How to make Unionists comfortable with Irish
An interesting remark from SF’s Francie Brolly on Monday during question time:
I do not accept that the rights of Irish speakers should be subject to consultation.
I have to say, that makes me feel an awful lot better about the impending Irish Language legislation. He continued:
A right is a right.
Indeed it is, the right to life for example is not negotiable. Any “right” to speak Irish is in no way infringed in Northern Ireland, if it were Brolly might have a point. As it is, his comments only serve to cement the feeling amongst Unionists that this is not a rights issue, but a cultural warfare issue.
“I don’t know whether you noticed how poor old Michael ran for the hills when he was challenged on the cost issue – ie the voter registration forms in ten languages in total only cost £1500!”
There is a bit of a flaw in the EONI thinking, though, Oilibhear – if you don’t have a printer on your computer, the putative registree needs to phone the Electoral Office Advice Line to get one sent out – do they have Irish/Ulster Scots/Portuguese/Polish/Latvian/Lithuanian/Cantonese/Mandarin speakers there just waiting on a call?
SUILVEN
Many of the 8,000 Chinese people here do not speak the languages of their mother country. If they do however want increased provision, then they should have it.
However people do not normally request or expect services in their own language when outside the country to which that language is indigenous. In this case Irish is native to Ireland and so Irish speakers request such services. The situation is the same all over the world.
Interesting about the fifth taste by the way.
RG Cuan
“It’s not only census figures we base our data on but also the NI Life and Times survey and last month’s Millward Brown study that found that about 17,000 people use Irish at home. That’s not even taking the many other fluent Irish speakers who do not use Irish in the home into account.”
All of them are self-reporting/assessing and thus problematic as a basis of policy.
The contrast in census knowledge levels and degree of home usage does somewhat undermine the demand argument.
I take it you are referring to the 1999 NILT questions. I haven’t seen the Millard Brown stuff but I’d be interested in reading it if you have a link I’d appreciate it.
This is my point six.
’6. Compulsory registration and social service monoriting of Irish speaking families.’
This is FD’s point.
‘All of them are self-reporting/assessing and thus problematic as a basis of policy.’
According to FG therefore the only way for criteria for recognition to be fufilled would be to move away from ‘self-reporting’ and to some kind of inspection system? Surely confirms my point.
Perhaps I should have mentioned ear tags?
Why is it problematic anyway? are Irish speakers more inclined to tell lies?
You mightn’t hear it too much but Irish is all around you – placenames & surnames (badly anglicised but recognisable nonetheless), the way people speak English, it’s in the soul of the place. There is also a small but thriving and growing Irish language community. There were still native speakers alive in West Fermanagh and South Armagh within the last century and there is still an Ulster Gaeltacht.
Equating it with Chinese or Polish doesn’t cut it and I think you know that.
FAIR DEAL
Here’s the only info in English i can find on the Millward Brown survey. Overall it’s quite positive, from the perspective of an Irish speaker, linguist, multiculturalist etc.
http://www.northernirelandscreen.co.uk/newspage.asp?id=143&storyID=1293
And it’s actually the Life and Times Survey from 1999 that states that 1% – circa 17,000 – use Irish as the main language of the home.
“there is still an Ulster Gaeltacht”
But is there a Northern Ireland Gaeltacht?
gaelgannaire
The tactic of “people aren’t saying objectionable things so let’s make it up” only displays self-serving prejudices rather than contribute to the debate. Let me speak for myself.
I don’t believe in nor would I support the “compulsory registration and social service monitoring of irish speaking families.”
Policy is better based on firm numbers such as the numbers attending Irish medium schools and those gaining recognised qualifications in it.
RG Cuan
Much appreciated
RG Cuan
“However people do not normally request or expect services in their own language when outside the country to which that language is indigenous”
That is a very sweeping statement have you anything to substantiate it?
Is the provision of services/information in the languages of migrant communities not relatively common? Among migrant communities (first and often second generation migrant in particular) is there not a need for such provision?
Tá sé in am an fód a sheasamh lom dÃreach anois.
SUILVEN
But is there a Northern Ireland Gaeltacht?
Not officially, but there are communities in NI in which the primary language is Irish. The Shaw’s Road in Belfast and Carn Tochair in South Derry are the first that spring to mind. There is also a ‘Gaeltacht Quarter’ on the way in West Belfast.
In general however, the Irish language population in NI is geografically dispersed, though there are people who now recognise the need to bring Irish speakers together – http://www.bailegaelach.com
FAIR DEAL
What i meant was that Spanyards, Germans or Mongolians etc do not expect government services in their own language, nor bilingual signage, when they are outside their own country. They do however expect this provision when at home. The same is the case for Irish speakers.
The linguistic requirements of migrant communities should be provided for on the basis of their own needs and demand. All assistance requested must be provided.
SHAMBO
AontaÃm leat a Shambo. Tá daoine i mbun an ruda faoi láthair.
Amharc Na Gaeil Óga agus http://www.ceithearnacoille.com
OK – here’s the maths:
“voter registration forms in ten languages in total only cost £1500!” – so that’s £150 per language. This is probably just the translation cost (although seems cheap and maybe omits the cost of someone tracking down and co-ordinating all the translators). The cost of typesetting and proofing will be higher. If the length of the document is increased then you are talking about a profound increase in cost – entirely dependent on the number of these registration forms printed.
“Life and Times Survey from 1999 that states that 1% – circa 17,000 – use Irish as the main language of the home”. I found the link: http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/1999/Community_Relations/MAINLANG.html
It also shows that 0% aged 18 to 24 use it at home, and only non-protestants speak ulster-scots (also at 1%, with both protestants and catholics at 0%). I think that the sample size is too low to draw any conclusions from this question!
RG Cuan
Got you, thanks for the clarification.
DK
“This is probably just the translation cost (although seems cheap and maybe omits the cost of someone tracking down and co-ordinating all the translators). The cost of typesetting and proofing will be higher.”
It appears from what the electoral office says that they will simply print them off on an ordinary printer rather than incurring the costs of full print runs.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6986133.stm
Ah, but how much on top of the £1500 did this cost?
“The Electoral Office has recently put in place translation facilities for those calling at or phoning its offices who would prefer to use their own language.”
Not that I’m against it, but it would be interesting to know.
SUILVEN
Ah, but how much on top of the £1500 did this cost?
Not that much when you think about it. There was probably one or two people already employed by EONI who could speak Irish and so no extra cost involved here.
Providing for the other languages could involve outsourcing a phone call when needed or making request forms available. This would need to be clarified with the EO of course.
As regards language issues my general impression of language activists is they overestimate how much state action led to decline in language use and thus overestimate the benefits of legislative action.
Spot on.
As a side point, may I ask – how many people took an Irish A-level this year?
This reactionary stance of Michael Shilliday is so redolent of all that old Unionist detestation of any extension of new legislative rights that might benefit mainland UK citizens (other than tax cuts for the better off) to that Little Missisippi of these islands that we each call differently yet all call home.
In my borough of Haringey all public offices carry notices in an evergrowing multiplicity of language (including Irish) and yet Michael Shilliday would deny the language rights acccorded to a recent Uzbekhistan resident of Tottenham to a UK citizen using a language much longer in usage, and yet extant and thriving, in these islands than the language he himself uses.
What really is it you seek please, Michael Shilliday, UK rights for all within the UK or “back to Alabamy” ?
Rory, I haven’t been following this thread since this afternoon, I look at it and the first comment I see implies that I’m a racist. That is a disgusting allegation.
Secondly, I would like you to explain for me PRECISELY which “rights” are being denied to Irish speakers right now in Northern Ireland. The right to life? The right to a fair trial? The right of association? Which one?
To return to the original start of the blog “How to make Unionists comfortable with Irish?”
An interesting question and one on which my views have changed a little.
I have said before on other threads but will repeat by saying that until I went to university I only ever heard Irish spoken on television at IRA funerals or by SF members on getting elected.
I will never forget the every word spoken in Irish is a bullet fired in the cause of Irish freedom by Danny Morrison.
Then at QUB it was used on all sorts of signs and I am sorry I felt it was there at territory marking (I was humiliated as a very naive fresher when I suggested multi lingual signs, that may have helped in my transition from moderate middle class unionist to member of the Prodiban).
I have only ever heard one set of people speaking Irish in “real life” when visiting in hospital.
So I do not start exactly well disposed to Irish.
However, having been looking at this web site for several months (and posting for a few, maybe a few too many for some of you) I have gradually come to the conclusion that a number of posters on this site are interested in Irish for cultural and not political reasons, and have no desire to use Irish as a weapon (I fear Mr. Brolly is not so enlightened).
Herein of course lies the problem. To get greater unionist acceptance the Irish language lobby need to request a relatively modest set of proposals and as I have suggested previously use obviously apolitical spokespersons. RG Cuan has previously demonstrated that they do indeed do this. The problem is that it is the likes of Catriona Ruane who get air time and every word she speaks in Irish probably sets back the cause of Irish (in reaching out to unionists anyway).
The Irish language lobby should not have to do this bending over backwards to unionists but I am afraid as far as unionists see it the Irish language has been gravely damaged by its co-option into the cause of violent republicanism. At a conference in Europe once I fell in with a bloke from RoI who told me quite spontaneously that one of the reasons he hated the IRA was because they had made him ashamed of his language.
I can of course see a further problem because essentially what I am suggesting to people interested in Irish is that they ask for less that they might hope for, or maybe even reasonably expect. Further they have to distance themselves from some a very powerful benefactor (SF). I fear though that SF support for the Irish language is a Midas’s touch whereby the Irish language lobby may well get more money and profile but find that in some ways it is counter productive. Remember that Midas starved to death.
I mean this in no way condescendingly but RG Cuan et al. you do have my sympathy.
A few months ago had you suggested to me that my children be taught Irish at school I would probably have foamed at the mouth and shouted No (and No Surrender) a lot, now I will merely say not yet.
You need to understand,Michael, that when you conquer a country it is essential that you wipe out every trace of the native culture otherwise it could be presumed that the old culture was as good as the one which is replacing it (An appalling vista,what?).English people excel at this and would die of starvation abroad rather than learn the ‘foreign’ word for food. Now having gone to such trouble to denigrate and smother Irish, why would you want to assist in it’s revival? The colonists at the coal face that have to mix with the paddies feel this urge to stamp out the original culture even more strongly. Things must be seen in black and white – grey is a sign of weakness and as long as the ‘British’ people here hang on to the apron strings of the ‘mainland’ and delude themselves that they are a valued part of the British nation, they will always sneer at the leprechaun language. This is RACISM and is essential for any colony to survive.
Turgon,
nice post.
I am quite often asked to not teach Irish but about Irish in state schools.
In contradiction to my own frustration fueled previous post I have always found my audience almost too receptive (now all this kids will have been volunteered by their parents).
For example, people love finding out about surnames and what they mean. Now contary to common belief many many protestant people have a Gaelic surname. I have never ever come across a young person who was not thrilled at learning the meaning of their own family name and its history from a Gaelic point of view. No MacDonald has ever been disapointed that the Mac Domhnalls were Lords of the Isles and that the name means world ruler.
Just a rambling thought. Doesn’t spoil anyones Britishness or nafin.
IJP
Don’t have the figures in front of me but Irish is the still the second most studied language at GCSE and A Level in the North. Quite a feat saying that only half our students get the opportunity to learn it.
TURGON
Great to hear that you would now consider finding out more about Irish and would think about saying ‘yes’ to your children learning the language.
Spread the word!
There are several widely held opinions in the Loyalist/British/Protestant communities and it is really hard to know if these fears are genuine. 1. All Irish speakers/learners are rabid republicans. Afraid not and I can speak with thirty years experience. If only all rabid republicans were Irish speakers! And by the way, leave Gerry Adams’ Irish alone. At least he uses it – not like some other politicians who are fluent but are not ‘gan naire’ 2. The Huns are coming and we will be forced to learn Irish! Does anybody believe this? Surely if there are leaflets in 10 different languages, you take the one you understand/prefer. Where is the compulsion? I have to add that I know quite a few protestants that are learning and have learned Irish and all seem to be still thriving and still british. Isn’t it strange that the councils can put up roadsigns with the townland below and nobody minds as long as the townland name is in gibberish and not in Irish.
Turgon
So what you want is the Irish speaking community to come begging hat in hand for whatever scraps that might fall from the protestant table and be well pleased that they recieved scraps at all?
I think not it should be a right and I think it will be a right if not from Storomont then look for the legislation to come from Whitehall
Turgon,
Republicanism is to the Irish Language as Unionism is to Evangelical Protestantism.
Often mixed-up in the public mind, but essentially, when you think about it, nothing got to do with each other.
“Irish speakers simply want to be able to deal with civil administration, North and South, through the medium of Irish and send their kis to an Irish language school. That for me is the nub of the issue. Nobody is trying to engage in “warfareâ€.”
I was unlucky enough to go out with a schoolteacher down in Newry. The worst work she said she ever had cut out for her, was when a parent panicked, removed their child from an Irish Language school, and moved them into “mainstream” education. I always remember her saying, “they could barely write their names in Irish, never mind English.”
But then, sure we know what schoolteachers can be like…
It’s hard to know what point you’re making Raven. Are you criticising the language, the school, the child or the parent? .. or Heaven forbid, the beauty from Newry?
All this talk about the Irish Language. I for one am useless at languages, but I understand that where they are in normal everyday use, it is important for people who want to integrate into that society to at least try to learn the language. However, I am grateful for having the benefit that I don’t need to learn Irish, otherwise I would find it very difficult to get by.
The Irish Language supporters would like to increase the use of the language as they see it as part of their culture, their history and their identity. I have absolutely no problem with that. The problem I see is two fold:
1. SF have and are trying to own all things culturally Irish, saying it is inclusive but their actions are more exclusive. They may say otherwise, but they are either fooling themselves, or are so blind that they do not see that in their efforts to bring Irish culture forward, they are losing Unionists along the way. They don’t own Irish History or Culture – but try telling them that.
2. The second problem is that it is because of the fear of being overrun by Irish culture, especially the language which they don’t understand – and when people do not understand something they fear it and reject it. However, there are also those who think that being open to Irish culture and language is a sell out of their culture, their Britishness and more often than not, their religion. The bigots abhor Irish culture and it because of this that we do need an Irish Language Act.
I would always ask myself the following questions, “will it do me any harm?” – NO
“Will it infringe my rights?” – NO
“Will I be inconvenienced?” – NO
“Will it cost me anything? – probably, but not much.
“Will it set a dangerous precedent?” – I doubt it.
So, what is all the fuss about. The more Unionists en bloc say NO, the more Nationalists (in the main) will want it and vice versa. Is this the progress we have made to be all inclusive and to create a shared future?
Let’s have the legislation and be done with it.
That’s probably the best post I’ve seen on the subject, Grouch.
I differ only on the final question – actually it does set a dangerous precedent, as the whole debate is along sectarian lines, thus placing the language in a sectarian camp, and anyone can play that game… trilingual signs anyone?
The sooner we shift away from a constant demand of rights to a proper consideration of our responsibilities, the sooner we’ll live in a proper democracy where decisions are made accountably, not by backroom deals.
Remember that Midas starved to death.
No, actually Bacchus took pity on him:-
Mite deum numen: Bacchus pecasse fatentem
Restituit pactique fide data munera solvit
Ov Met XI: 134-5
I won’t bother quoting it to you in Irish, for obvious reasons.
Republicanism, Catholicism and Irish language speaking are three separate things, which have nothing to do with each other. In particular, the first two movements are considered to be antithetical in most other jurisictions.
My take is that Northern Irish Protestants should consider Scottish Gaelic to be their ancestral cultural language, and learn that. In fact the dialect of Down and Antrim had many features which are more characteristic of Scotland than Ireland. That of Rathlin island is definitely Scots.
NIPs could then treat themeselves to an appropriate section of this language’s loyal literature: Calvins’s Institutes (Reachdan Chalbhin):-
http://www.freechurch.org/resources/gaelic/gaelic10.htm
Queen Victoria’s Highland Journal, and the collected sermons of a particular Lewis minister who was a fan of Jack Glass and Ian Paisley. See also:-
http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/gaidhlig/
There is actually a (Protestant) man from County Down who is a recognized poet in Scottish Gaelic. He said he chose Scottish rather than Irish Gaelic as this would not be misinterpreted as a political statement.
IJP
trilingual signs anyone
We’ve been here before. Bilingual/trilingual signs in areas that want them. That said, over 96% of our placenames come from Irish Gaelic, less than 1% come from the Hamely Tongue.
PADDY REILLY
For many speakers, Irish and Scottish Gaelic are the same language.
The similarities between Antrim Gaelic and Argyll Gaelic, for example, simply highlights the language continuum between the two areas. Rathlin Gaelic is very similar to Scottish dialects but since Rathlin is an Irish island, it is ‘Irish’ Gaelic.
As we’ve mentioned before, it would be super if Unionists took an interest in Gaelic, Irish or Scottish. While work has been done in the area it’s clear that it will take a while before the majority accept it as an intrinsic element of the society and culture of these islands.
PaddyReilly,
‘Northern Irish Protestants should consider Scottish Gaelic to be their ancestral cultural language’
Why? Because you say so? Most NIPs of Scottish heritage would be descended from Scots/English speaking lowland Scots, who generally had little time for highlanders or their language (for good reason, in some cases).
RG Cuan – you may be onto something there: To make unionists interested in the language, give them some ownership. Even though the linguistic basis for this may be slight, instead of proposing an Irish language legislation, go for an Ulster language legislation, or even a Northern Irish language legislation.
Being a unionist is, apart from wanting the union, about being different from the majority on the Island and having some sort of self-determination: therefore if the language can be defined in these terms, it stands a chance.
Good idea- call the legislation The Northern Irish Language Act.
Suilven,
Normally wouldn’t quote wikipedia but it seems almost certain that Gaelic survived in Galloway until even after the plantation of Ulster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galwegian_Gaelic
Almongst the protestant population there are a large number, I dont know what percentage of Gaelic surnames, most of which indicate some Galloway ancestry.
McCausland (Mac Auslainn) being a classic example, though they settled in Galloway from Ulster around 1200 I understand.
There are of course many highland Gaelic names also, Campbell (Caimbeul) springs to mind.
Michael Shilliday,
I most certainly did not accuse you of being a racist. Such accusations are pointless and self-defeating to my mind as all men are somewhat racist and only those who allow it to become obsessive and irrational become a problem – Nazis, Ku Klux Klan and the like, but then they tend generally to revel in the term and see it as a virtue.
You certainly display a fear of expressed Irish culture and react to it in an agressive-defensive manner and you might wish to address that. Or not as it may be.
Gaelgannaire,
Thanks for that – your link was very interesting. I’ll quote one bit, which for me highlight the linguistic tensions of the time:
‘An important source for the perception of Galwegian language is the poem known as The Flyting of Dunbar and Kennedy. The poem, written somewhere between 1504 and 1508 portrays an ideological, historical and cultural conflict between William Dunbar (representing Lothian, and Anglian Scotland) and Walter Kennedy (representing Carrick and Gaelic Scotland). Dunbar ridicules Kennedy’s Heland accent and Erische language, whilst Kennedy defends it, saying calling it “all trew Scottismennis leid” and telling Dunbar “in Ingland sowld be thy habitation.”[3] The importance is that, from a Lothian perspective in the early sixteenth century, Carrick and Galloway still represented Gaelic Scotland, just as Lothian did Anglian Scotland. Note also that Kennedy is referred to as “Heland” (Highland).’
As I said before, the perception of Gaelic among lowlanders around the time of the plantation would have been pretty negative, for various reasons (cattle reiving, religion and persecution of the Covenanters by highland troops, to name a few).
Most NIPs of Scottish heritage would be descended from Scots/English speaking lowland Scots
An English friend of mine (ex-British Army) asked me to look up his ancestry on the net recently. He assured me he was pure English (I later found out that he had only asked me about his father’s family, because his mother was Catholic Irish). However the father’s family turned out to be heavily infiltrated by Welsh. He wasn’t too pissed off, but I think he has laid off on the sheep-shagger jokes.
When excessive factionalism occurs, people conveniently forget those of their forebears who came from the wrong side. Basically, your average NIP has a Catholic in his family tree somewhere, and the average Lowlander has a hielan granny.
‘As I said before, the perception of Gaelic among lowlanders around the time of the plantation would have been pretty negative, for various reasons (cattle reiving, religion and persecution of the Covenanters by highland troops, to name a few).’
Entirely agree (but of course you would agree that the lowlanders were not always the victims of highland aggression?)
For me the true source of anti-Gaelic freely goes back well beyond the troubles and the Gaelic revival period and the plantation and back ultimately to the poetic flighting of Kennedy (Ceannaideach) and Dunbar.
Nevertheless, Carrick and Galloway were clearly seen as part of Gaeldom in the period leading up to the plantation of ulster, suggesting to me at least that many ‘planters’ were ultimately of similar origin to the Gaels of Ulster.
I mean of course the ideas behind the ‘poetic flighting’ not the poetry istelf.
Point taken, Paddy. And the irony of people buying into the whole kilts-and-pipe-bands, shortbread-tin kitsch, while turning their backs on Gaelic (as happens in Scotland as well as NI) is not lost on me!
Suilven,
It is a pity too that Highland War pipes get all the attention whilst Lowland and Northumbrian piping are mostly ignored.
‘Nevertheless, Carrick and Galloway were clearly seen as part of Gaeldom in the period leading up to the plantation of ulster, suggesting to me at least that many ‘planters’ were ultimately of similar origin to the Gaels of Ulster.’
Maybe – but it was a condition of the plantation that the settlers were English-speaking.
‘Maybe – but it was a condition of the plantation that the settlers were English-speaking.’
Dont know. Would appreciate a link / reference.
There is a writer Dr. Ruairà Ó Bleine who specialises in Prespiterians and the Irish Language. He has written a book published by Ultach trust. I have been to a few lectures by him and he certainly would disagree. I myself just don’t know. But i do know that a McNarry, McCartney, Donaldson, Campbell, McCausland or two must have sneaked on that boat somehow, they could all of course have been English and Scots speakers by that stage but I am not entirely convinced.
As with you, Gaelgannaire, I dislike quoting Wikipedia, but here goes anyway:
‘The principal landowners were to be Undertakers, wealthy men from England and Scotland who undertook to import tenants from their own estates. They were granted around 3000 acres (12 km²) each, on condition that they settle a minimum of 48 adult males (including at least 20 families) who had to be English-speaking and Protestant.’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantation_of_Ulster
I’d also suggest the ‘inland Scottish’ in the following link was intended to mean anglophone:
http://publish.uwo.ca/~bgordon/UlsterPlantation.html
Then, of course, there’s the flip side:
‘And there is some evidence that a significant number of the incoming population learned the Irish language, or at least learned sufficient Irish language to facilitate commercial interactions with the native population.’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/plantation/transcripts/es07_t02.shtml
“There is a writer Dr. Ruairà Ó Bleine who specialises in Prespiterians and the Irish Language.”
I’ve also been meaning to read ‘Hidden Ulster, Protestants and the Irish Language’
by Padraig O Snodaigh. Anyone know if it’s any good?
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/61/297.html
Not read either but there’s a review:
Is the reviewer Sinn Fein’s Tom Hartley do you think ?