QuoteI'm glad to see you have departed from your earlier stance.Originally Posted by GavinZac
I think its fantastic. University is where more obscure interest subjects should be taught to people who genuinely want to learn it either for a career or just out of interest. if we could provide the same course in an irish university, we'd be flying, because apparantly some english university can teach in 2/3 years what the irish system fails to do in 14.
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
I'm glad to see you have departed from your earlier stance.
Did you actually read the text? This course teaching it as history -I'm glad to see you have departed from your earlier stance.
"It is also the only university anywhere that allows students to study Irish in its wider context, as one of a network of ancient languages and culture that define the heritage of these islands."
"the first English university to teach both modern and medieval forms of the language."
But either way, by history I mean something which is interesting to a few people to look back on. That is what this course is, it is not an attempt to force every school child into learning something they have no use for. That is the context in which it is fantastic.
Of course, the worrying part of this is..
"the Irish Government has provided funding to the university to help make the course a reality"
"Irish Government funding has enabled the university to employ a modern Irish teacher, Dr Karrina Hollo"
Yet another bizarre pouring of money which could be better spent.
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
Possibly the most self-contradicting post ever.
explain?Possibly the most self-contradicting post ever.
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
Exaggeration fair enough, but you asked me if I had read the text when you hadn't yourself.
"Cambridge will tomorrow launch its first classes in modern Irish."
Then you quoted this bit; "the first English university to teach both modern and medieval forms of the language." And start talking about history when the notable thing is the introduction of modern Irish.
People who can't hold their hands up and admit to being wrong make me feel good about myself, for that Gavin, I thank you.
I've had to restart this post since that javascript alert about a new private message clears the text box for some reason so I'll try to remember as best I can what I had said.Exaggeration fair enough, but you asked me if I had read the text when you hadn't yourself.
"Cambridge will tomorrow launch its first classes in modern Irish."
Then you quoted this bit; "the first English university to teach both modern and medieval forms of the language." And start talking about history when the notable thing is the introduction of modern Irish.
People who can't hold their hands up and admit to being wrong make me feel good about myself, for that Gavin, I thank you.
The course is (or is at least described as) a Celtic History and Languages Studies course similar to the one we have at UCC. That the Irish government has funded them to hire a modern gaeilge (i.e., well versed in such contrived words as "telefón" or "rádio") teacher is not somehow a vindication of the teaching of the Irish language here, but rather a damning indictment of force feeding the language to kids here - that is, that my own proposition, the teaching of the irish language to those who voluntarily choose to learn it over the course of 3 or 4 years, rather than forcing it upon kids for 14 years, at either university or secondary level is being shown as a viable option EVEN with extra topics thrown in such as the theory of celtic languages and their relationships and development.
That is why its fantastic, and I'm sure your own pig headedness will get quite a buzz from me pointing this out.
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
My point was simply that modern Irish has been acknowledged as being important enough for a university in Cambridge to start a course. Thereby extending the opportunity to learn the language to a whole new category of people when you think it has no relevance etc.
Fair play to the Government for supporting an initiative to widen the promotion of Irish language and culture
They're not starting a course, they're adding a modern language to provide context to a Celtic Studies course. That they hired an Irish teacher and as such will be teaching Irish as the chosen modern celtic language is down to irish government funding (specificly, the Department of Rural Communities and The Gaeltacht, which is dominated by self-promoting money wasting "gaeilgóirs" whose neglect of that other part of the department is far more responsible for the collapse of the rural community than drink driving bans) in hiring an Irish teacher rather than Welsh, Scots Gallic or Breton.
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
It was hardly the Government who went to the university.
Let us not get caught up in the semantics of course/class the fact is Irish is seen, by the people who know about these things, as a language with modern day relevance. Why would they bring in a dead language to add contemporary context? And don't say it's some conspiracy please
You think Cambridge University asked our government for funding? Would it make any difference if our government didnt chastise them for their neck but actually gave them what they wanted?
They wanted to teach the basics of the one the languages they've been learning the history of. They chose Irish because it was being funded. No conspiracy, just an economical decision by the college and a bizarre waste by our government.Let us not get caught up in the semantics of course/class the fact is Irish is seen, by the people who know about these things, as a language with modern day relevance. Why would they bring in a dead language to add contemporary context? And don't say it's some conspiracy please
Just to add some input from "people who know about these things", here are the comments of one editor of Wikipedia.org on the (later revoked as vandalism) removal of Irish from the list of endangered languages.
"I'm a huge supporter (and an optimistic one, I'd like to think) of Irish, but as far as I'm aware the number of regular, fluent, and native speakers is nowhere near stabilized. It is a very endangered language. There has doubtlessly been a recent resurgence of interest, but I think most realists will tell you that Irish is going to die out within a century or so if the current situtation does not change. And by dying out, I mean that the Gaeltacht will be effectively no different than the Galltacht. Gaelgeoirí are in the minority in most Gaeltachtaí already. It's thrilling to see the slow change in attitude, manifested by phenomena like the gaelscoileanna, but more needs to be done. The situation for Irish is undeniably brighter than that of Gaelic or Breton, but it is in no way ready to be seriously removed from a list of endangered languages (I hear many would argue that neither is Welsh, but that's a different story). Rath Dé ort. Andrew 19:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)"
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
Maybe you know more than me but yes. I would look to which is more likely - the University deciding to expand a curriculum or the Government asking them to do so. I would say the former is more likely. If so, well done to the University for spotting the opportunity to improve their service in an area where they thought an interested benefactor was likely to help out.
Apparently a bit more than the basics; "Dr Karrina Hollo, who has already begun classes at beginner, intermediate and advanced level."
This is wonderful news. Hopefully the next George Thomson will be along soon enough. GT was a legend. Born in London in 1903, at the age of 20 he took a trip to the Blaskets, quickly falling in love with the language. He befriended an islander, Muiris O Suilleabháin, and immersed himself in the language for six weeks, quickly acquiring a lovely turn of phrase; Bhíodar beirt sé seachtaine i dteannta a chéile. Arsa Muiris: "Nuair a bhí an téarma sin caite, is aige a bhí an Ghaeluinn go blasta." Indeed, spotting Muiris' story-telling talent, George impelled Muiris to write the famous work Twenty Years A'Growing; Thuig Seoirse gurbh an-scéalaí é Muiris is d'áitigh air leabhar a scríobh ar shaol an Bhlascaoid. B'shin mar a tháinig Fiche Bliain ag Fás ar an saol, ****as rómánsúil ach ****as atá lom lán le gile is iontas na hóige.
As for that wiki thing, it would be a very sad day if Irish was no longer spoken ina gceantar dúchais. But is that not more of a societal issue than a fault with the language?
Last edited by kingdom hoop; 01/05/2007 at 11:12 PM. Reason: The stars there are for c,u,n,t...meaning account
Well thats fantastic, they manage to get to advanced level irish (although i dont know what advanced irish is defined as in southern england) in 3 or 4 years. We have to literally immerse someone in irish for 14 years to get them to advanced level! See the power of making something voluntary and teaching it at a level where people really commit? Its a fantastic example, as I've said, and I'll probably end up using it in future arguments elsewhere
Its not a fault with the language. Its just a language. Is it societies fault? I wouldn't say fault, more "society is the cause". If we have no use for something, it often goes away, like car elevators (fascinating if you want to spend a few minutes with google) or dublin city fcAs for that wiki thing, it would be a very sad day if Irish was no longer spoken ina gceantar dúchais. But is that not more of a societal issue than a fault with the language?
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
Do if you wish to embarrass yourself. For one the intellectual capacity of a third level student would dwarf that of a child so that's a poor comparison. Secondly, if subjects are made voluntary then students wouldn't know what to pick, they'd pick what their friends were doing, or what teacher was the most lenient etc. Most people probably only liked one or two subjects in school, so blame the system then not the subject. As it happens I think a broad education, and not just academic, at second level is far more preferable, let people find their strengths so they can then specialise in college, and basically give them a platform from which they can sprout.
Having been educated in Irish I know I won't have any regrets later in life concerning my relationship with the language. However if I never had studied it I would be confident in saying that I would curse the system for forcing me to make a whimsical decision about a key constituent of this island's heritage at such an impressionable age. Perhaps more senior members of the forum could vouch for such a view
Nice Redknappism as well by the way, 'literally immerse' in Irish
I didn't say fault either. Rather the gradual depopulation of Gaeltacht areas is a societal trend, for now at least while the country is recoiling from decades of rural idyll in favour of urban anonymity and hedonism. That's why yer man said Irish is endangered, not because people have no use for it.Is it societies fault? I wouldn't say fault, more "society is the cause". If we have no use for something, it often goes away, like car elevators (fascinating if you want to spend a few minutes with google) or dublin city fc
Yes, that is why they are open to learning specific, specialist topics that shouldnt be applied to everyone.
Thats very patronising, most secondary students pick subjects related to their career goals and certainly most university students do. By making things voluntary, you restrict them to people that actually want to learn. You progress much faster, and you raise the standard that eventually gets taught. I would have thought this would be a good way to "save" irish, giving a minority a very strong grasp of it rather than the majority a cúpla focal.Secondly, if subjects are made voluntary then students wouldn't know what to pick, they'd pick what their friends were doing, or what teacher was the most lenient etc.
Most people probably only liked one or two subjects in school, so blame the system then not the subject. As it happens I think a broad education, and not just academic, at second level is far more preferable, let people find their strengths so they can then specialise in college, and basically give them a platform from which they can sprout.
But, to be honest, you're in the extreme minority. you were educated in the minority system where you knew no different than to know irish. who knows, you might even occasionally get a use out of it down in kerry. for every 1 person who thinks they would be "forced to make a whimsical decision" by making irish optional at some level, there would be 100s who would say "a whimsical decision was made for me" by making it compulsory.Having been educated in Irish I know I won't have any regrets later in life concerning my relationship with the language. However if I never had studied it I would be confident in saying that I would curse the system for forcing me to make a whimsical decision about a key constituent of this island's heritage at such an impressionable age. Perhaps more senior members of the forum could vouch for such a view
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
That's nonsense - most people in secondary school haven't a clue what their career path is. They end up picking one language, one science and one business subject because that's what they're told is best.
Hasn't stopped you ranting off for the last ten pages with hardly a soul in agreement with you.
The only people arguing with me are people that went to gaelscoils, which is pretty pointless as they are, in a way, an example of what i've been advocating, choice in learning irish.
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
Doesn't change the my point - no-one's in agreement with you (they'd post in your favour otherwise), yet you tell someone else they're in the minority?
If you gave schoolchildren choice as to what subjects to learn, they'd do sex ed, sport and probably not a lot else. Kids under 18 anyway should be told what to learn by and large, because they aren't mature enough to make the calls themselves, and they don't have the life experience to see what's useful or interesting later in life.
If that sounds harsh, well, it's the way it's always worked, here and in other countires, and seems to have been doing well.
how does posting on foot.ie change the reality that people that attended gaelscoils are in the minority
You're being ridiculous. you honestly think we should take away optional subjects from leaving cert students?If you gave schoolchildren choice as to what subjects to learn, they'd do sex ed, sport and probably not a lot else. Kids under 18 anyway should be told what to learn by and large, because they aren't mature enough to make the calls themselves, and they don't have the life experience to see what's useful or interesting later in life.
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
Explain to me, there, if you wouldn't mind:
1. Who you think these Gaeilgeoirs are and how exactly they are meant to dominate the department. The current Secretary General is no Gaeilgeoir: he is an appointment from outside the department who started going to Irish lessons when he arrived four years ago; as it stands only one of his three assistant secretaries can speak Irish. Of the 46 officers of assistant principal officer grade or higher, only ten can speak Irish, nine of these in the Irish-language or Gaeltacht sections; more remarkable in context of their domination of the department, only 3 of the 15 principal officers speak Irish, and all of these are in the Irish-language or Gaeltacht sections.
2. How, exactly, these Gaeilgeoirs manage to magically promote themselves in disregard of civil service bureaucracy and why their ringleader (the assistant secretary with responsibility for Irish, the Gaeltacht, and Charity Law) never thought of promoting more than 3 of his minions to positions of more power in sections other than those that deal with Irish and the Gaeltacht;
3. How the actions of these 1+3 Gaeilgeoirs in administering the allocation of funds for constantly reviewed projects and schemes on the final authority of the minister of an elected government can be described as 'wasting money' any more than the legitimate actions of any other civil servants speaking any other language in any other section of any other department in the country (preferably with some reference to the relevant accounts or annual reports rather than what you yourself reckon them to be spending);
4. How the 1+3 Gaeilgeoirs are "more responsible for the collapse of the rural community than drink driving bans"through their neglect of "that other part of the department" (the 12 out of 15 sections of the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs under the control of the 2+12 Béarlóirí that do not deal with Irish or the Gaeltacht, in which the three Gaeilgeoir POs do not work and over which their Gaeilgeoir assistant secretary overlord has no control except the section that deals with charity law ... is it your position that the new charity regulations are killing the country way of life??);
5. How you claim so much knowledge about the inner workings and politics of a government department and yet do not know what the department is called or what its remit is.
Otherwise, please stop talking through your hat. Or stick to fact-free bloggish musings about the betterness of a purely anglophone society rather than slanderous specifics that you can actually get pulled up on.
Last edited by Erstwhile Bóz; 02/05/2007 at 1:26 PM.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks