gets a bit of a bad rep because of the tone in which some people use it, but I assure you that was not my intent.

Dughorm

briany wrote: »

As for the term for a group of people, you yourself said "not native", just meaning non-native as I said or foreign. "Foreign" is also a synonym for non-native, although it gets a bit of a bad rep because of the tone in which some people use it, but I assure you that was not my intent.

I wouldn't agree with the negative aspect of the argument that "irish people have a hangup en masse", rather the positive argument that "one without a hangup can excel and enjoy the language"

As for foreign v not native.... you're right foreign is a word that people can equivocate with hence why I don't like using it.

Dan_Solo

Aineoil wrote: »

That's a very sweeping statement. People who live in the Gaeltacht areas of

Ireland speak Irish just as you speak English.

People who live in small, specially designated and funded areas speak, to a large extent, the Irish language.
We've been through this already. Irish is finished. Nobody outside a dwindling tiny smattering of people are even faintly interested.

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

Why is the burden of proof on me to show you why bother learning Irish? You have yet to give a reason other than the circular "it's a waste of time" argument against.

Why would you not want to know what the words of your own national anthem mean assuming youre irish?

For a start, if I really wanted to know what a particular specific song meant in my native tongue, I'd probably just Google it rather than learn the entirety of the language in question.
Learning Irish being a waste of time because it's a waste of time... hmm, maybe you need "circular logic" translated into Irish for yourself because that's not that is.

Dan_Solo

briany wrote: »

There is an accusation sometimes made against Irish people, or native Irish, or however you want to say it, that they have little national or cultural pride because they're being outpaced in uptake of the language, proportionately, by people who come to live here from abroad or the children of those who do. Not trying to put words in your mouth about how you feel over Irish people vs. non-Irish people speaking the language, but I've seen the sentiment used as a segue into talking about the native Irish's perceived negativity toward the language before, and I wanted to nip it in the bud in case that line of logic caught fire (again).

As for the term for a group of people, you yourself said "not native", just meaning non-native as I said or foreign. "Foreign" is also a synonym for non-native, although it gets a bit of a bad rep because of the tone in which some people use it, but I assure you that was not my intent.

It's pretty hilarious the way this thread has gone that a complete foreigner learning Irish seems to be being held up as more "Irish" than 90%+ of indigenous Irish people who have been here for generations but speak English...

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

It's pretty hilarious the way this thread has gone that a complete foreigner learning Irish seems to be being held up as more "Irish" than 90%+ of indigenous Irish people who have been here for generations but speak English...

If that's directed at me then I couldn't disagree more.

As I've already said it's not for me (or you) to decide what someone else's identity is.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

For a start, if I really wanted to know what a particular specific song meant in my native tongue, I'd probably just Google it rather than learn the entirety of the language in question.

How can one ever learn the entirety of a language?
Not what I'm saying.

Translation is always second best. Why not learn the living language to engage with it?

You haven't given persuasive reasons to not learn the language. We can always learn other things but that can be an addition.

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

How can one ever learn the entirety of a language?
Not what I'm saying.

Translation is always second best. Why not learn the living language to engage with it?

Because of I've better things to do with my life than learn how to speak a language which will be guaranteed 100% entirely useless for any conceivable purpose?

Do You Even Squat

Just finished my HL Irish paper 2 today. I'm hoping for at least an A2. It's pretty sad that by the time I'm 30, I'll have the same level of Irish as the foundation level students in my year.

Dughorm

Is having Irish a bit like having a 'good room'?

Hardly ever used but wheeled out on occasions and good to have just in case...

323

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Well the thing is you've probably convinced yourself that if only Irish was taught in manner X or Y then everybody in the land would suddenly love it refuse to speak any other language again.
The problem is this is nonsense. Nobody wants to speak it, no matter what their proficiency level is or how easy it was for them to learn.

Tend to mostly agree with you

Aineoil wrote: »

That's a very sweeping statement. People who live in the Gaeltacht areas of

Ireland speak Irish just as you speak English.

If Dan_Sols's statement is sweeping, surely yours has got to be equally so. Come on, you don't really believe that.

Spent my first 18 years in the Galethacht, the only reason 80% professed to speak Irish at home was for the ‘deontas’, gone now I believe. Most could but didn't, unless in preparation for that day once a year when the ‘cigire’ would visit.

323

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Well the thing is you've probably convinced yourself that if only Irish was taught in manner X or Y then everybody in the land would suddenly love it refuse to speak any other language again.
The problem is this is nonsense. Nobody wants to speak it, no matter what their proficiency level is or how easy it was for them to learn.

Tend to mostly agree with you

Aineoil wrote: »

That's a very sweeping statement. People who live in the Gaeltacht areas of

Ireland speak Irish just as you speak English.

If Dan_Sols's statement is sweeping, surely yours has got to be equally so. Come on, you don't really believe that.

Spent my first 18 years in the Galethacht, the only reason 80% professed to speak Irish at home was for the ‘deontas’, gone now I believe. Most could but didn't, unless in preparation for that day once a year when the ‘cigire’ would visit.

Iwasfrozen

Do You Even Squat wrote: »

Just finished my HL Irish paper 2 today. I'm hoping for at least an A2. It's pretty sad that by the time I'm 30, I'll have the same level of Irish as the foundation level students in my year.

Congratulations kid you'll never use Irish again. I hope all that time spent learning it was worth it.

Do You Even Squat

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Congratulations kid you'll never use Irish again. I hope all that time spent learning it was worth it.

Never did algebra or geometry in primary school but at least i got to know how to conjugate verbs in the past tense. Spent over 3 hours a week in irish class and 3 hours a week studying irish over 6 years. Time well spent

Mumha

Aineoil wrote: »

That's a very sweeping statement. People who live in the Gaeltacht areas of Ireland speak Irish just as you speak English.

It might be better for you if there weren't Gaeltacht areas, as they hold themselves as the "keepers of the flame" jealously. It's almost like if you're not born with the peeling of Bow Bells, you're not a real Cockney. And unfortunately that follows through in positions of influence, where those are looked down on for not being Gaelgoirs. Look at the uproar at Joe McHugh's appointment, and even though he threw himself into the learning of the language, I've still read comments deriding him, rather than being inclusive.

Let's face it, the Irish Language "industry" is simply an effort to suck more and more public money from the Government, or EU, for the cosy cartel.

briany

Dughorm wrote: »

You haven't given persuasive reasons to not learn the language. We can always learn other things but that can be an addition.

The question is not why one should or shouldn't learn Irish, the question is what bumps it up high enough on the list of priorities vs. all the other things a person could be learning. Yes, Irish can be an addition, but there are only so many hours in the day.

Mumha

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Congratulations kid you'll never use Irish again. I hope all that time spent learning it was worth it.

A relation of mine is studying to be a primary teacher at the moment, and has been driven demented by a w@nker of a Gaelgoir who is making her life hell over the standard of her Irish. It's disgraceful that someone who would make a wonderful primary school teacher, and has reasonable Irish as it is, is being held to ransom by jackbooted Gaelgoir.

Grayson

Do You Even Squat wrote: »

Just finished my HL Irish paper 2 today. I'm hoping for at least an A2. It's pretty sad that by the time I'm 30, I'll have the same level of Irish as the foundation level students in my year.

Probably the level of a first year student.

Bayberry

dlouth15 wrote: »

But the main advantage is that he will get a good result in Honours Irish. I wonder how much he will use it 4 or 5 years from now.

Probably the same use that many of the people who do honours English, honours Maths, honours Geography, honours Biology etc.

People do 6-8 subjects at leaving cert level. Most of them will go on to do a 3rd level course that really only makes use of 2 or 3 of them to any great extent, maybe 4 if they do a science course.

The other subjects at leaving cert weren't a total waste, but nobody seems to have the same chip on their shoulder about them that they have about Irish.

Dughorm

Do You Even Squat wrote: »

Never did algebra or geometry in primary school but at least i got to know how to conjugate verbs in the past tense. Spent over 3 hours a week in irish class and 3 hours a week studying irish over 6 years. Time well spent

If you're confident of an A2 as Gaeilge then you probably have a reasonable command of the language - have you gone beyond the curriculum in any way?

Have you looked at a TG4 documentary? Have you ever bought a book in Irish if you like reading? Considered joining a ciorcal gaeilge?

The great thing for you is that all those hours you have put in are behind you now - it's your choice as to whether you now want to use your Irish skills for your college course if that's the route you'll pursue or just for the pure enjoyment of it or not at all. It's up to the individual, but your education has given you these options. Go n-éirí leat

Mumha

briany wrote: »

The question is not why one should or shouldn't learn Irish, the question is what bumps it up high enough on the list of priorities vs. all the other things a person could be learning. Yes, Irish can be an addition, but there are only so many hours in the day.

I personally have no problem with Irish being taught in Primary School, though I wish they would teach a foreign language as well, from such a young age. However, compulsory Irish should go, in secondary schools, or make a second language compulsory and that could be Irish, French or whatever.

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

You haven't given persuasive reasons to not learn the language. We can always learn other things but that can be an addition.

Can I ask if you are immortal? Otherwise this is instantly demonstrably false.

Dughorm

briany wrote: »

The question is not why one should or shouldn't learn Irish, the question is what bumps it up high enough on the list of priorities vs. all the other things a person could be learning. Yes, Irish can be an addition, but there are only so many hours in the day.

That comes back to your philosophy of education. I think Irish should be core and not a choice. It is not unusual that countries' national languages form part of their core curriculum.

I think the present curriculum broadly addresses that balance between core and individual priorities. It could be improved in the ways I outlined previously.

The student in the post above now has an education, which because Irish forms part of it, allows him/her to use the language to advance his career, enjoy a substantial portion of Irish culture past and present and have an additional means of communication. Well rounded education in my view.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Can I ask if you are immortal? Otherwise this is instantly demonstrably false.

Haha, I'd say you've been waiting a while for that opportunity :P

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Because of I've better things to do with my life than learn how to speak a language which will be guaranteed 100% entirely useless for any conceivable purpose?

But that's not correct.

How can you become a primary school teacher without Irish?

How can you sing the national anthem at any soccer/GAA game without Irish?

How can you get the shift at a céilí in the Gaeltacht without at least a cúpla focal?

FunLover18

Dughorm wrote: »

That comes back to your philosophy of education. I think Irish should be core and not a choice. It is not unusual that countries' national languages form part of their core curriculum.

I think the present curriculum broadly addresses that balance between core and individual priorities. It could be improved in the ways I outlined previously.

The student in the post above now has an education, which because Irish forms part of it, allows him/her to use the language to advance his career, enjoy a substantial portion of Irish culture past and present and have an additional means of communication. Well rounded education in my view.

But it is unusual that a country's national language is spoken outside of school by less than 50% (I'm unsure how low to go) of the population.

I don't have a major problem with Irish in primary schools, kids at that age are too young to think that Irish is waste of time (or at least I was). It's only as they get older that they begin to start questioning things, and why we're obliged to learn a language which the rest of the grown up population doesn't use is a pretty obvious question.

You mentioned earlier the burden isn't on you to prove why Irish is worth learning, but it is. When you insist on taking time from a student and telling them they have to learn Irish during that time (which is what the state is doing) then I think it's only fair that the onus is on you to explain why. Making Irish optional does not deprive anybody of their right to study Irish, compulsory Irish deprives students of time they could be spending learning a subject they deem more appropriate to their future careers or even just a subject they enjoy.

I don't see why people should have to justify offering a choice

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

But that's not correct.

How can you become a primary school teacher without Irish?

Well we have a decent definition of a circular answer here anyway for you...

Mumha

Dughorm wrote: »

But that's not correct.

How can you become a primary school teacher without Irish? See above

How can you sing the national anthem at any soccer/GAA game without Irish? Use the English version/Irish Phonetics that the lrish Anglos use

How can you get the shift at a céilí in the Gaeltacht without at least a cúpla focal? Let them see the size of your wallet i do phoca

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

Haha, I'd say you've been waiting a while for that opportunity :P

Haha indeed. Are you going to answer it then or not?

Dughorm

FunLover18 wrote: »

But it is unusual that a country's national language is spoken outside of school by less than 50% (I'm unsure how low to go) of the population.

True.

I don't have a major problem with Irish in primary schools, kids at that age are too young to think that Irish is waste of time (or at least I was). It's only as they get older that they begin to start questioning things, and why we're obliged to learn a language which the rest of the grown up population doesn't use is a pretty obvious question.

I'd agree with you, but we have to be consistent here - the majority of the English course is poetry, drama and Shakespeare - topics which the majority of the public don't use either (i'm guessing... not claiming to be an expert here).

So perhaps you are of the option that all subjects should be optional - in which case Irish would be no different.

But that isn't my philosophy of education as I explained above.

You mentioned earlier the burden isn't on you to prove why Irish is worth learning, but it is. When you insist on taking time from a student and telling them they have to learn Irish during that time (which is what the state is doing) then I think it's only fair that the onus is on you to explain why. Making Irish optional does not deprive anybody of their right to study Irish, compulsory Irish deprives students of time they could be spending learning a subject they deem more appropriate to their future careers or even just a subject they enjoy.

I don't see why people should have to justify offering a choice

That logic applies to all compulsory subjects. As I explained above, I think we have a fair balance between core and choice subjects. The content of those core subjects is certainly up for debate in my opinion.

Mumha

FunLover18 wrote: »

But it is unusual that a country's national language is spoken outside of school by less than 50% (I'm unsure how low to go) of the population.

I don't have a major problem with Irish in primary schools, kids at that age are too young to think that Irish is waste of time (or at least I was). It's only as they get older that they begin to start questioning things, and why we're obliged to learn a language which the rest of the grown up population doesn't use is a pretty obvious question.

You mentioned earlier the burden isn't on you to prove why Irish is worth learning, but it is. When you insist on taking time from a student and telling them they have to learn Irish during that time (which is what the state is doing) then I think it's only fair that the onus is on you to explain why. Making Irish optional does not deprive anybody of their right to study Irish, compulsory Irish deprives students of time they could be spending learning a subject they deem more appropriate to their future careers or even just a subject they enjoy.

I don't see why people should have to justify offering a choice

2011 figures


Speaks Irish daily outside the education system
Both sexes
All ages 77,185

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Haha indeed. Are you going to answer it then or not?

Am I immortal? - I'll tell you after I'm dead - we can be like the squabbling corpses in Cré na Cille

See http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/cr%C3%A9-na-cille-%C3%B3-cadhain-s-squabbling-corpses-revived-in-english-1.2154852

Dughorm

Originally Posted by Dan_Solo
Because of I've better things to do with my life than learn how to speak a language which will be guaranteed 100% entirely useless for any conceivable purpose?

Originally Posted by Dughorm
But that's not correct.

How can you become a primary school teacher without Irish?

Originally Posted by Dan_Solo
Well we have a decent definition of a circular answer here anyway for you...

You asked - I answered...

Not 100% entirely useless at the moment - whether you want it to be might be another question though!

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

Am I immortal? - I'll tell you after I'm dead - we can be like the squabbling corpses in Cré na Cille

See http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/cr%C3%A9-na-cille-%C3%B3-cadhain-s-squabbling-corpses-revived-in-english-1.2154852

Yes, also amazingly hilarious. Clap clap.
Now, are you still insisting there is "always" time to learn anything you want? Or is learning Irish some magical extra time added to your lifespan?

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

You asked - I answered...

Not 100% entirely useless at the moment - whether you want it to be might be another question though!

So you had what
1. Torturing the next generation with a useless almost extinct language.
2. Learning what some specific Irish song is about, because just reading the words in English wouldn't do the job. Oh no, couple of 100 hours learning a new language to get some tiny nuance in an anthem where the lyrics don't matter a **** to anybody anyway.
3. Getting a shift at a ceilidh.

Were you whining something earlier about making a persuasive case?

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Yes, also amazingly hilarious. Clap clap.
Now, are you still insisting there is "always" time to learn anything you want? Or is learning Irish some magical extra time added to your lifespan?

Well I do endeavour to keep you entertained... have to throw you the odd sprat!
I'll keep the Breadán Feasa to myself then...

(Explainer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salmon_of_Knowledge)

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

So you had what
1. Torturing the next generation with a useless almost extinct language.
2. Learning what some specific Irish song is about, because just reading the words in English wouldn't do the job. Oh no, couple of 100 hours learning a new language to get some tiny nuance in an anthem where the lyrics don't matter a **** to anybody anyway.
3. Getting a shift at a ceilidh.

Were you whining something earlier about making a persuasive case?

I'd agree with you on the torturing part - that's criminal in my view and not necessary. There are so many creative ways of learning languages and it pains me that teachers aren't given the flexibility to be creative with Irish in this way.

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

Well I do endeavour to keep you entertained... have to throw you the odd sprat!
I'll keep the Breadán Feasa to myself then...

(Explainer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salmon_of_Knowledge)

That's three times I've asked you to explain how there is an infinite amount of time in your life to learn anything you want.
And three time you've refused to answer.
Which is, in itself, as much an answer as anybody needs.

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

I'd agree with you on the torturing part - that's criminal in my view and not necessary. There are so many creative ways of learning languages and it pains me that teachers aren't given the flexibility to be creative with Irish in this way.

This again for the millionth time.
It isn't "how Irish is being taught" is the problem.
Nobody wants to learn it or speak it at all.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

That's three times I've asked you to explain how there is an infinite amount of time in your life to learn anything you want.
And three time you've refused to answer.
Which is, in itself, as much an answer as anybody needs.

An answer to what though? You seem to think you have discovered an unassailable argument which is relevant?

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

This again for the millionth time.
It isn't "how Irish is being taught" is the problem.
Nobody wants to learn it or speak it at all.

Your omniscience regarding this and questions to do with the space-time continuum are impressive. Maith thú!

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

An answer to what though? You seem to think you have discovered an unassailable argument which is relevant?

You yourself thought it was relevant when you said there's "always" time to learn a new language such as Irish (despite it being a big fat waste of time).
Are you going to explain this "always" or just retract it?
Let me guess, option three, break your arse to avoid the question. Yet again.

FunLover18

Dughorm wrote: »

I'd agree with you, but we have to be consistent here - the majority of the English course is poetry, drama and Shakespeare - topics which the majority of the public don't use either (i'm guessing... not claiming to be an expert here).

So perhaps you are of the option that all subjects should be optional - in which case Irish would be no different.

But that isn't my philosophy of education as I explained above.

The English curriculum can afford to be poetry, drama, and Shakespeare because we're fluent in it. It's not just about teaching us the language it's about teaching us critique and analysis which can applied to every day conversation and online discussions.

I think you suggested earlier that there could be 2 Irish subjects, a mandatory conversational class, and an optional subject for poetry and literature. I think this is unnecessary; If Irish were taught properly and conversationally in primary school students should be educated enough in it come LC to study poetry, etc. What would be the focal point of a conversation based Irish class at LC level?

I'll have to read back on your philosophy.

Dughorm wrote: »

That logic applies to all compulsory subjects. As I explained above, I think we have a fair balance between core and choice subjects. The content of those core subjects is certainly up for debate in my opinion.

Irish is the only subject that the department of education says students must study at Leaving Cert level. Compulsory Maths and English seems to be down to schools, probably because of course requirements or something like that. The chances are even if the state did remove mandatory Irish at LC the schools might still keep it in place given that all NUIs require Irish (although from a previous thread on the topic I seem to remember someone saying that that was easy to get around).

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

Your omniscience regarding this and questions to do with the space-time continuum are impressive. Maith thú!

Meaningless drivel.