“there is a mechanism to go back to the British..”
Interesting lines in the final paragraph in Sinn Féin MLA Francie Brolly’s response to some of the arguments against an Irish Language Act
“The British government has already given a commitment to ensure language rights and there is a mechanism to go back to the British if this is thwarted. But we’d rather not.”
Assuming that Francie Brolly actually believes this line.. Which mechanism would that be then?.. It’s probably true that the situation isn’t as clear-cut as that surrounding the devolution of policing and justice – as the language issue is already devolved – but the British Government’s position has been stated clearly to the House – “we would not legislate on a devolved matter, except with the Assembly’s acceptance and agreement.” – And to circumvent the Sewel Convention [pdf file] on devolved matters would demand that both the Scottish and Welsh administrations were also assured that this was a one-off, never to be repeated, incident..
“What would be the most important single precise item in any such Act-for you?”
That local Councils would have the right to erect Irish-only or bilingual signage.
Darren – thanks for the straightforward reply.
“That local Councils would have the right to erect Irish-only or bilingual signage.”
Irish only sinage is akin to dogs pissing on lamp posts or painting kerb stones. As for bilingual sinage, district councils already have this right and some nationalist councils exercise it.
Bilingual council signs do not an Act require.
Perhaps Darren can clarify?
If property developers or local Councils want to name residential developments as Gaeilge only then they SHOULD be allowed. They can in the Republic. Outside of a handful of counties, there are a huge number of developments being named in Irish only in most counties in the Republic today.
If road-signs can already be bilingual if the local Councils want them I don’t know why this issue seems to be the biggest argument on the subject.
Gaelgeoirà should have the right to deal with State bodies as Gaeilge also. Irish was spoken in Ireland hundreds of years before English was spoken in English and there are thousands of Irish speakers in the North.
NI has failed as a State. Over 40% of the population vote for parties that want reunification. Unionists might like to stay in the UK but so long as nearly half of the population disagree many issues cannot simply be dismissed. An Irish Language Act is one of them. If the DUP and UUP don’t budge they will be demonising themselves.
Darren has clarified.
“then they SHOULD be allowed. They can in the Republic.”
“Irish was spoken in Ireland hundreds of years before English was spoken in English (sic)”
“NI has failed as a State”
“Over 40% of the population vote for parties that want reunification”
Isn’t it interesting that in a debate about the Irish language tired old nationalist rhetoric is deployed. Then again, tired old nationalism and Irish language activism do seem to attract exactly the same type.
Remind me again why a unionist should support this particular item on the nationalist/ republican wish list?
Don’t worry about it Bonar Law – this lad plays lovely welsh folks songs – tell him he’s good.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QwOOX0zt_hw
Dewi
thanks for the link, John Joseph Davies is very good indeed!
Diolch Bonar Law !
Slug
Thanks for your comments.
You know, I’d nearly back SF on this, given the ludicrous response of the Unionist Parties, if they weren’t being so sectarian about it.
The colours red, white and blue aren’t sectarian either – but once you paint them on a kerbstone they are.
Willowfield
The threat of courts is more ludicrous even than that.
We now have SF demanding the intervention of “the Brits” in the internal affairs of part of Ireland!!
True Republicans would spend their time persuading their fellow Irish of the merit of their case, not demeaning themselves by going off to London with the begging bowl.
But then, true Republicans don’t join SF. And when they do, they find their press releases re-written… crioch
“You know, I’d nearly back SF on this”
It’s not a question of backing SF. The SDLP want an Act as well. Sen. Maurice Hayes- a former head of the Civil Service in the North- is also in favour of one. I believe Eoghan Harris is also.
It’s not a matter of backing anyone ! – it’s just about a language – no religious stuff involved – just maintaining the linguistic diversity of the world – be a disaster if another language dies.
BONAR LAW
Irish only sinage (sic) is akin to dogs pissing on lamp posts or painting kerb stones.
A load of crap, if you pardon the pun. The Irish language community is not asking for Irish only signage. Bilingual signs in areas that support Irish is simply recognition of the Gaelic language community, nothing else. 99% of people do not speak Irish for political reasons.
And the issue for Irish speakers is road directional signage, not street and road names that can already be made bilingual.
Also please stop equating Irish speakers with ‘old Nationalists’. One poster here made those remarks, not everybody.
IJP
You know, I’d nearly back SF on this, given the ludicrous response of the Unionist Parties, if they weren’t being so sectarian about it.
So you would support it if SF were not so vocal on the issue?
It might help if the media would interview representatives of the Irish language community instead of politicians. It is after all an Act for Irish Gaelic, a language community which includes people from all sections of our society.
Fair_Deal:
“If SF and SDLP want an act then they have to offer Unionism something in return and considering the unpopularity of an ILA in the broad Unionist community, it would need to be a pretty sweet deal.
Unionism doesn’t need to “to come forward and engage with us so that we can all work towards finding ways to resolving those concerns†as it can achieve what it presently wants without this. However, nationalism won’t.”
On the contrary, if Unionists weren’t so short-sighted then they would realise that it is they who should be offering things like the Irish Language Act, parity of flags, etc to the increasing population of northern nationalists, if the latter are to be persuaded that the partitioned 6 county statelet is something that they can give their allegiance to.
Darren
I have much less concern about backing the SDLP on things than SF.
The ILA is, however, totally associated with SF. As, frankly, is the Irish language these days.
Dewi
You’re buying the rhetoric.
An ILA is not necessary to save the Irish language.
A genuinely cross-community approach to it is.
RG
BonarLaw makes a reasonable equation though.
It is frankly ludicrous to put Irish on all directional signs “in recognition of the Gaelic-language community” – first, such recognition is unnecessary; second, what about schools and hospitals? third, what about other language communities – can you explain why Bangor Leisure Centre (a directional sign) should be in Irish but not Polish, Bengali or Scots?
RG again
Support what? We haven’t seen the Act yet!
Regardless of what any party (even my own) says, my stance is that anything that advances a cross-community approach and is focused on education and broadcasting and does not cost money has my support.
Anything which is about getting one up on the other side and forms an inequality between speakers of one language and speakers of another will damage the language and damage our politics.
Therefore a rights-based ILA is a nonsense, as it creates inequality, and anyone suggesting such a thing should be ashamed, particularly if they claim to be a “republican”. However, it would help if the Unionist reaction weren’t so hysterical.
Oilibhear
I fear you’re heading down the road you did with the whole ‘Irish as the biggest factor in the economy’ issue.
“The fact is that it’s not a set of proposals. It’s an international agreement. If you want to argue otherwise, do so. waste your time not mine.”
Look, you can keep saying one thing and I can keep saying another, but at least I’m producing some evidence to back up my claim. Where is your proof that this is an international agreement? I can’t find any.
This was a document which was agreed by the Prime Ministers of two countries. That doesn’t make it an international and binding agreement you know.
I’ll even use the statement from the Irish Government website:
http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/index.asp?locID=199&docID=2931
Where’s the mention of some binding treaty there then?
However, you have singularly failed to explain two issues.
1) How London is going to overrule a UK devolved administration on an issue where responsibility is devolved? And allied to that, why they would risk the wrath of a very twitchy Scots electorate to do so.
2) What in the hell Dublin is going to do about anything, either in the Courts or through any other method?
You know, if there ever was the allegation that unionists had a superiority complex I feel that it has well and truly been passed on to the nationalist community. Nationalists have been pandered to for well over a decade now, mind you, some previous unionist leaders helped feed that demand. For a good few years there were Presidents of the USA, Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom and Prime Ministers/Presidents of Ireland all ready to tell you how good you were and how your concerns needed addressing.
The trouble is that it cant go on for ever and the Government made it clear that its the end of the road. No more running back looking for more and more. The Irish Language Act isn’t in the legislation – there is no legal method to force one and there’s b*gger all you can do about it. Get used to it – you’re just not that important any more.
Gee, I’m crushed interested.
The facts are, it seems, whatever you want them to be. I’ll stick with my version, you with yours. If unionists want to say NO to the Irish Language Act for no good reason except to prove that nationalists ‘aren’t that important any more’, let them do that in the eyes in the world and see where that gets them.
Ian
Unionist “concerns” get dealt with by no bill being brought forward or vetoed. So they don’t have to do anything. My suggestion creates a win-win.
I was waiting for the “give nationalists everything they want and it will make nationalists more content” argument.
Running NI for the sole satisfaction of one community is how we got into this just changing the community to be satisfied will not produce any better results.
Also all the electoral evidence of the past 10-15 years is the opposite, a series of key demands of Irish nationalism have been granted the result is northern nationalists voting in increasing numbers for the more vociferously nationalist party. The “content” it produces (if any) seems significantly outwieghed by the feeding of expectation of “success” around the corner.
olibhear
” If unionists want to say NO to the Irish Language Act for no good reason except to prove that nationalists ‘aren’t that important any more’, let them do that in the eyes in the world and see where that gets them. ”
Do you really think the world could give a flying you-know-what? People think NI is “sorted” and don’t want to hear any different.
BonarLaw
Do you really think the world could give a flying you-know-what? People think NI is “sorted†and don’t want to hear any different.
This is essentially the same point as the one I’d already made, made better.
I ask: what is it with Irish Republicans wanting the British to intervene in this part of Ireland? Would “Republicans” not be better trying to convince their fellow “Irish” citizens?
You rightly point out: oh, and by the way, SF has no political power outside NI any more. So not only should they start convincing rather than demanding, but they must…
IJP
it has suddenly come to me!
This is about softening up the Republican heartland for an end to the Westminster boycott. The nasty unionists won’t play ball at home so Gerry, Marty et al can introduce an Irish Language Bill from the floor of the House of Commons.
Oilibhar
“The facts are, it seems, whatever you want them to be. I’ll stick with my version, you with yours.”
I’m fairly happy with that tacit admission of defeat. Pieces of paper don’t become ‘law’ simply because a couple of Prime Ministers hold them up you know. They have to be legislated for – keep that one in mind for the future.
“If unionists want to say NO to the Irish Language Act for no good reason except to prove that nationalists ‘aren’t that important any more’, let them do that in the eyes in the world and see where that gets them.”
You really think the “eyes of the world” give a monkey’s fiddle about an Irish Language Act. They may well be fairly pleased that we’ve stopped shooting at each other (and them) but I really think its stretching their good-will and interest to ask them to get bothered about some piece of minor language legislation.
You just haven’t taken the big point here – You’re not important enough for the British or Irish Government to worry about any more let alone the “eyes of the world”.
*Disclaimer – I’ve just read Bonar Law’s post after typing this but I cant be a*sed deleting it. Point well made.
Also a nice possibility about Gerry and Martin seeking Royal assent in the Mother of Parliaments for their Irish Bill rather than doing it the circuitous route through Stormont!
Time will tell!
IJP
Can you explain why Bangor Leisure Centre (a directional sign) should be in Irish but not Polish, Bengali or Scots?
Yes, it’s quite simple. The word Bangor – like over 96% of place-names in NI – is a bastardisation of the original Irish Gaelic. In this case, Beannchar. Bangor also has a long connection with Irish Gaelic life, stretching back over 1,500 years – a connection which Polish and Bengali do not have.
Irish is also the second most widely spoken language here, Polish, Bengali and Scots are not. If however the people of Bangor wanted their road signs in the Ulster version of Scots, then i would support their call for bilingual English/Scots signage.
Support what? We haven’t seen the Act yet!
You know what i mean – to support the proposed ACHT.
Anything which is about getting one up on the other side and forms an inequality between speakers of one language and speakers of another will damage the language and damage our politics.
I agree to an extent but increased recognition for the Irish language community is not about one-upsmanship. It’s about equality. Do you even know any Irish speakers? I’d ask them before stating why people are seeking further official recognition.
You somehow claim that an Irish Language Act will create inequality – the only real linguistic equality is created by the current system which leaves Irish speakers unable to deal with government officials in their language of choice, which provides minimal tv or radio programming in Irish and which has only one language on all road signage. Is this equality in the eyes of the Alliance Party?
RG
You know fine rightly I was referring to “Leisure Centre”, not “Bangor”.
Irish is also the second most widely spoken language here
And that’s just nonsense.
recognition for the Irish language community is not about one-upsmanship. It’s about equality.
No it’s not. It doesn’t just become “about equality” because you keep saying so.
Do you even know any Irish speakers?
I know Francie Brolly well for a start…!
the only real linguistic equality is created by the current system which leaves Irish speakers unable to deal with government officials in their language of choice
… and Polish speakers, and Bengali speakers, and Scots speakers. What’s your point? It’s up to them to learn English, and up to the State to enable to them to do so. That’s equality.
I speak German. If I choose to deal with government officials in my language of choice, and the language of my choice is German, should I be able to do so?
“Irish is also the second most widely spoken language here, Polish, Bengali and Scots are not”
Polish and Bengali speakers have English as a second language, Irish speakers have, well, Irish as a second language. Unless there are thousands of Irish speakers ignorant of or deficient in English I think the Poles and Bengalis have a better arguement for bilingual sinage.
“the only real linguistic equality is created by the current system which leaves Irish speakers unable to deal with government officials in their language of choice”
Are you suggesting that those define themselves as Irish speakers are disadvantaged in their dealings with government officials by chosing not to use English?
BonarLaw,
‘I think the Poles and Bengalis have a better arguement for bilingual sinage’
Is there any evidence that Poles and Bengalis have adopted new forms of place-names?
What for example is Newry in Polish?
This is singularly the most divisive issue I can think of at the moment. I understand the Unionist parties argument in the sense that it is divisive. However NI is already 90% divided in geographical terms.
IJP
Dominic Bradley and BrÃd Rodgers are two SDLP members I can think of who speak Irish- BrÃd Rodgers being a native Irish speaker from neighbouring Donegal.
gaelgannaire
now you’re just being silly.
Darren
ah Brid. I remember her use of Irish back in ’98 when she used it in Castle Buildings anytime she was in the company of a fellow Irish speaker. Funny thing though, she always used English until a monoglot Unionist strayed into view, nor do I recall her being disadvantaged by Sen. Mitchells’ oppressive use of English.
IJP
Sorry, it wasn’t clear you were refering to ‘leisure centre’.
And that’s just nonsense.
Please clarify this. Anybody who claims that Irish Gaelic is not the most widely spoken language here after English has serious issues of denial.
According to the last census there are only 8,000 speakers of Chinese languages in NI. There are about 30,000 Polish speakers. A recent Millward Brown survey found out that around 17,000 people here speak Irish at home. Add to this the thousands of other fluent speakers and you’ll get a figure above 30,000. While not as high as the census figure of 75,000 fluent speakers, the true number of Irish speakers in NI is significantly greater than any other language community apart from English.
I know Francie Brolly well for a start…!
Francie Brolly is hardly representative of the Irish language community. He is Sinn Féin’s spokesperson for the language, nothing more.
I speak German. If I choose to deal with government officials in my language of choice, and the language of my choice is German, should I be able to do so?
If a person has to speak German and needs to communicate with the authorities then of course a translator should be provided.
Overall though, do you really know how ridiculous your arguement sounds?
German was never spoken here historically nor is it currently spoken by a significant section of the community. Irish is.
Has German influenced the way we speak or is it an integral part of the cultural makeup of our island? No.
Do nearly all our placenames come from German? No.
Would a German expect German language signs or widespread German services in Spain? No.
But would he or she expect them in their own country? Yes.
Everybody in Wales, Catalunya, Galicia, Friesland, Tirol etc. understands this – why not the Alliance Party?
BONARLAW
now you’re just being silly.
He is not. Gael Gan Náire has a valid point.
The place-name Newry is based on the Irish Gaelic ‘An tIúr’. It is known by two names, the Irish and the English. There is no version in Bengali or Polish, or any other language for that matter.
The vast majority of places throughout the world that have bilingual or trilingual versions of placenames recognise this diversity in their signage.
In the Basque Country for example it’s not just San Sebastián on the signs but Donostia/San Sebastián. In Wales it’s not just Cardiff but Caerdydd/Cardiff. In the South Tirol there are three versions to acknowledge their diverse native language groupings – German, Italian and Ladin. For example the capital of the region is known as Bozen, Bolzano and Bulsan respectively.
Maybe you think all these guys are extremists too?
Doesn’t Newry & Mourne District Council have bilingual signs on the way into Newry?
“Is there any evidence that Poles and Bengalis have adopted new forms of place-names?”
No but language Acts aren’t about place names, that is tokenism.
I’ll give you an example of where the Irish speakers can’t seem to understand how other minorities are affected by use of their own language in Northern Ireland.
Polish people who work in Northern Ireland tend to be able to use English as a second language and arguably not as well as the indigenous locals; now obviously Polish people who work with other Polish people tend to return to speaking in their mother tongue to help carry out work related tasks.
There have been examples of employers giving tasks to employed Polish managers, usually in the retail sector, who then converse in Polish to other Polish employees; however, employers have came down on said managers stipulating a requirement of the preference to have staff speak to each other in English at all times, even if completion of tasks will take longer due to the fact that talking in Polish tends to speed up understanding of instructions.
To me that is intolerance and discrimination, but where does such a situation like this occur with Irish speakers whenever the vast majority can out-articulate in English over Irish, or where would a situation like this happen in the workplace in an Irish language context.
BONAR LAW
Doesn’t Newry & Mourne District Council have bilingual signs on the way into Newry?
Yes. They have an excellent bilingual policy and many street names in the Council area are in both Irish and English.
Councils however have no power over road signage. That’s DRD.
DC
There have been a number of incindents over the past few years where Irish speakers have been instructed not to use Irish at work. One such incident actually involved a parent who was asked not to speak Irish on the phone with her children as it was upseting some of her work colleagues.
I’m guessing Gael Gan Náire could provide more info.
Bonarlaw, IJP.
Almost all Irish speakers, aside from the very young, are bilingual due to centuries of discrimination.
To you this is an arguement againist linguistic rights. But clearly to an Irish speaker the same senario is an arguement for linguistic rights.
For example, if you are up in court you have to speak in English so you had better make sure you can.
Whilst not entirely relevent today, it is worth noting that people in Ireland and Scotland have gone to the gallows without ever understanding the charges againist them. Again, to some that’s discrimination, to others progress.
The reality in the North today is that there simply not enough children speaking Irish as a first language to guarantee a future for the language.
Again, from unionists’ point of view this is an arguement againist linguistic rights but again an Irish speakers will seek, for example, an ILA in order to break down the barriers that mitigate againist people speaking Irish to their children and which make that task a lot harder, essential services being an example, lack of t.v. programs being another.
Anyone who has reared their family with Irish can tell you that it is not an altogether easy thing to do, that is why Irish speakers want an Act, to ease the pressures on our language.
How would a biligual road-sign in say, in Carrickmore (‘Tha Big Stane’) aid this? The kids would see the original form in print, it would mitigate againist them using the anglicised form, which in turn makes it impossible to form the genitive case in Irish leading again to further anglicisation, a bilingual would also have the important effecvt of lifting the status and esteem of the language.
Bilingual signs are about the preservation and transmission of knowledge.
Unionists frequently speak of ‘territorial pissings’, it must be concluded in my view that that is their primary reason for opposing them, i.e. that Northern Ireland is marked as their territory, and their’s alone.
However, and in reference to Darren, it is pointless to discuss the issue as both parties seek opposite outcomes.
Darren, in Wales they quickly realised this http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/celtic/22papers/phillips.pdf
However, whilst I don’t beleve that there can never be an Irish Language Act per say, due to the simple demographics of Northern Ireland. I do think there has been a shift in the retoric of unionist away from the ‘Irish is a dead language of a dead people’ (Jim Shannon, DUP) and the whole leipreachán discourse.
It may be possible therefore to pick out the most important parts of a proposed acts and get them enacted as individual segments. E.g. The right to learn Irish at school > the right to be educated in Irish?
“There have been a number of incindents over the past few years where Irish speakers have been instructed not to use Irish at work.”
Yes, and now you are starting to come round to the need for tolerance in such a setting and focus on the right to speak it without the outcome leading to discrimination against the person speaking it, but at the same time the whole domination of the singular ‘Irish’ dimension to a language Act and indeed focusing on place names is just a bit OTT given other sizeable nationalities within Northern Ireland.
The main point which I am generalising is that with equality anti-discrimination protection it is usually brought in to protect those people who are discriminated against because they remain without the option to revert into anything other that what they are living with rigid conditions without any flexibility to change to accommodate. Such as disability, race, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, gender etc.
So if Polish people work with Polish people the natural conclusion is that Polish should be spoken given their nationality where Polish language is default. The Irish Republic constituents speak English as their first language, widely acknowledged no, and thus the primacy of the Irish language lacks integrity.
“Almost all Irish speakers, aside from the very young, are bilingual due to centuries of discrimination.”
Stop the thread now!!
We’re not going to ever top that one for sheer stupidity…
After the full gambit of dodgy rationale for an Irish Language Act we then came to this little gem:
gaelgannaire
“It may be possible therefore to pick out the most important parts of a proposed acts and get them enacted as individual segments. E.g. The right to learn Irish at school > the right to be educated in Irish?”
Err… Actually I’m quite happy with that – because you already have those rights. Everyone has the right to be educated in Irish, Urdu or Esperanto should they choose to do so. Whether the state has a duty to fund such activities is another matter all together.
DC
Every Gaelic speaker will agree that nobody should be discriminated against on the basis of language. We understand this more than most.
Your point however about having the option, or being able to change which language you speak, is not valid. Being forced by an employer to speak a certain language is still forcing somebody to do something against their will.
Irish Republic constituents speak English as their first language
I’m sure you are aware that this is not the case for everybody. Or are you now calling into question the Irish language population of the south as well as the north?
“Being forced by an employer to speak a certain language is still forcing somebody to do something against their will.”
Yes, and oddly enough my employer forces me to do things that I dont like / dont want to do all the time – work being one of the of course. They also impose things like a dress code, a behaviour code and it is not at all unreasonable to ask people to speak in English, not just so that other staff can communicate with them, but particularly I would imagine if there is any interaction with the public.
Someone being forced to speak English in their job just highlights the lack of any credible argument being put forward here. Oh woe is the poor Irish speaker who is forced to converse in the language of choice of the vast majority of people in that country. I’d take exactly the same view of course if they insisted on speaking in French, because whilst the census figures allegedly show more Irish speakers, I’d be willing to hazard a good guess that on a survey in the street a lot more people can speak French than they can speak Irish (if you were measuring ‘speaking’ and ‘understanding’ on the same criteria for both).
“Your point however about having the option, or being able to change which language you speak, is not valid. Being forced by an employer to speak a certain language is still forcing somebody to do something against their will.”
Yes RG but Northern Ireland is diverse, and with that in Public Authorities there is a Section 75 equality aspect which stipulates the need to have regard to the desirability to maintain good relations in the workplace.
An example could be Rangers supporters talking about beating Celtic and indeed other groups of people who can speak Irish speaking Irish visibly in the workplace. However, if the effect of this brings about bad relations due to the fact in the case of Irish speakers that no-one can understand what they are saying leading to misunderstandings, then problems arise.
You see this is the goal – good relations. Is Irish spoken at a level deserving of a rights-based requirement for it to be protected by law in Northern Ireland at a similar level as per other equality strands? Those advocating what is in Pobals wish list need to rethink because the key here is bringing into play Rights that are beyond the nature of the subject it is being applied to.
Is it the case that you want Irish Rights in Northern Ireland that diminish good relations in the workplace, whereby the law protects Irish speakers in the workplace but in doing so disrespects good relations corrupting existing equality legislation in place in the 1998 act?
The thing is people do speak Irish in work, people do talk about Rangers and Celtic, what we don’t want is the right for people to carry on doing so if the outcome is for other reasons. And ultimately, neither should they be discriminated against for talking in that way such as job opportunities and employment promotion and so on.
I don’t believe Irish language commands the empowerment of a rights-based approach, that’s what I believe, but democracy in consultation with the Statutory authorities should provide the appropriate way forward by which to grow Irish so as someday it becomes recognised at a level which makes it naturally spoken and therefore rules out its potential contentious application.
INTERESTED
You’re missing the point. Irish speakers are happy to speak English if that’s what the job requires. The issue here is forcing people – like the parent mentioned above – to speak English even when communicating with other Irish speakers.
I’d be willing to hazard a good guess that on a survey in the street a lot more people can speak French than they can speak Irish.
And i’m guessing you’re completely incorrect. It’s nonsense to suggest there are more French speakers in NI than fluent Irish speakers.
gaelgannaire
What for example is Newry in Polish?
Newry probably.
But “Newry Leisure Centre” or for that matter “Newry City Centre” is also a directional sign. That was my point. Why should it be in Irish, but not Polish or Bengali or Scots?
Almost all Irish speakers, aside from the very young, are bilingual due to centuries of discrimination.
Discrimination happened, but that’s not actually the reason.
It’s because English is and for centuries has been the language of world commerce. Same reason 80% of people in Scandinavia and Benelux are bi-/multilingual in English.
To you this is an arguement againist linguistic rights.
Absolutely not!
It is an argument for linguistic rights, to be applied equally to everyone legally resident here.
The reality in the North today is that there simply not enough children speaking Irish as a first language to guarantee a future for the language.
Achieved without an ILA. Precisely my point.
It may be possible therefore to pick out the most important parts of a proposed acts and get them enacted as individual segments.
I think I would agree with this, yes. This is why I have suggested a “Language Act” – to show the rights exist, but apply them equally to speakers of all languages.
RG
Please clarify this. Anybody who claims that Irish Gaelic is not the most widely spoken language here after English has serious issues of denial.
Au contraire.
Polish is obviously second, Chinese-Cantonese third – although both are edged out in some areas by Portuguese and/or Lithuanian.
I’m not talking about ticking a box in a census form. I’m talking about daily, regular, fluent use of the language.
Francie Brolly is hardly representative of the Irish language community. He is Sinn Féin’s spokesperson for the language, nothing more.
… but to be fair, it is his comments are the ones we’re discussing…!
If a person has to speak German and needs to communicate with the authorities then of course a translator should be provided.
Overall though, do you really know how ridiculous your arguement sounds?
Au contraire encore!
I agree 100% with what you say about the German speaker. And likewise if anyone needs Irish to speak to the authorities, they too should have a translator provided.
Equality of treatment, can’t say fairer than that.
German was never spoken here historically nor is it currently spoken by a significant section of the community.
Ooooh, we’re straying a bit into “We were here first” territory, aren’t we?
For the record, the German-speaking group meets first Friday, usually in the Queen’s University area. Come along!
IJP
‘Why should it be in Irish, but not Polish or Bengali or Scots?’
I am not arguing againist that, that it is a question for the representatives of the communities cited. If I was in a position to decide I would take every situation as it comes.
‘It’s because English is and for centuries has been the language of world commerce’.
Are you serious? Absolutely nothing to do with military expansion? Nothing to do with famine? Enforced English medium education? Complete removal of status? It is a common mistake made by anglophile linguists to put down the expansion of English down to psuedo-linguistic and market economics.
For example, do the Apache tribe mostly speak English because they decided it was the commercial thing to do or because they were militarily defeated and their society deliberately destroyed?
Polish is obviously second, Chinese-Cantonese third – although both are edged out in some areas by Portuguese and/or Lithuanian.
This is opinion which is based on no fact whatsoever. It actually totally contradicts all available linguistic studies. And if you look again i wasn’t talking about ticking boxes in census forms either.
You may also like to know that in some areas of the north Irish is the most spoken language in the community.
Ooooh, we’re straying a bit into “We were here first†territory, aren’t we?
Not at all, it’s simpy the truth. Most progressive societies acknowledge the important role of their indigenous languages and cultures. And this recognition does not in any way impede the ability to provide for other language communities.
Ich danke dir für die einladung but i’ll won’t be able to make it!
gaelgannaire
I wasn’t positing a sole reason, you were. Then you resorted to MOPEry, which we’ll ignore for the sake of a good debate.
How did Irish fare under de Valera? Why was this?
RG
Which “linguistic studies”?
Here’s a study: go to Castle Court and count how often you hear Irish versus Polish or Lithuanian or Cantonese.
Most progressive societies acknowledge the important role of their indigenous languages and cultures.
And rightly so. But you were talking about rights a minute ago. And I’ve explained countless times the policies I would implement to deliver that progressive view, and how a rights-based ILA would actually hinder it.
Don’t fall for the SF spin “Pro-ILA” versus “Anti-Irish”. I am anti-ILA and pro-Irish, and have explained that position clearly.
Schade!
IJP,
‘How did Irish fare under de Valera? Why was this?’
Poorly, he didnt match rhetoric with a comprehensive rights based language policy. It took his grandson to do that.
RG,
Maybe you should take IJP on a wee trip to a bar or two rounf the back of the castle court and carry out the same test? What about a thursday nite pint in Belfasts 4th most Irish speaking pub!?
At last!
The Famine- and it only took four pages of posts!
I predict Strongbow will get an honourable mention any time now.
So now all is clear. The ILA is just another part of the payback agenda- my great great great grand father starved/ emigrated/ rebelled and now you get to look at Irish signs on the motorway!
Bonarlaw,
I think you will find what was written was ‘famine’, lower case and without the article. Therefore ‘a famine’ not Thee famine and refering to a common factor in linguistic shift.
IJP
I was refering to the NI Life and Times Survey and last month’s Millward Brown study. Ok, they are not works on linguistics but they do provide interesting language data.
Funny you should mention Castlecourt, i was there on Saturday and, yes, was speaking Irish.
And Gael Gan Náire is correct. A number of pubs in Béal Feirste’s city centre have a regular Irish-speaking clientele. Ever been to the Duke of York on a Thursday? You might learn something.
And i don’t fall for Sinn Féin spin. I understand your position.
BONAR LAW
Do you have anything constructive to contribute?
Gael Gan Náire mentioned the Famine in the context of the deline of Irish during the 19th century, not as a reason for the ACHT.
I’m happy to be constructive.
The democratic reality is that there is not the support in the Assembly to pass an Irish Language Bill. Given the double veto built into the system there probably never will be. However, at district council level language policy can be to some extent be designed to fit local circumstances- hence the use of Irish sinage in certain areas of certain councils. Perhaps the language activists could build on this to show those who do not share their nationality that language protection is not necessarily a bad thing if done sensitively.
Lets not waste another four pages of posts.
I’ll go with BonarLaw‘s final point.
Enjoyed the debate though, very thoughtful contributions all round. Slugger’s back at its best.
I think we can agree that all four of us who made it to the cyber equivalent of the back of Castle Court are genuine and want what’s best for the Irish language. Without wanting to sound too much like John Hume, such dialogue is always a good thing.
OÃche mhaith.