The Irish language is failing.

Carlos Orange

Dughorm wrote: »

Are you suggesting Irish speakers are trying to colonise their own country? Seriously?!!

You can call it a reconquista if you prefer.

Dan_Solo

Deleted User wrote: »

When you use this kind of pejorative and overly emotional language, you might think it shows some kind of strength in your argument. But all it shows is weakness. If your case was as strong as you claim you would be able to make it with calm, rational and dispassionate language.

Translation: no actually, I can't back up my claim about what you said with a quote, but here's some vague waffle instead.
Nailed.

Wright

Un Croissant wrote: »

Just watching the news and the Irish language is failing, even in the Gaeltacht.

I dont want to get into a debate with the misty eyed brigade about Irish being our first language etc.

Languages are only relevant if they are used. History or nationalism doesn't appear to be enough.

So with that in mind, how can we improve the position of Irish? Do we want to?

While it will never be our first language again, considering mass culture and the internet age, is there a case to be made for a strong second language?

Or should we look elsewhere? I guess I'm inviting the "let's all learn Chinese" gang to join the discussion.

Irish has been dead a long time. Now it simply serves as an annoyance on Public Transport, a financial drain on the government (translation etc.) And most importantly, a ball and chain around the throat of every student in the country. Away with it I say.

(Having a far eastern language in your skillset is an excellent advantage for what is to come )

LordSutch

Dughorm wrote: »

On topic, what is the evidence to suggest that the majority do want Irish optional?

I think a national debate needs to take place, and I would guess that if that debate did tak e place, it would lead to Irish being 'optional' after the inter cert! (But that's just my wish & my opinion).

I have no idea how people would actually vote. It's been mentioned many times before about Enda & Fine Gael suggesting that Irish need no longer be mandatory after the Inter Cert, but they were shot down in flames (pre election) by the "keep Irish mandatory" brigade who are very strong in their own right.

So the status quo continues . . . . . .
The language is in decline, and most of us don't speak it, yet its still compulsory I'm school, right up . . . .

Dan_Solo

inocybe wrote: »

Why is Irish necessary to gain entry to the NUI? And why do kids with dyslexia and ADD get exempted from it, even though they are allowed to take up another language subject in its place.

Or why are foreign born people not required to have Irish to get into NUI? It's either important to be able to follow a university course or it isn't.
(Of course it isn't!)

Dughorm

inocybe wrote: »

Why is Irish necessary to gain entry to the NUI? .

For similar reasons that a foreign language is necessary to gain entry to the NUI I imagine...

Dughorm

LordSutch wrote: »

I think a national debate needs to take place, and I would guess that if that debate did tak e place, it would lead to Irish being 'optional' after the inter cert! (But that's just my wish & my opinion).

I have no idea how people would actually vote. It's been mentioned many times before about Enda & Fine Gael suggesting that Irish need no longer be mandatory after the Inter Cert, but they were shot down in flames (pre election) by the "keep Irish mandatory" brigade who are very strong in their own right.

So the status quo continues . . . . . .

I genuinely don't believe the majority would support optional Irish to be honest...
I'm sure everyone would welcome better teaching of course! And that's not to blame teachers in general - many do inspire a love of the language!

inocybe

Dughorm wrote: »

For similar reasons that a foreign language is necessary to gain entry to the NUI I imagine...

why are students with disabilities granted exemptions from Irish rather than other subjects?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Deleted User wrote: »

Nope. I'm just mimicking the behaviour of those who think that teaching a child one language is "forcing" it on them, but teaching the child another one isn't, for no other reason than their own prejudices. They might think they're being rational or consistent, but they aren't.

No-one is perfect, and we all have to have things that maybe we're not so good at and/or don't like so much. I get that, but I'm just pointing out that basing public policy on the fact that some people can't cope with and don't like something isn't a good idea.

Then the Scandanavia exmple you listed is ridiculous for reasons previously explained.

FTR - I think all subjects should be optional after Junior Cert, english included. If, at the age of 15, we don't trust a student to be able to choose what they study, something has gone wrong long beforehand.

Yes, it is that simple; and if we took that approach to education generally our school leavers would be even more simple.

The idea that letting students choose what they study makes them "simple"?

Dughorm

inocybe wrote: »

why are students with disabilities granted exemptions from Irish rather than other subjects?

I don't know - perhaps their disability makes it more difficult for them to learn Irish? I'm not an educational psychologist or medic...

LordSutch

Dughorm wrote: »

I genuinely don't believe the majority would support optional Irish to be honest...
I'm sure everyone would welcome better teaching of course! And that's not to blame teachers in general - many do inspire a love of the language!

Thing is, the curriculum has been tinkered with for eight decades to try and get us to embrace and speak the language, and this has clearly failed (you must agree)?

So what have they not tried?

I'll tell you. Taking the compulsory nature out of the beast. Making Irish a subject pupils want to study instead of being forced to study (after Inter Cert) . . .

I think this should at least be triled for five years or so to see what happens, and if the take-up is good then its working, and if the take up for Irish is bad, then something else would have to be introduced to keep the language alive?

psinno

psinno wrote: »

You don't think giving legal ascendancy to the language of a tiny minority has a colonial tinge to it?

Assuming for a moment that the above has some practical meaning in terms of the law or the Constitution, only a prejudiced person could believe that the Irish language has "legal ascendancy".

I've said more than once that arguments made on this thread by people like yourself are based on prejudiced viewpoints. If you want to make arguments about the position of the Irish language in Irish life - or ask questions of those of us who believe it should have a place in Irish life - at least make an effort to base your arguments and questions on what is and isn't, not on what you do and don't like.

Dan_Solo

LordSutch wrote: »

Thing is, the curriculum has been tinkered with for eight decades to try and get us to embrace and speak the language, and this has clearly failed (you must agree)?

So what have they not tried?

The thing is this is one of the central pillars of the pro-compulsory Irish brigade argument: that Irish people really really really want to speak Irish all the time but it was never taught to them properly.
The simple fact that nobody wants to speak Irish that is staring them in the face can never once be admitted is true.

Dan_Solo

Deleted User wrote: »

Assuming for a moment that the above has some practical meaning in terms of the law or the Constitution, only a prejudiced person could believe that the Irish language has "legal ascendancy".

WTF? The Irish version of the constitution takes legal primacy. This is a cast-iron widely known indisputable fact. Is reality prejudicial? For some people I guess!

psinno

psinno wrote: »

What are the rational dispassionate reasons for mandating Irish in schools?

If you have an argument to make to change the status of either of our languages in law and in the public realm, it's up to you to make it rather than trying to change the discussion to draw attention away from your inability to advance your case.

You should bear in mind that my argument isn't about "mandating Irish in schools", or whatever other hobby horse you have. I would prefer a radical overhaul of the teaching of Irish, as it happens. But that view of mine is by the by. Your argument is based on your inability to get to grips with Irish and your prejudices against it. If you want to be taken seriously, you'll need to advance more credible arguments that rely on reason rather than emotion.

Dan_Solo

Deleted User wrote: »

Your argument is based on your inability to get to grips with Irish and your prejudices against it.

Any chance you'd show us some evidence for any of this "inability" or "prejudice" or are you just, ya know, blathering on made up stuff again like you were caught red handed earlier with the "human rights" thing that you fabricated?

Dan_Solo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Translation: no actually, I can't back up my claim about what you said with a quote, but here's some vague waffle instead.
Nailed.

Translation?

But translation is something you just can't do.

Aistriúcháin: Is mó bealach le cat a mharú ná é a thachtadh le him.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

FTR - I think all subjects should be optional after Junior Cert, english included.

Nope, I'm not buying that either.

FTR.

Dan_Solo

Deleted User wrote: »

Translation?

But translation is something you just can't do.

Aistriúcháin: Is mó bealach le cat a mharú ná é a thachtadh le him.

Whatever. Caught lying about other posters multiple times and the best you can do is some oh so hilarious Irish blather which nobody really gives a **** what it means.
Well done lad. Well done.

Dughorm

LordSutch wrote: »

Thing is, the curriculum has been tinkered with for eight decades to try and get us to embrace and speak the language, and this has clearly failed (you must agree)?

The language has been in decline for a few hundred years - you must agree?!

But that's not the point, there have been incremental improvements, such as gaelscoileanna, retirement of Peig, 40%+ Oral Irish exam - you must agree?!

LordSutch wrote: »

So what have they not tried?

Loads of things -
Junior Cert Oral Irish Exam
Additional optional subject for literature and poetry "celtic studies"
Primary school 'turas scoile' to the Gaeltacht
Gaeltacht immersion trips in non-exam years
Continuous assessment - community expression of Irish etc...

I could go on.... but I think the 40%+ Oral Irish should be given a chance to bed down - it certainly puts those lazy "dead-language" notes-only Irish teachers on the back foot!

Dan_Solo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Whatever.

I know you don't know what it means - but there's always google.

Or better still, go spend a week learning the language, and then come back here and post your thoughts on the topic.

Beir bua agus beannacht.

Dughorm

Dughorm wrote: »

I could go on.... but I think the 40%+ Oral Irish should be given a chance to bed down - it certainly puts those lazy "dead-language" notes-only Irish teachers on the back foot!

Over the years we've made a bollix of teaching Irish - though I guess we've also done that with some other subjects too.

We put way too much emphasis on written Irish and the "caighdeán", at the expense of conversation, caint agus éisteacht.

Hopefully the changes that have been made will help. An bhfuil siad ró-dhéanach? B'fhéidir, ach is fiú an iarracht.

Dan_Solo

Deleted User wrote: »

I know you don't know what it means - but there's always google.

Or better still, go spend a week learning the language, and then come back here and post your thoughts on the topic.

Beir bua agus beannacht.

How do you know I don't know what it means? Because you've been caught out multiple times lying about other posters and the best you have in reply is to give us an Irish proverb?
Bit of a non-sequitur that isn't it, huh?

Dan_Solo

Deleted User wrote: »

An bhfuil siad ró-dhéanach? B'fhéidir, ach is fiú an iarracht.

It's dead mate. Dead and buried.
Under 1% of the country use it in any meaningful sense. There's more habitual Polish speakers.

Carlos Orange

Deleted User wrote: »

If you have an argument to make to change the status of either of our languages in law and in the public realm, it's up to you to make it rather than trying to change the discussion to draw attention away from your inability to advance your case.

That is certainly true in some sense. There is a burden on someone asking for a particular change due to the requirement to overcome inertia. On the other hand it really amounts to just conceding the current state of play exists only because it exists. Apparently there isn't any particular rational argument in favour of it.

It is about as convincing as Irish has to be mandatory because we have loads of Irish (language) teachers.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

It's dead mate. Dead and buried.

When did it die - in your opinion?

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

Loads of things -
Junior Cert Oral Irish Exam
Additional optional subject for literature and poetry "celtic studies"
Primary school 'turas scoile' to the Gaeltacht
Gaeltacht immersion trips in non-exam years
Continuous assessment - community expression of Irish etc...

I could go on.... but I think the 40%+ Oral Irish should be given a chance to bed down - it certainly puts those lazy "dead-language" notes-only Irish teachers on the back foot!

This is delusional.
Do you really think only 1% of people who pass their LC are able to hold any sort of conversation in Irish? Of course they are. They've been listening to and speaking Irish for hours a week for 13-14 years.
They just don't want to speak it or hear it when they don't have to.

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

When did it die - in your opinion?

It "died" as being a language of any consequence nationally when it got to under 1% of the population using it in any way habitually. When it was surpassed in popularity by another language, Polish, which has only had any sizable number of speakers in the last few decades at most.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

It "died" as being a language of any consequence nationally when it got to under 1% of the population using it in any way habitually. When it was surpassed in popularity by another language, Polish, which has only had any sizable number of speakers in the last few decades at most.

So only recently then? Ah sure we'll be grand... that's like being a goal and a few points down at half time

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

This is delusional.
Do you really think only 1% of people who pass their LC are able to hold any sort of conversation in Irish? Of course they are. They've been listening to and speaking Irish for hours a week for 13-14 years.
They just don't want to speak it or hear it when they don't have to.

It would appear from this thread many people haven't been listening to and speaking Irish for hours a week...more like learning off translations and essays...

More's the pity... irish teachers acting like undertakers using your terminology!

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

So only recently then? Ah sure we'll be grand... that's like being a goal and a few points down at half time

So when something is dead that isn't a problem because it only died recently? So basically you're saying Irish needs a miracle to save it?!?!

Dan_Solo

Dughorm wrote: »

It would appear from this thread many people haven't been listening to and speaking Irish for hours a week...more like learning off translations and essays...

You're kidding me. Do you think people go through primary and secondary school without hearing any spoken Irish at all?

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

You're kidding me. Do you think people go through primary and secondary school without hearing any spoken Irish at all?

I genuinely wouldn't be surprised - with the exception of the aural tapes of course - what was your Irish teaching like?

Carlos Orange

Dughorm wrote: »

It would appear from this thread many people haven't been listening to and speaking Irish for hours a week...more like learning off translations and essays...

More's the pity... irish teachers acting like undertakers using your terminology!

I did find it weird back in the day how the honours leaving cert Irish students memorised essay answers (as the teachers policy not something random students did). Almost as weird as the fact I can't remember whether my pass Irish class did that or not.

Dughorm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

So when something is dead that isn't a problem because it only died recently? So basically you're saying Irish needs a miracle to save it?!?!

But Irish isn't a problem - it's a way of communicating for people who enjoy it.

It's "dead" using the arbitrary statistical measure you've decided upon based on your own authority.

To me a language is alive when people use it to relax and chat over a pint - try it some time!

Sh1tbag OToole

A language with only 1 fluent speaker is still alive. Languages can even be revived from the dead in some cases. Don't think even 1% of the crowd that left the secondary school I went to could hold a conversation in Irish

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Deleted User wrote: »

Nope, I'm not buying that either.

FTR.

You're not buying it as an idea, or the fact that I beleive it?

I;ve state it repeatedly that I belive the Leaving Cert should be entirely chosen by the student. Your opinion seems to be that this makes students simple: I notice you cut that bit out rather than reply to it?

In any case, it;s a sidescreen: the question is: how does cumpolsory Irish for the LC help the language?

georgewickstaff

The amount of time my kids WASTE learning this s**t genuinely upsets me. I loathe it and the ghastly micro minority who put so much effort into the whole theater of pretending the language is important or relevant.

Enough FFS.

Dughorm

georgewickstaff wrote: »

The amount of time my kids WASTE learning this s**t genuinely upsets me. I loathe it and the ghastly micro minority who put so much effort into the whole theater of pretending the language is important or relevant.

Enough FFS.

Same could be said for religion, drawing, english literature etc... - it's as relevant as you want it to be!!! but why be deprived the opportunity of a liberal arts education?

Iwasfrozen

Dughorm wrote: »

Same could be said for religion, drawing, english literature etc... - it's as relevant as you want it to be!!! but why be deprived the opportunity of a liberal arts education?

No one wants to deprave anyone of anything, we just want Irish made optional. Is that hard to understand?

youngblood

It should be banned/outlawed completely and see what happens then

Dughorm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

No one wants to deprave anyone of anything, we just want Irish made optional. Is that hard to understand?

Oh I understand but there's two problems
1. No one has presented evidence that the majority want it optional,
2. You might want Irish optional, I might want English literature optional, DanSolo might want Maths optional - unless you want an A-levels approach where all subjects are optional then you can't please everybody.

I personally think the current approach re. mandatory subjects is adequate.

Iwasfrozen

Dughorm wrote: »

Oh I understand but there's two problems
1. No one has presented evidence that the majority want it optional,
2. You might want Irish optional, I might want English literature optional, DanSolo might want Maths optional - unless you want an A-levels approach where all subjects are optional then you can't please everybody.

I personally think the current approach re. mandatory subjects is adequate.

1. Why do I need to provide evidence for something I haven't claimed?
2. That's fine, let's have all subjects optional. I would prefer to have maths stay compulsory but I'm willing to accept optional maths as a compromise for optional Irish.

Dughorm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

1. Why do I need to provide evidence for something I haven't claimed?
2. That's fine, let's have all subjects optional.

1. I think the onus tends to be on the people who want the change to establish the grounds and support they have...
2. Nothing wrong with that - it is consistent... but that isn't what some other posters here believe...

Iwasfrozen

Dughorm wrote: »

1. I think the onus tends to be on the people who want the change to establish the grounds and support they have...
2. Nothing wrong with that - it is consistent... but that isn't what some other posters here believe...

1. Not really, people's rights should not be subject to democratic will. I believe the forced teaching of Irish violates a student's (and parent's when the child is under 18) rights to choose their own education.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Dughorm wrote: »

I personally think the current approach re. mandatory subjects is adequate.

Adequate for what? The enhancemetn and status of Irish as a flourishing langauge?

Dughorm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

1. Not really, people's rights should not be subject to democratic will. I believe the forced teaching of Irish violates a student's (and parent's when the child is under 18) rights to choose their own education.

Do you feel your human rights are being violated? Have you considered getting legal advice? Constitutional challenge perhaps?

Iwasfrozen

Dughorm wrote: »

Do you feel your human rights are being violated? Have you considered getting legal advice? Constitutional challenge perhaps?

Now you're being flippant.

Dughorm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Adequate for what? The enhancemetn and status of Irish as a flourishing langauge?

Adequate as a foundation for a broad liberal arts education - students also have the flexibility to pursue other courses in business, the sciences, arts etc... I think it's a fair mix.

The exam mill approach doesn't help Irish flourish, neither does it enhance our appreciation of literature and poetry in English in my opinion.

Dughorm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Now you're being flippant.

That was free legal advice....