The announcement over the past couple of days of a new strategy towards Irish makes eminent sense, although no details have been fleshed out. Essentially the claim that the government is trying to make Irish the national language has been replaced by the goal of producing as many people as possing who are completely functionally bilingual. In other words, this recognises that Irish is always going to be a language alongside English.

There are many implications of this intriguing approach. The goal, early on in the state, of restoring Irish as the community language of Irish people produced this Gaeltacht focus. Even now the government is fixated in its census not just on whether can speak Irish fluently but on how many times a week they speak it and that sort of thing. But of course it is a little invasive to try to make people behave in any particular way in their homes and communities, and ignored the fact that Gaeltacht people needed English as the language of opportunity. The deontas concept is also a little bit odd: going down to each family with children and giving them a cash prize if they are deemed to be bringing them up with enough Irish. In a way the Gaeltacht idea allowed the rest of the country to pay lipservice to Irish, safe in the knowledge that Irish was being spoken every day somewhere. Now, as English becomes more and more prevalent in the so-called Gaeltacht, it has to be recognized that the final end of the Gaeltacht when it comes will not be the end of Irish as a living and naturally transmitted language. It will still not be a Manx or a Cornish, or even a Latin, as people all over the Galltacht are native speakers of Irish, whether or not it is the community language.

In theory the idea of forgetting out making Irish the sole national tongue implies a downgrading of the Gaeltacht concept - although that has not been said by the government. Essentially the real point is not to try to force parts of the country to remain Irish speaking on a daily basis, but what it always should have been, to produce as many people as possible who were fully bilingual. This goal is sustainable in the long term. Essentially the significance of the Gaeltacht does not have to be that there are areas of the country where the street language is all in Irish, where conversations on the bus are naturally always in Irish, but that there is still a pool of fluent native speakers, who must be used to the maximum extent while they still exist to boost Irish education elsewhere in the country. A Conemara man moving to Dublin is not necessarily a tragedy for the Irish language: he could be going to teach Irish in a gaelscoil. And seeing as Irish learners in Dublin are more enthusiastic than native speakers in Conemara, maybe that is where he should be anyway.

I would not give up on the Gaeltacht myself: I would love to see Galway, Donegal and Kerry implement county-wide all Irish education systems to enhance the pool of people who could play the role I have just outlined of the Conemara man in Dublin. But it is clear that the Gaeltacht has to be, not a strategy to create reservations where the natives still use Gaelic like a zoo, but to use the Gaeltacht as a base to foster bilingualism in the country as a whole. Maybe the government is getting round to this idea. It doesn't matter from this perspective that people in the Gaeltacht are functioning in two rather than one language. It doesn't hve to be the only or main community language. Just so long as most people in these areas remain naturally bilingual, they are a resource for the wider national policy.

The government has not guaranteed a gaelscoil place to any one that wants one. That is a big negative, although maybe is just a recognition of reality. But they have emphasised that secondary education through Irish needs to be expanded, and tertiary education in Irish put in place. If there is follow-through, it should mean a constant stream of qualified Irish speakers coming on to the job market in the future and possibly facilitating a gradual expansion in the provision of IRish language education. This is all very interesting stuff. The question now is, what will their 20 year strategy to achieve this contain?

When is it to be published?

And who is publishing it?

Féach an snáth eile seo, tá an t-eolas ar fad ann

http://www.daltai.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/daltai/discus/show.pl?tpc=20&post=48889#PO ST48889

Kieran,
I disagree with you on the Gaeltacht aspects.

This strategy will include a focus on sustaining the real Gaeltachts; without areas where it is a daily community langauge, the language will be severely weakened.

bheadh sé marbh, mar níl aon Ghaelg sa chathaireacha 'fíor-Ghaelg'

"without areas where it is a daily community langauge, the language will be severely weakened"

Aontaim leatsa, a Aonghuis

A Aonghuis

Aontaim leatsa freisin.

I know that some people may feel that the concept of a Gaeltacht is out of date but I really think that having a safe and encouraging place to speak Irish is vital to the language's use as a community language. Obviously it is fabulous and grand for people to speak Irish all over the island and that should be encouraged very much, but that doesn't mean that the Gaeltachtai should be abolished.

Strictly from my experience, the Gaeltachtai that I visited were the nicest places that I saw in Ireland and if I can ever go back that is whare I will spend most all of my time.

Beir bua agus beannacht

quote:

whare

Chím an focal so arís is arís. An bhfuil an bhrí speisiálta air agat, a Riona? Scríom péin "where" i gcomhnaí.

Gabhaim pardún agaibh as "scríom" im' theachtaireacht deireanach! "Scríom" = SCRÍOBHAIM, ar ndóigh!

Ni thuigim do bhri, I don't understand your meaning here. You are asking me if the word whare as special significance to me since I write it so often? Pardon me but that seems an odd question to ask, I don't think that I write the word whare anymore than anyone else and if I do it is not intentional. Am I spelling it wrong or something? I spell quite a lot of things wrong so that too wouldn't be out of the ordinary.

Are you going to write to me.

Beir bua agus beannacht

Ca bfhuil, Ca bfhuil, chuaigh mo mhadra beag? Ca bfhuil, ca bfhuil, an féidir leis a bheith?

FRC-GRMA

Oops, I spelled "bfhuil" wrong above. It should be "bhfuil."

FRC-GRMA

"I know that some people may feel that the concept of a Gaeltacht is out of date"

I once heard someone describe bodyhair as 'out of date' and 'not modern'.

It must be great to be evolving so quickly!

I am not sure I understand exactly what is being said here...it sounds like they are not really doing anything at all to me?

The "change in strategy" sounds more like a "change in perspective" to me. I mean it sounds like they are not going to enforce Irish as a first or second language, but rather just sort of shrug their shoulders and say "in Ireland there's Irish and English and hopefully the people have a little of both at them." Which in my opinion is what they have been doing from the beginning.

Now I caught the part of revising the census...finally! But I hope they are going to ask better questions than just the currency of usage for the language because that number will vary from person to person and will not give very accurate information. It hasn't in any other langauge, I do see how Irish will be any different. We will have to see...

And I also caught the part about their being a need for more secondary and third level Irish education...again this sounds like a good thing...but at what cost?

It almost sounds like they are retreating from the the fight, and possibly willing to sacrifice the Gaeltachts in the process...and I am thinking this might be a very bad idea.

If you open up a book to find where Irish is spoken what does it say...the Gaeltachts, and ask an Irish person where is Irish spoken what do they say...in the Gaeltachts!!! If the Gaeltachts are allowed to fade away, where is Irish going to be spoken in numbers to protect itself from being replaced with English?

If they want a change of strategy...one that does away with the Gaeltachts...maybe a better change would have been to erase the four major Gaeltachts and start treating the whole of Ireland as one big Gaeltacht and encouraging the preservation of the language like they do in the current Gaeltachts???

There is no question of the gaeltachts being done away with.

Agus an Ráiteas/And the Statement
http://www.pobail.ie/ie/Preaseisiuinti/file,7757,ie.pdf

WARNING: It's a big pdf

Perhaps you should read it. It's only 17 pages (in each language)

Thanks Aonghus...I just finished reading the pdf.

And it is very impressive...I mean with all those neat pictures and flashy colors, one might easily miss the fact that they don't really give you any real information ;0)

For those who have read it, and those who have not yet...I would like to point a phrase used several times that worries me when it comes to an official platform..."be developed."

While they address some 13 major issues facing the language, most of which we have debated on this site several times...I couldn't help but hear my grandmother in the back of my head warning me, "Beware of the architect without his blueprint."

While they addressed the issues, they didn't address what they intended to do about these issues. The details of what their plan of action will be is crucial in any political agenda. Yet, for some reason they seem to have not included their plans in this? For instance number twelve on the list, which was recently talked about here is "The use of the Irish language by the Garda Síochánna and the Defense Forces will be continued and developed."

Great...but how? Is it their plan to develope a mandatory fluency level and force the members of these forces to maintain it? Are they going to make the current members take re-fresher courses? I hate to bring it up again because I know it makes me sound like a penny pincher, but where is the funding going to come from? I can think of many concerns facing this single issue. But they didn't tell us anything but "hey we know it's a problem and we're taking care of it now." And while this is great news...they fail to mention the manner in which they are going to take care of it...

Thanks, Aonghus, for providing the link to the report. Language can be amusing when taken out of context, as in this English sentence found on page 10 of the Statement:

3. According to the 2002 Census of Population,
43% of the population of Ireland have the
ability to speak Irish.

I know what is meant, but a humorist could say that 57% of the population of Ireland cannot talk or that 57% of the population cannot make the sounds of Irish. If they could speak any language, they could speak Irish once it was learned. Using the language is another story.

I enjoyed reading the whole report and again thanks for providing it.

Maidhc

these are the terms of reference for a detailed strategy to be developed over the next two years.

Actually Mícheál...that's exactly what they mean. Of the people who took part in the last Irish census, 57% checked "no" to the question asking them "Can you speak Irish?"

I often post about the mockery of the current census when it comes to Irish language because I think it is an excellent example of how people are looking at Irish through a rather fuzzy lens.

The question was designed to establish if a person spoke Irish on a regular basis. However, because it is not very specific, and people like to assume knowledge of a language and the ability to use it being related...the numbers have been "less than accurate" over the years.

Of the 1.5 million speakers who checked "yes" on the census question, only a small fraction of these people actually "speak" it. And while the census numbers have been going up, the real number of speakers is going down.

That is why I hope they are really going to change the questions on the upcoming census. Depending on the questions, we might finally be able to get a better understand of the language.

"57% of the population cannot make the sounds of Irish"

I was just talking to someone training to be a guard, and their 'native' Irish speaker teacher is teaching them to say 'ku-ee' for 'chuaigh', so even the 'speakers' contain a lot of dross.

By the way, the guy was not impressed

Go raibh maith agat. How often is the census taken?

quote:

I was just talking to someone training to be a guard, and their 'native' Irish speaker teacher is teaching them to say 'ku-ee' for 'chuaigh', so even the 'speakers' contain a lot of dross

That's exactly how I pronounce it. "igh" is commonly pronounced as "í" in Irish -- I'd even hazard a guess that maybe the majority across all dialects do it. If it's just a small class teaching the basics, then there's no point in emphasizing the difference between "c" and "ch"... you need immersion to do that -- it would be like trying to get a Dubliner to say "this" instead of "dis".

Dúirt Éamon Ó Cuív T.D., an tAire Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta, gurb é seasamh soiléir an Rialtais gur le gach duine an Ghaeilge, is cuma cén líofacht atá acu. "Mar gheall ar thiomantas leanúnach na Rialtas a tháinig i ndiaidh a chéile, don teanga, cinntíodh go bhfuil méadú tagtha ar líon na ndaoine a labhraíonn Gaeilge - rud a léirítear sna Daonáirimh. Tá súil agam go bhfeicfear an ráiteas seo mar bhunchloch do pholasaí nua ar a mbunófar gníomh praiticiúil don Ghaeilge a bheas bunaithe ar chur chuige nua-aimseartha agus straitéis fhoirfe."

Déanfar na socruithe seo a leanas chun an straitéis a réiteach:

* Beidh ról comhairleach ag Fóram na Gaeilge i gcomhairle a chur ar an Aire maidir leis an straitéis.
* Ceapfar duine sa Roinn Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta chun an obair a stiúradh ó lá go lá
* Tá EUR300,000 á chur i leataobh agam le n-íoc as costais a bhaineann le réiteach na straitéise as seo go ceann dhá bhliain.
* Fostófar saineolaithe ar conradh le comhairle a chur ar an Roinn agus ar An Rialtas maidir leis an straitéis agus bainfear leas as saineolas domhanda chun an obair a chur i gcrích.
* Spriocam dhá bhliain atá le réiteach na straitéise.
* Rachfar i gcomhairle leis an bpobal mar is cuí i réiteach na straitéise ó tharla go bhfuil tacaíocht an phobail don ráiteas agus don straitéis fíorthábhachtach.

Er... I need to be as measured with my words as I can... but pronouncing "chuaigh" as "ku-ee" is incorrect. There is no form of Irish that pronounces "ch" as "k". It's just wrong. And it means you don't have lenition in your Irish. Do you make a difference between "cathaoir" and "an chathaoir"? When I hear people saying that you need immersion to pronounce "ch", I start wondering whether it is time to go monolingually English in Ireland. Ch is a sound all English speakers can make if they make the effort - and if you don't want to make the effort, why learn Irish?

quote:

Er... I need to be as measured with my words as I can... but pronouncing "chuaigh" as "ku-ee" is incorrect.

Sa chaoi chéanna, is mícheart "think" a fhuaimniú mar "tink" nó "fink".

quote:

There is no form of Irish that pronounces "ch" as "k".

Fíor, déarfainn.

quote:

And it means you don't have lenition in your Irish.

Fíor.

quote:

Do you make a difference between "cathaoir" and "an chathaoir"?

Uaireanta, ach caithfidh mé fad a bhaint as mo ghuth chun an t-idirdhealúchán a dhéanamh.

quote:

When I hear people saying that you need immersion to pronounce "ch", I start wondering whether it is time to go monolingually English in Ireland. Ch is a sound all English speakers can make if they make the effort - and if you don't want to make the effort, why learn Irish?

Níl an fhuaim, "C séimhithe", le cloisteáil i mBéarla.

Is féidir liom iomlán na bhfuaimeanna daonna guthacha a fhuaimniú (is duine daonna mé, tar éis an tsaoil), ach tá roinnt díobh míchompordach de réir mo bhlais -- go háirithe an "th" i "this" agus an "th" i "that".

Más í an aidhm labhairt ar nós cainteora dhúchais, caithfidh tú glacadh leis an mblas freisin -- agus sí an t-aon chaoi amháin sin a chur i gcrích ná tréimhse a chaitheamh i ngaeltacht. Tá neart daoine ann a labhraíonn teangacha difriúla le blais dhifriúla -- agus sin díreach a dhéanfaidh mise nuair a rachaidh mé le tréimhse a chaitheamh i ngaeltacht.

Well let me add this:

a) the point was to empasise the shite she was talking. The guy's name is Dermot, and after telling them their 'irish' names, went on to add that 'Dermot is from Ger' (Gerry, Garry, etc). Gerry and Gearóid go back to Garrett, which was introduced with the Anglo-Norman invasion, lest I be mistaken. I'm sure ye can work out how she arrived at her conlusion.

b) 'chuaigh' is/has been in various forms in recent history [huaig'] [xuag'] [xua] [xuaj] [xui:] [hui:] (maybe a few other too) as far as I can see. Traditionally the form was 'Do chuaigh', so it would be odd to carry a stop consonant there instead of a spirant. Young Donegal people seem to do 'h'.

Ch is articilated differently initially than finally, as according to the dialect books, rounding can take place, and ch can sound more 'Spanish-like' initially. In Erris the rounding even went as far as making chuaigh into 'fua'. The grinding down of initial ch woudl then make h as better choice than k

c) The corrospondance with dental frictives, or lack thereof, in late Hiberno English is erronous, as Dubliners are native English speakers, and the d and t substition is fine. In England th is been replaced with f or t, so they are losing ground in even their home. Sorry, can't find article with that material.

Dubliners, nor ar most of us, native Irish speakers, their historical innovation in English are hardly grounds for excusing poor pronounciation today! I mean, Dubliners make most of the normal English sounds, and their phonotactics are 'in range'. If we read caighdeán with our native sounds of English we will be farther from native irish than dubliners are from the Queen's English.

Also, the fricative 'ch' is in country Hiberno English, altho slightly (to my ear) less velar, and is just a varience of 'k' [bux] for 'buck'. The palatal frictive is not foreign either, as slender ch can be got in the first c of 'cucumber', or in 'McHugh' (in the country). Some Dubliners have a very plain pronounciation, and even here they may have what I described. Anyway. slender 'ch' is just a noisy lenis fricative of /j/ (as in English 'yet'). To me, the sounds are less of an issue than actually speaking

d) FnaB -you voiced the opinion that all Caighdeán should be scrapped recently. The regaelicising of the grammar -should this not be extended to all parts of the language? Lenition, for example, serves a grammatical function, as do all irish sounds (in theory -do natives listen to the broad vs slender f in 'graf/graif' anymore?)

quote:

c) The corrospondance with dental frictives, or lack thereof, in late Hiberno English is erronous, as Dubliners are native English speakers, and the d and t substition is fine.

Labhríodh Gaeilge in Éirinn sular tosaíodh ag labhairt Béarla, agus coimeádadh an blas céanna nuair a tosaíodh ag labhairt Béarla. Níl a fhios agam conas a d'fhuaimníodh muintir Bhleá Cliath "capall Vs. capaill" nó "cuid Vs chuid" nó "bád Vs báid" nuair a labhraídís Gaeilge.

quote:

Dubliners, nor ar most of us, native Irish speakers, their historical innovation in English are hardly grounds for excusing poor pronounciation today!

Níl fhios agam cad atá i gceist agat?

quote:

I mean, Dubliners make most of the normal English sounds, and their phonotactics are 'in range'. If we read caighdeán with our native sounds of English we will be farther from native irish than dubliners are from the Queen's English.

Ach is de bharr consain chaola agus leathana atá sé sin don chuid is mó, déarfainn.

quote:

d) FnaB -you voiced the opinion that all Caighdeán should be scrapped recently.

I gCaighdéan Béarla Bhanríon Shasanna, sí "saw" an aimsir chaite de "see", agus sí "whom" an fhoirm de "who" a úsáidtear sa tuiseal áinsíoch agus sa tuiseal tabharthach, m.sh.:

I saw the person to whom he gave the book.

I mBéarla lucht aicme oibre Bhleá Cliath, sí "seen" an aimsir chaite de "see", agus sí "who" an fhoirm de "who" a úsáidtear sa tuiseal áinsíoch agus sa tuiseal tabharthach, m.sh.:

I seen the person he gave the book to.

Bheadh sé aisteach dá n-inseodh duine "whom" agus "seen" san abairt chéanna:

I seen the person to whom he gave the book.

Ní déarfadh éinne ar an domhan an abairt mar atá sí thuas -- ach seo díreach an cineál ruda atá Caighdéan na Gaeilge a chur chun cinn. Seo sampla d'abairt a chloisfí i gCúige Mumhan:

ar an sráid agus sa seomra

Seo sampla d'abairt a chloisfí i gCúige Uladh:

ar an tsráid agus ins an tseomra

Má tá "t" ar "sráid", beidh "t" ar "seomra". Mura bhfuil "t" ar "sráid", ní bheidh "t" ar "seomra". Ach ní bhíonn meascán ann! M.sh.:

Bhí siad ar an tsráid agus sa seomra.

Tá an abairt sin thuas aisteach, ní labhraíonn éinne sa chaoi sin, ach sin atá scríofa i "gCaighdeán na Gaeilge".

quote:

The regaelicising of the grammar -should this not be extended to all parts of the language?

Níl aon ghá le "athghaeláil" ann, mar níor athríodh an teanga. Murar thug tú faoi deara, ní labhraíonn éinne Caighdeán na Gaeilge.

quote:

Lenition, for example, serves a grammatical function, as do all irish sounds (in theory -do natives listen to the broad vs slender f in 'graf/graif' anymore?)

Ní féidir liom freagra a thabairt air seo mar ní rabhas i ngaeltacht riamh. Ach ní fheicim fáth ar bith nach gcoimeádfidís a gcóras consan caol agus leathan.

(Message edited by Fear_na_mBróg on December 24, 2006)

FNB, my point stands that "ch" is not validly pronounced as a "k" in any variety of Irish. You may be able to read and write Irish, but that does not address my question; it misses it completely. I do accept that some phonemes are difficult to get outside the Gaeltacht - or maybe permanently difficult to get for an adult learner regardless of location. I thought a while back that I had mastered Slender R, and then on hearing more examples, I started to wonder again. But CH is just not one of the ones that is hard for a native speaker of English to get. And if you can do it, you should, because it is a vital part of the language. How do you pronounce "an phoblacht"? As "a poblakt"? I think we are all trying our best, and I wouldn't want to ridicule anyone's attempts to try his best, but we are all striving to do better, as learning a language is a lifelong task, is it not? But "chuaigh" is NOT pronounced "ku-ee" - there is just no getting away from that fact...

FnmB,
I understand your points, but as I said, the fact that native English Dubliners have made innovations in English over 2 centuries, does not justify their alterations of Irish, as they have not reconstituted a native irish speaking community!

"I do accept that some phonemes are difficult to get outside the Gaeltacht - or maybe permanently difficult to get for an adult learner regardless of location."

I have to disagree in a broad sense -the sounds individually are possible, and I've mapped out what I think are stratagies for learning to pronounce them; its the fast speech that makes one come acropper as the syllablic structure plus speed seems to 'demand' one institute sandhi. A linguist might find interest in how sandi may have effected the history of irish, but there goes.