mainoff.gif
lastdyoff.gif
lastwkoff.gif
treeoff.gif
searchoff.gif
helpoff.gif
contactoff.gif
creditsoff.gif
homeoff.gif


The Daltaí Boards » Archive: 2005- » 2005 (July-August) » Archive through August 03, 2005 » Aistriúchán « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Domhnall
Member
Username: Domhnall

Post Number: 17
Registered: 06-2005


Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 05:20 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

A chairde..
Nílim in ann Gaeilge a chur ar an bpíosa thíos.. Tá's agam nach ceart 'literal translation' a dhéanamh ach fós ní féidir liomsa é a dhéanamh. Aon smaointí ag éinne?
Míle,
Domhnall

"How Irish are Irish people today?"

Ní Síocháin Go Saoirse.
Is í slánú na Gaeilge athghabháil na Saoirse

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

An_mídheach_mealltach
Member
Username: An_mídheach_mealltach

Post Number: 32
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 06:01 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

This might be a bit long winded but it's gramatically ok:

Cé chomh hÉireannach is atá na hÉireannaigh/Muintir na hÉireann sa lá atá inniú ann?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Maidhc_Ó_g
Member
Username: Maidhc_Ó_g

Post Number: 36
Registered: 05-2005
Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 05:29 am:   Edit Post Print Post

Ca mhéad gaelacha (nó/agus traidisiúnta)inniú atá ar na muintir na hÉireann?
I think this asks the same English question in two different manners in Irish. The first, about the number of natural born citizens of Ireland and the second concerning tradition. But, something is nagging me to think that the first could be understood to mean the same as the second.
I'm also not sure of my grammar.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fear_na_mbróg
Member
Username: Fear_na_mbróg

Post Number: 612
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 08:25 am:   Edit Post Print Post

quote:

"How Irish are Irish people today?"



Depends what context that statement is in... for instance, if it were a negative, almost insulting statment, I'd say:

Cé chomh gaelach is atá na héireannaigh inniu?

Here I use "éireannaigh" instead of "gaeil" to indicate that the "people of ireland" nowadays aren't really "irish", but are "irish" in a sort-of official capacity only (eg. they have an Irish birth cert).

If it were a neutral statement, I'd probably say:

Cé chomh gaelach is atá na gaeil inniu?

Other possibilities:

Cé chomh gaelach is atá muintir na hÉireann inniu?
... an mhuintir ghaelach ...

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Domhnall
Member
Username: Domhnall

Post Number: 18
Registered: 06-2005


Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 06:09 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Go raibh míle sin i bhfad níos fearr ná mo cheann féin;
"Cé mhéad atá ar Eireannaigh? Ar Eireannaigh iad?"

Bhí sé scríofa in alt ina raibh mé ag cur Gaeilge uirthi. I was questioning whether most Irish people have the right to call themselves "Irish"..

Ní Síocháin Go Saoirse.
Is í slánú na Gaeilge athghabháil na Saoirse

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lughaidh
Member
Username: Lughaidh

Post Number: 454
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 05:39 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

"Cé mhéad atá ar Eireannaigh? Ar Eireannaigh iad?"

That doesn't mean "how Irish are irish people?" but "how much/how many do Irish people cost?" :-)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dalta
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 02:07 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

I never liked the use of 'Gael' in Irish, it means Gael, as in Scots/Irish/Manx, rather than just Irish. Saying how Gaelic are the Irish, would bring people back to sitting around fires in animal skins fighting over the biggest piece of meat, rather than diddley-iddley Irish culture that we all know and love. I would go with An_mídheach_mealltach 's one. Or for an alternate way of putting it, "An fíor-Eireannach iad na hÉireannaigh inniu?" (Are the Irish really Irish today?)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Domhnall
Member
Username: Domhnall

Post Number: 22
Registered: 06-2005


Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 04:05 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Mo leithscéal seo é an ceann gur scríobh mé féin.. "cé mhéad atá ar daoine Éireannaigh; ar Éireannaigh iad?" rinne mé botún thuas

Dalta, ní aontaímse leat in aon chor.. The Gaeil were and still are related to the Scots etc..The links are facts and unmistakeable. Today the term "Irish" is more appropriate because Eire is a multi-cultural society with a minority of Eire's inhabitants using Gaelic.. Gaeil is who we would be if our beautiful emerald isle hadnt been invaded and ruled(and of course still partly being ruled) by a foreign people...

Agus rud amháin eile - Is Gael mise agus táim bródúil as!!

Ní Síocháin Go Saoirse.
Is í slánú na Gaeilge athghabháil na Saoirse

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dalta
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 04:20 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Sure, they were Gaelic, but so were the Scots and Manx. That's my point, Gael doesn't mean Irish, it means Irish, Scots and Manx. The term "Irish" is more appropriate because it refers to people living on the island of Ireland. Whether or not Irish refers to the multi-cultural new inhabitants is a seperate issue, but do you mean the new habitants, e.g. Pakistanis, Indians etc. or the Vikings/Normans/British etc? If the former, then the term "Irish" came about long before they arrived, as I'm sure you're aware.

And, don't forget that the Gaels in their turn invaded Ireland and ran out the previous people, forcing their language on them and banishing them to other countries.

By the way, maidir le do shiniú, tá an cuid is mó den tSaoirse athghabháilte anois, an slán i an Ghaeilge anois?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 07:56 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

"And, don't forget that the Gaels in their turn invaded Ireland and ran out the previous people, forcing their language on them and banishing them to other countries".

Where is the evidence for this? Genetic tests suggest that there was complete lineage continuity between Bronze age Ireland and the introduction of Gaelic custom. It would seem Celtic culture became the norm in ireland due to long standing influence from Europe and took the best part of a millenia to achieve. The stories of the Celts fighting other groups are of 'Celticised' elements of Ireland trying for dominion over each other and non Celtic elements. All groups, it seems, had common ancestry, with a mixing of cultures (but with the Celtic achieving greatest influence).

Gaulish been continental celtic appears not to have had initial consonatal mutation (eclipsis and lention etc), yet Irish and Welsh do. These features are non standard in the Indo European scheme, and suggest a heavy degree of influence with the native Bronze age cultural language which given the parallels in Welsh and Irish, may have been a common tongue in both islands. Cetainly, Bronze age astronomy was European wide, so its linguistic pools may have been wide too.

The decendants of the neolithic farmers and Bronze age temple builders, it would seem are still here. Here too is an interesting article:
http://itotd.com/index.alt?ArticleID=226

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lughaidh
Member
Username: Lughaidh

Post Number: 457
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 10:21 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

>Gaulish been continental celtic appears not to have had >initial consonatal mutation (eclipsis and lention etc), >yet Irish and Welsh do

The texts we have in Gaulish are very old. We don't have Irish or Welsh texts that would be as old, except some oghamic words (for irish). At the time Gaulish was spoken, there were no initial mutations in it, and there were no mutations in Pre-Historical Irish either, and no mutations in Brythonic etc. Initial mutations have appeared at the end of the 5th century, if i remember well.

Now, some scholars say Gaulish was spoken till the 10th century in some remote places of France and Switzerland. If we had texts from that period, i'm pretty sure we would see initial mutations in that Late Gaulish.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 04:22 am:   Edit Post Print Post

Lughaidh,
so do you think that ICM is a development that Celtic languages will/would develop of their own accord?

I have also read that there is no clear evidence of Irish having ICM or not prior to the 5th century, due to ogham lacking the requisite sophistication to show this. How to you view this conjecture?

Have you any references or link for any papers on late Gaulish? In fact I once heard mention of it lasting to the 16th century!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lughaidh
Member
Username: Lughaidh

Post Number: 460
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 02:42 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

>Lughaidh,
>so do you think that ICM is a development that Celtic >languages will/would develop of their own accord?

Yes. Initial mutations do exist in Corsican as well (it's a Romance language close to Italian, and spoken in Corsica).

>I have also read that there is no clear evidence of >Irish having ICM or not prior to the 5th century, due >to ogham lacking the requisite sophistication to show >this. How to you view this conjecture?

That's right, we have no evidence of that, but we do know what things in oghamic Irish have come to make mutations (that we can see in Old Irish).

>Have you any references or link for any papers on late >Gaulish? In fact I once heard mention of it lasting to >the 16th century!

16th century? where have you read that? It would be interesting but it sounds quite incredible to me - never heard about Gaulish surviving later than the 10th century.
Thanx in advance, i'd like to read more about that.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dalta
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 04:48 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

I heard somewhere else that the Irish aren't Celts at all, they were in fact only influenced to take the Celtic language of Irish and the whole Celtic thing was made up by nationalists in the 20th century to seperate them from Britain. I'd need to see some preety clear-cut and understandable evidencce before I go believing any of this genetics malarky.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Max
Member
Username: Max

Post Number: 73
Registered: 05-2005
Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 06:55 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

>>do you think that ICM is a development that Celtic languages will/would develop of their own accord?


No


1/ Languages don't have lives of their own: a people makes a language, and not vise versa.
2/ These so-called mutations are regular phonetical/phonological patterns. They are not entitled to any language in particular. Given certain circumstances, they may occur.
3/ If short-term predictions about the evolution of language are pretty unsure, you can forget about long-term evolution.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lughaidh
Member
Username: Lughaidh

Post Number: 461
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 12:42 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

>I heard somewhere else that the Irish aren't Celts at >all, they were in fact only influenced to take the >Celtic language of Irish and the whole Celtic thing was >made up by nationalists in the 20th century to seperate >them from Britain. I'd need to see some preety clear->cut and understandable evidencce before I go believing >any of this genetics malarky.

You can read somewhere that Celts are ETs and stuff like that, so... you're right to be that cautious: loads of **** can be read about Celts :-)

Anyway, the definition of a Celt is (especially today): person who speaks a Celtic language. So...

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 01:39 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Lughaidh,
the remark on 16th century Gaulish was seen on a BBC discussion site. I looked this morning, and again now, but cannot locate it. I must say, I believed him not whence I heard, thinking perhaps he did err. So, sorry, there is no distinct scholorly references to track down.

Dalta,
As for genetics, as anyone with even a rudimentary introduction to statistics can guess, genetic analyses are very often just the comparision of one set of data to another. One takes swab from the mouths of Frisians (people mind, not cattle!) and also in Birmingham and analyse the swabs and compare the data. If they match, one concludes that both populations share common ancestry. One could call one group 'Germanic' and another 'Celtic', but they really are only, been precise, labels on the test results, nothing more.

One study I viewed on the net had a total sample set for England of 27 poeple! I'm no geneticist, but 27 looks a tad small for a whole country.

Max,
"Languages don't have lives of their own: a people makes a language, and not vise versa".

I know, it is good practice to add riders to statement to the effect that ones is conjecturing, not stating, a series of possibilities.

I was wondering tho, if from the point of view of a self-structuring system, are certain features implicit in particualar langauges? Exmaple: the tongue has only a limited range of movement, the mouth a limited range of sounds, every language carries only so many bits of information (on average) per word, particualar grammar, phonetics, morphology...etc When historical linguistics reconstructs language lineages do they find certain features are more likely in some languages due to structure recurring over time as 'emergent features'?

I'm sure you've heard such language before and it can sound like gobbledegook, but I'm not a linguist, so have to use what I can.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dalta
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 04:21 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Very interesting discussion. I think a good rule of thumb is that a man makes himself, regardless of background, language or anything else.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Domhnall
Member
Username: Domhnall

Post Number: 25
Registered: 06-2005


Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 04:41 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Mo leithscéal a chairde iv been working like non-stop for the last few days anywho..

Dalta, the point i was making is that Yes the Gael included Scotti(The scottish tribe who left N.W. Ireland for scotland) manx etc.. We were Gael just like them sharing similar things and to whatever extent today are Gael just like Scots etc not english.. But as the quote suggests what right do we have to call ourselves "Gael" or "Irish" and What do those terms actually mean etc..

I'd say that Ireland has been home to "Irish" since 1169 - Normans.. They spoke their own alien language(the most distinguishable trait of one's culture) and since then Bloody Béarla has been spoken non-stop in Eire. Of course the normans blended with the GAEL(!) and thanks to the reformation etc they the so-called old-english "became more Irish than the Irish themselves"
Thereafter the planted protestants of England/scottish lowlands used english in Ireland .. The penal laws, and general foreign interference and methods of barbaric oppression were used to suppress An Ghaeilge and the catholic Gael (i dont mean to over generalise) The language lost importance etc and began to receed and it hurts me so much to say that she hasnt stopped receeding since.

Anois, "By the way, maidir le do shiniú, tá an cuid is mó den tSaoirse athghabháilte anois, an slán i an Ghaeilge anois?"
Yes only an CHUID IS MO - - to quote The Legend DeValera;
"If liberty is not entire is Not liberty" Simple as that.
Nil an ghaelige slán in aon chor - of course there's both good and bad signs nowadays but til that f-ocking pointless and murderous way of teaching the language is ended i cant see an ghaelige being slán... And i believe we've failed the language and ONLY us are to blame for the decline of our hertiage in the 20th century.
And in reference to the NorthEast of our country that still remains under colonial rule thanks to ppl who dont belong here.. I dont believe the IRA should go on a shooting spree indeed we've learned the hard way from our oppressor that violence solves nothing and makes situations worse. Instead i hope religious tolerance is the norm (like C 1798) and the unionists of the North realise they've nothing to fear since all of their reasons for resisting home rule have since been proven to be rúbáiste!

"the Gaels in their turn invaded Ireland and ran out the previous people" - i agree with what robert said above.

"I heard somewhere else that the Irish aren't Celts at all" - what is your problem with Gael/Celts/Irish people.. Who are you, Ian Paisley..!?!?!? And advocating such statements without even a vague reference(not that i believe it because its rubbish) is truly precocious.

"the whole Celtic thing was made up by nationalists in the 20th century to seperate them from Britain." Next you'll be telling us 'you heard somewhere' that 20th century nationalists made up the oppression,suffering etc that they were fighting against and it was an army who had the right to be here who they were fighting..
I'm sorry Dalta but would you wise up!!

A people without a language of its own is only half a nation. A nation should guard its language more than its territories, 'tis a surer barrier and a more important frontier than mountain or river." - Thomas Davis

Tír gan teanga - tír gan anam.

Ní Síocháin Go Saoirse.
Is í slánú na Gaeilge athghabháil na Saoirse

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dalta
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 05:04 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Well, there's a lot to digest there. First I'ld like to clarify clearly that I never said that the Irish weren't Celts, I said I heard somewhere that the Irish weren't Celts and it was all a nationalist ploy. Yes, of course it's bolox, read my posts more clearly next time.

As to the the term Irish, after the Normans integrated and after the penal laws etc. Irish culture still flourished, the Normans became part of Irish culture. Don't forget the Vikings were already integrated at this stage, so were the Viking/Celts Irish or Gaels? So, saying are the Irish today really Gaels isn't correct, since the Gaels doesn't refer purely to the Irish and to Irish culture. Saying are the Irish really Gaels, i.e. do they speak each form of Gaelic and play the various forms of pipes that are there etc. etc.

The liberty question is a seperate issue, but regarding the language, do you think that when/if we get back the six counties that Irish will be saved? Judging by what you said it seems you don't, then you signature isn't right. It'll take more than liberty to save the language, regardless of how many Irish died and are dying as a result of British occupation.

As to the Gaels overrunning whoever was here before them, are you suggesting that the Celts have existed in Ireland since before the Bronze Age, even though they originated in central Europe? Robert was saying that the pre-Celts stayed around until now, it doesn't change that the Gaels/Celts came in and overpowered whoever was here before them. Don't forget also, that the Irish invaded and took over Scotland and they had several colonies in West Britain especially Wales and Cornwall. The Irish aren't a fantastic pixie race who only do good, we've enough blood on our hands like everyone else.

Nations aren't half-nations without languages, nations don't exist, they're purely manufactured things so as people have a sense of belonging. This can be seen clearly if anyone ever asks the question, what is it to be Irish, preety shortly afterwards, the question is forgotten.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Domhnall
Member
Username: Domhnall

Post Number: 29
Registered: 06-2005


Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 05:36 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

No sorry to say irish culture still flourished after being barred is as you put it - bolox.
How can one culture being made illegal, oppressed, the number of gaeilgeoiri decreasing etc etc etc be flourishing??????????????

The vikings were indistinguishable from the Gaeil by 1169 and as such were gael. Dont forget not all of the Normans aka Old-English became more Irish than the irish themselves.. The simple answer to "are the Irish today really Gaels" is no well at least for the most part - i consider myself to be a member of Clann na nGael.
So how "Irish" are irish people today? Please tell me duine éigin because i simply dont know!

Well being still ruled by the "old enemy" lets call them.. The Northern Nationalists realise how important Gaeilge is - as seen by the beautiful murals, their setting up of a Gaeltacht bheag in Belfast, the setting up of Lá in Belfast... Before now, Protestants such as Douglas Hyde thought the language could bring both cultures together and i would hope they would accept the invitation (instead of making up non-existant languages i.e. Ulster-Scots) If something like revitalising Gaeilge while bringing both communities together materialised then yes "is í slánú na Gaeilge athghabháil na Saoirse"!
Yes i know it was me who pointed out that the Scotti invaded scotland but that invasion and the continuing English 800 year onslaught are neither justified but there is a Massive difference in affects - deaths are in the millions in Ireland whereas the whole popultion of England/wales/scotland was probably smaller than the total casualties in ireland. I never claimed that the Gael/Irish are a perfect race - we're only human afterall.

I disagree with your last point entirely but of course you're entitled to your opinion (no matter how ridiculous ;-) )

Ní tír gan teanga

Its time to embrace the superior race!

Ní Síocháin Go Saoirse.
Is í slánú na Gaeilge athghabháil na Saoirse

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Canuck
Member
Username: Canuck

Post Number: 39
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 10:27 am:   Edit Post Print Post

Domhnall wrote: "The vikings were indistinguishable from the Gaeil by 1169 and as such were gael. Dont forget not all of the Normans aka Old-English became more Irish than the irish themselves.."

I am fairly certain that the Norman's were of Viking stock that settled in France and adopted the French language. They went on to conquer the Old-English Anglo Saxon's in 1066 which, as I understand it, nearly fell the death blow to the English language. What we speak today is an evolved French/Old English mix no?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Domhnall
Member
Username: Domhnall

Post Number: 31
Registered: 06-2005


Posted on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 04:44 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

"What we speak today"
Speak for yourself.. Is í teanga na gaeilge mo theanga!!!

Ní Síocháin Go Saoirse.
Is í slánú na Gaeilge athghabháil na Saoirse

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Canuck
Member
Username: Canuck

Post Number: 40
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 05:55 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

agus Francais agus Rosjan agus Béarla...

Táim ag magadh fút! Rinne mé meancóg:
"What they speak today is a devolved.."

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dalta
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 06:29 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Of course it flourished, how could it still be alive today without flourishing? Nowadays it's not flourishing any more because of the one hundred times more powerful invasion(in terms of culture) happening today, but after the penal laws, seanchaí story-telling, Gaelic Games, Irish etc. etc. were fine(less so Irish), they only started diminishing in the late 19th early 20th century, around the time an chuid is mó independence was won.

If the vikings then became Gaels, is that the beginning of this "Irish race", does that mean that a new race was creating when the Normans integrated with the Irish? If not, and the vikings became Gaels, then when the Normans integrated, surely they became Gaels aswell, making the people living on the island today Gaels, but of course that's wrong since Gael means the ancient race that inhabited Ireland, Scotland and the Isle of Man and still live on now to an extent. And what about the integration of the pre-Gaels in Ireland with the Gaels?

And does this mean you base nationality on culture, not race or ethnicity? In which case half of Ireland is no longer Irish or Gaelic, and if you base it on ethnicity, again, half of Ireland isn't Irish or Gaelic.

To the Irish/Liberty, the Northern nationalists use Irish as a way of declaring their Irishness. The same way the southern nationalists did back in the day. The unionists will never accept it as a way to bridge the gap as no one is truely willing to bridge the gap. You're sig is from an age-old time when it was believed every problem in Ireland stemmed from British rule, not entirely wrong, but wrong with regards to the language. In fact, the language is probably stronger under oppression, since people feel the need to identify themselves and one of those ways is to take up Irish.

It's a bit more than "far from perfect", and I don't know if what we did is much better than what the Brits did, in terms of us. We managed to co-destroy the Picti who lived in Scotland as well as cause some preety horrifying damage to Wales and Cornwall including slave raids, remember how St. Patrick got here? And truth be told, it was only the increasing Anglo-Saxon dominance in the area that stopped the Irish increasing their power. Ok, what the British did might be worse, but I'm saying that there's no point painting a picture that Ireland and the Irish are great and the Brits are horrible, it's painfully obvious that there are wankers everywhere and given the chance, any race would do the same that the Brits did to us.

Just out of curiousity, where are you from, do you live in the Gaeltacht? I was thinking about the possibility of setting up a new Gaeltacht, probably in Dublin but anywhere really. In big urban centres, there's usually enough Gaeilgeoirs to live together/rent a block of apartments together or something. I can't do it myself since I'm emigrating at the end of summer, but just to float the idea and see what you and every one else thinks.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Domhnall
Member
Username: Domhnall

Post Number: 34
Registered: 06-2005


Posted on Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 03:45 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Firstly look up "flourish" in the dictionary. Thats not a joke you obviously dont know what it means. It is still alive thanks to the Gaelic revival and the seculedness of the West of Ireland.
"they only started diminishing in the late 19th early 20th century," One again more unfounded speculation aka RUBAISTE!
A new race takes a lot of time to adapt/change and is on-going.

Now look this is the last time im going to point this out
"And does this mean you base nationality on culture, not race or ethnicity? In which case half of Ireland is no longer Irish or Gaelic, and if you base it on ethnicity, again, half of Ireland isn't Irish or Gaelic."
This is THE EXACT POINT i was making and asking san aistriúchán a bhíos ag lorg. I DONT KNOW THE ANSWER. K?!!

"In fact, the language is probably stronger under oppression," More bull.. Simple as this a phota ;
Whilst under oppression the language was banned etc etc.. People were forced to use English and they did and hence the majority of people in Ireland using it seachas Gaeilge.

The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of a million is just a statistic. It is an unfortunate reality that yes many humans are wankers and are greedy etc etc.. Hence yes," given the chance, any race would do the same that the Brits did to us. " But this is here and now. They did what they did and we're at where we're at now trying to right their and our wrongs.

Is as Droichead Atha, Co.Lú mé - - aka West Britain.. There is such an incredible lack of ANY part of Irish culture it makes me physically sick..
There's defo potential in that but i think its way too practical.. Tut tut - emigration.. The scourge of this nation for the last 150 years, cá bhfuil tú ag dul?

Ní Síocháin Go Saoirse.
Is í slánú na Gaeilge athghabháil na Saoirse

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dalta
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 06:58 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

I know what flourish means, for Irish culture to survive this long it has flourished in the West for centuries, even with the penal laws. It has flourished because of the secludedness you talk about. The Brits didn't put a complete ban on Irish culture, the language etc yes, but people could still congregate and could still play games together and still gather for story-telling and music etc. and in that sense, it flourished. What I said isn't rubaiste or unfounded speculation. The Irish language was cementing it's decline centuries ago, but the culture lived on. In the late 1800s the GAA was founded and the Irish literary revival began, however seanchaí, seisiúin etc. began their decline thanks to the start of mass media, especially that from Britain making such things 'uncool' and assciated with the lower classes, the main problem which has continued until today.


Ok, with the Gael/Irish thing, I got off the point a bit I think, however I don't think it's right to call us Gaels, since it doesn't mean Irish. That was my point.

"In fact, the language is probably stronger under oppression," More bull'
I think you missed my point, I was saying that people make an effort to revive the language while under oppression, e.g. Conradh na Gaeilge, na timirí, the Gaeltacht in Belfast, Lá etc. After oppression, people no longer feel the need to identify themselves as different from the invaders and so they forget about their culture etc. eg. The huge amounts od Irish "nationalists" who follow Arsenal, Man Utd etc. and hate Gaeilge.

"But this is here and now. They did what they did and we're at where we're at now trying to right their and our wrongs."
Alright, fair enough but there's no point having faith in a race when you admit yourself that many of them are wankers and there's nothing much to differentiate them from other races. (The whole "nations aren't real" thing I said a while ago).

Droichead Átha, eh? God I thought Dublin was the worst place for West-Britism. These young'ins today, eh? What's to be done?

"There's defo potential in that but i think its way too practical.." What do you mean? How can something be too practical. I got the idea from a guy who wanted a Gaeilgeoir to be his roomate, I thought it was a great way to bring the dispersed Gaelgeoirí together and set up another Gaeltacht, thus increasing the spread, power and influence of Gaeilgeoirs.

I'm myself heading to Dún Éideann to go to college. It's not all bad though, I'll be coming back when I'm done, I'll be a voice for the Gaeilgeoir(temporarily) ar imirce.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Domhnall
Member
Username: Domhnall

Post Number: 35
Registered: 06-2005


Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 04:08 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Im actually just sick of you and your repulsive, anglophile in nature "opinions" - -

Nílim ag iarraidh caint leat a thuilleadh ní bhíonn tú ach do mo chrá. (Bhuel maidir le stair, cultur na hEireann agus araile that im passionate about in life)

Is binn béal ina thost.

Ní Síocháin Go Saoirse.
Is í slánú na Gaeilge athghabháil na Saoirse

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dalta
Unregistered guest
Posted From:
Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 05:55 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Well, fair enough. Though you probably got the wrong end of the stick again since you're not that bright.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Caoimhín
Board Administrator
Username: Caoimhín

Post Number: 122
Registered: 01-1999


Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 10:42 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

Thread closed.

Caoimhín

Tír gan teanga, tír gan anam.



©Daltaí na Gaeilge