Here’s Ben Lowry in the News Letter just over a week ago:
“In March, the Department of Communities published figures for 2015/16 that found that 9% of the adult population in Northern Ireland can speak Irish, 5% can write it and only 1% can write or carry on a complicated conversation in the language.”
Ben is drawing on an argument frequently made by those who have no interest in or are hostile to the Irish language: few people here can read, write or speak Irish.
I’ve never found that a convincing argument. In 2012, the Vegetarian Society in the UK reported that just 2% of the population were vegetarians. The small percentage of vegetarians suggests, not that they should be forgotten about, but that the rest of us should be trying to address our eating habits and try to wean ourselves off red meat, which causes all sorts of health problems, not to mention the impact on the ozone layer of farting cows.
Likewise with Irish: the small percentage who have full fluency in the language should be a spur, not scoff at the notion of providing for Irish speakers, but a spur for all of us to try improving the numbers,.
Ben concludes his article:
“Moderate supporters of a standalone Irish language act might perhaps want to turn their ire on hardline advocates of aggressive and triumphalist language provisions, and the damage they have done to the prospects of milder legislation, instead of always scolding those who have entirely reasonable reservations about such an act. “
Oh, come on, Ben. Both Pobal and Conradh na Gaeilge, the two main Irish-speaking organisations, believe that to include in an Act anything other than Irish would be contrary to the approach to minority languages in the EU and contrary to common sense. The director of Pobal, Janet Muller, has said inclusion of Ulster-Scots in such an act would “make a laughing stock” of the legislation.
Those unionists oppose to an Irish language act claim it’s on the grounds that such provision would involve a waste of money. Ben is with them there, and cites the cost of bilingual road signs. But the real reason behind unionist resistance to Irish provision slips out along with Ben’s cost concern:
“Consider how expensive such a replacement will be and how it will change utterly the feel of Northern Ireland (as is intended).”
Unionist resistance to an Irish Language Act in unionism is due to one of two reasons: (i) Unionists believe our North-East Nest is fine and dandy as it is (which suggests seriously low standards). Or unionism realises our North-East Nest is in serious need of change to reach even the level of Scotland and Wales, but refuses to take the necessary steps towards such equality because that’s how unionism is.
I’m not sure which is worse.
Here’s the link, gio – enjoy.
Unionism’s attitude to the Irish language is as simple as this – ‘ anything Irish belongs to the 26 Counties’. So that includes the language, sport, catholic religion etc.
anything that threatens the protestant artificial state will be fiercely defended against.
So equality does not come into play, because equality would be against the Norths reason for being – its as simple as that.
in my work place, a work place colleague (happens to be the husband of an MLA in Portadown) – said to me a few years ago “when the economy improves down there, will you be going back home?”
– needless to say, i reported this to management.
Anyway, i suppose i am lucky to be working in the north nowadays, 40 years ago, i wouldnt have been allowed.
I guess it’s something like a rejection of ‘the other’, a denial that other people actually exist.
There are some ‘demands’ from SF which aren’t sensible or realistic. It’s a pope dream to think that within a decade the Courts could be held in Irish. It’s also unrealistic; think of the training time for a barrister, a solicitor and a judge. All of the law in NI is in English; a translation isn’t the same. The Bunreacht is primarily in Irish as the national language; there is a version in the official language of English. In at least one place they don’t agree. Now, is Irish or English to be the superior language in the Court? (The Bunreacht was of course drafted in English before being translated into Irish, but let’s pretend we don’t know that.)
So what is the Irish language actually for? This question isn’t asked, nor answered. I’d suggest it as a way into a culture other than English language culture, a better and deeper understanding of who we all are.
Oh, the ozone layer isn’t being destroyed by farting cows; it’s their belches that do it.
Irish language aside, K, I’m not sure you have the right end of the stick/cow…
https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/5-reasons-cow-farts-matter-and-could-destroy-the-w/
I believed, like you Jude, that it was the cow farts that were doing for us. Somewhere, I forget where, I read that it was the emanations from the other end. If I’m confused now, it’s a simple binary problem compared to an Irish Language Act.
Irish Language Act will allow Sinn Fein and other activists to organise campaigns against shops and businesses who do not have Irish speaking staff-They think it will be a clever way to ensure no non Irish speakers-ie unionists get jobs
This is what is behind the demands for this Act
you know it I know it and everyone else knows it
Gaz, do you really believe what you write?
“you know it I know it and everyone else knows it”- if you truly believe that you need to get out of your trench and see that SF don’t want to stop unionists getting jobs.
Unionists fear Irishness, and they hate the Irish language.
Just because Unionists have tried to stop Catholics getting jobs does not mean Catholics will do the same to unionists.
I’m starting to think most of the fears from Unionism is because they feel nationalists will behave the same way they did when they are in power.
Jude
Stirling effort on the links. My work here is done or at least that bit of it!
As a vegetarian I have to say I don’t think the comparison is apt.
I would not expect Tescos to stock the same quantity and variety of veggie alternatives as they do for dead animal flesh-eaters. It would be nice of course but I accept that there will be proportionally less choice for me mainly due to cost reasons for them.
We still do not know exactly what is to be in an Irish Language Act and although I support it in principle I would like to see some detail.
How for example do you envision the courts working for a case involving an Irish speaker?
Would it be through translators or would all court officials (and jurors?) in such a case have to be fluent speakers?
I tried to explain,gio. What happens when a non national appears in court in the north? Answer : an interpreter is hired. The entire judiciary dies NOT have to learn Irish.
fiosrach
Can you elaborate on that?
Are you saying it will just be a matter of having an interpreter on call?
I thought it was intended to go further than that.
Where are you getting that from?
Well,gio, as a sensible fellow, do you think that the Irish language community is going to demand that the judiciary will have to be fluent in Irish? The gaeilgeoirí would hope never to be at the mercy of a BrItish court in Ireland.
You are both missing the point. Having an interpreter is fine for a ‘foreign’ language, such as Slovak or Bulgarian which so few of us speak. Neither of these can be seen in any way as an indigenous language. Irish is different; it is an indigenous language, even if there were attempts to eliminate it, and if few here now speak it fluently. The laws here are all in English, as are those in GB and in the US to which reference could be made. No laws in NI are primarily in Irish.
You imply that Irish speakers would be, at best, disadvantaged by having to speak and hear in English, and at worst their lack of understanding would be used to their disadvantage.
Here, in NI, and in the Republic the laws are in English; in the Republic, there may well be translations into Irish; in all my time at Courts in Dublin and elsewhere, I never heard Irish being spoken. Further, who is to decide which of the English or Irish versions of the law to have precedence?
Be careful what you wish for; it may not be as easy as you imagine.
Korhomme
I am trying firstly to find out what is being proposed and then we can decide on whether it is workable or not.
In your view is it an interpreter service that would be proposed as fiosrach suggests?
Ben Lowry seems worried it would go further than that.
You seem to know a bit about it so what is your take on it?
dead on Sir. The rejection of the Irish language act is just a 2017 version of “not an inch”
“how it will change utterly the feel of Northern Ireland”, for me that explains it perfectly……
Irish Language Act will allow Sinn Fein and other activists to organise campaigns against shops and businesses who do not have Irish speaking staff-They think it will be a clever way to ensure no non Irish speakers-ie unionists get jobs
This is what is behind the demands for this Act
you know it I know it and everyone else knows it
Is there some hidden connection between Ben Lowry and farting/belching cows?
Btw, I had always thought it was the methane gas from the back end, and from their dung which was so useful in producing energy, which, if not harnessed, could do such ecological damage.
As far as Ben Lowry and unionists objection to the Irish language is concerned, there are three reasons:
1 – Bigotry
2 – Bigotry
3 – Bigotry
Anything else is just a facile excuse!
1% speak Irish fluently. Shows how much our language has been suppressed over the years.
I’m 65 years of age and went to a catholic school. Neither Irish language or Irish history was taught.
Says it all.
I’m older than you, Tony. I went to a ‘non-denominational’ school. Irish wasn’t taught. History was taught to the exam curriculum; it was English history as seen from an English perspective. We even had a book called ‘England under Queen Anne’ to study. (An excellent book, but partisan.) And you and others wonder why there is a problem with the Irish language…
At primary school in a nationalist town, I never heard a single word of Irish and never heard of Cuchulainn. Needless to say, Irish history was never mentioned and our musical history was popular country and western hits. But we had our Catholic ethos so all was ok. Sweet heart of Jesus, font of love and mercy.
at my school, run by sisters without mercy, we were taught the Welsh national anthem, which has stood me in good stead over the years?????
Irish Language Act will allow Sinn Fein and other activists to organise campaigns against shops and businesses who do not have Irish speaking staff-They think it will be a clever way to ensure no non Irish speakers-ie unionists get jobs
This is what is behind the demands for this Act
you know it I know it and everyone else knows it
Shop owners soon realise if there is a clientele of Gaeilgeoirí coming in and they hire accordingly. And if it’s true that there are only 1% of Irish speakers there is still a massive market to supply in the 99% Monoglot section. And how do you know what the Act will or won’t do? Who’s briefing Jamie Bryson now?
Unionists hate Irishness. They are allergic to anything resembling it. The KKK hate blacks,Jews and of course Catholics. They hate anyone who isn’t a red neck. We should not pander to bigotry. England tried to wipe Irish out. Fortunately they failed. Everyone I know has a wee bit of the language. My nephews are schooled in it as their first language. There can be no going back.
“Unionists hate Irishness.” Complete and utter tosh. I was brought up in a predominantly Unionist area in Co. Antrim where both Irish traditional music and Irish dancing were popular and still are. The old country people around where I was brought up, mostly Unionist, wouldn’t have missed the “Ceilidh House” programme broadcast on “Athlone” on a Saturday night. The amount of ignorant stereotyping on this site is incredible.
The exception proves the rule?
“The exception proves the rule?”
I always had difficulty with this, for i thought that ‘prove’ meant something like ‘show to be true’. But it doesn’t; prove in this sense means ‘to test’. Think of a proving flight, proof spirit or even the proving of bread. In this example, the exception tests the rule, and shows it to be false.
I take it to mean that the odd aberration simply indicates how correct and overwhelming the main tenet is? Here pockets of love for facets of Gaelic culture does not negate the fact that the artificial state set up and maintained by force is virulently anti Irish.
Korhomme
That is an interesting take on the saying. I had never thought of it that way before.
Either way the idea that unionists hate Irishness is offensive nonsense and reveals more about the person making the claim than it does about the broad spectrum of opinion in unionism.
Gio, just look at long history of Unionist politicians attacking anything Irish. Look at the actions of current unionist politicians and it is offensive to try and state unionists don’t hate anything Irish. Look at any period in the short history of the northern statelet and the anti-Irish rhetoric and it is impossible to argue that Unionism doesn’t hate Irish. Even I’m partial observers with limited knowledge can spot unionism’s hatred of all things Irish or Catholic. If you look around you in July you might spot a few pieces of supporting evidence. I have yet to see a unionist prepared to tolerate anything Irish.
emmet
Linda Ervine?
Gio, What are you saying? Does she negate the long history of unionists attacking anything Irish? Does she negate the long list of anti-Irish rhetoric that has come from current unionist politicians? Is this what you are trying to argue?
I can only speak from my personal experience, Willie D. I grew up in a town where unionists hated any expression of Irishness, whether it was a Saint Patrick’s Day March or the playing of GAA. Somebody littered the pitch with broken glass. The population is now fifty fifty yet loyalist flags still hang from lamp posts. In general unionist politicians still deny being Irish, absurd I know.
Willie, I’d be interested to know what part of Co. Antrim has such a love of Irish traditional music and dancing? Do they also have an affinity to the Irish language? How do you know they are popular?
This is not something I have ever come across or heard of. Would be very interested to find out more
Irish Language Act will allow Sinn Fein and other activists to organise campaigns against shops and businesses who do not have Irish speaking staff-They think it will be a clever way to ensure no non Irish speakers-ie unionists get jobs
This is what is behind the demands for this Act
you know it I know it and everyone else knows it
Gaz you have repeated this 4 times on this thread- so you must believe it , but here is my response to you one the previous 4
“you know it I know it and everyone else knows it”- if you truly believe that you need to get out of your trench and see that SF don’t want to stop unionists getting jobs.
Unionists fear Irishness, and they hate the Irish language.
Just because Unionists have tried to stop Catholics getting jobs does not mean Catholics will do the same to unionists.
I’m starting to think most of the fears from Unionism is because they feel nationalists will behave the same way they did when they are in power.
Gaz, below is lifted from the East Belfast Mission, Turas site.
When the Community Relations Council Chairman, Peter Osborne, talks about an award that recognises Linda Irvine’s bravery in challenging myths and stereotypes he is probably thinking about people like yourself who would like to believe that all unionists hate anything Irish.
Would you like them to reverse all the good work that they have done so that it fits with your enlightened views ?
CRC Award
Linda Ervine was proud to receive the 2015 Community Relations Council (CRC) Civic Leadership Award for her commitment to Turas, an Irish Language project at East Belfast Mission.
The CRC award seeks to recognise exceptional contribution to civic leadership in Northern Ireland and the demonstration of sustained leadership that has helped promote community relations, peace-building or intercultural work. The 2015 award was presented at a special leadership symposium, organised by CRC, at Malone House, Belfast featuring a range of speakers on the subject of civic leadership. These included Bishop Harold Miller, the current Bishop of the Down and Dromore Diocese in the Church of Ireland, and former Lord Mayor of Belfast, Máirtín Ó Muilleoir. The panel discussion was chaired by Dr Leon Litvack, a Member of the Board of the Community Relations Council and Reader in Victorian Studies at Queen’s University Belfast.
CRC Chairman, Peter Osborne, says that the award recognises her bravery in challenging myths and stereotypes, in the face of opposition, to create understanding and bring people together. “Leading an Irish language teaching organisation based on the Lower Newtownards Road in the heart of east Belfast might have seemed unthinkable a few years ago, but the fact that Turas is now thriving, with 10 language classes per week and over 120 students, is testament to Linda’s vision, bravery and leadership,” Mr Osborne added.
giordanobruno; I only know what I’ve read about. SF seem to want, for instance, that if an Irish speaker was in court, that the proceedings would be in Irish, and that within 10 years or so. They also demand, AFAIK, that road signs are bilingual. I’m not sure if they want Irish to be an ‘official’ language and have this enshrined in law.
But, the court scenario is unrealistic except perhaps for the most trivial of summary offences. Otherwise, it effectively requires all those in the court, and all those who prepare documents to be perfectly bilingual. Think of the Charlie Gard case in England, where there is now evidence from medics in the US; any complex case could easily need input from people who don’t speak or write Irish to the necessary level. How are they to be cross-examined? IIRC, there was a court case over a contested will in England; it seems to have centered on the exact legal meaning of the phrase ‘and/or’. How do you accomplish this and understand the nuances of legal language without being bilingual?
It could be done using translators, but it seems odd to have to use translators for a language which is a part of the heritage; translators are fine for a ‘foreign’ language, but to have to use them for a ‘domestic’ language.
I think that SF are going too far with this; Irish as a recognised language is a reasonable demand, but to require that a certain percentage (was it 10%?) of judges etc are so proficient is unrealistic. Perhaps in a century we will be this advanced.
Korhomme
Thanks for the reply.
I agree that reaching 10% of judges is not realstic in the short or medium term.
I am not at all sure that that is being suggested by anyone in SF just yet.
Maybe Ben Lowry is extrapolating a bit on that one.
If it is to be an interpreter service that is more realistic.
It would lead to absurd situations of course as the Irish speaker will most likely be able to interpret for themselves!
Could there also be the risk of more appeals being made based on claims that interpretation was inaccurate or misleading?
Interpreters have to be certified (after exams) so they should be expected to be accurate; but still, there could be problems which might lead to an appeal. The use of idiomatic language could be a particularly difficult area.
As for SF, I’ve a suggestion.
They should go to Switzerland. The Swiss have three ‘official’ languages, French (around 25% of the people), German (about 65%) and Italian (about 10%). All official documents are available in all three languages. Most, though not all, will know one other language though perhaps not to a very high level. Professionals and business people will know all three, and also be proficient in English. If you go to a local conference there, there might be a presentation in French. The speaker will then take questions, some of which might be in German. But he or she will respond in their own language, here French. (I’ve not been to the courts there, I don’t know what happens.)
All of this is background, for there is a fourth language in Switzerland, spoken by about 1%; it’s Romansch. (Strictly, there are three main groupings with several sub-groups, but it’s usually considered as a single language.)
Romansch is recognised as a ‘national’ but not an ‘official’ language. This followed a lot of effort and lobbying by Romansch speakers who wanted to keep their language and identity alive. The kids will be schooled in Romansch; of course, to be able to function elsewhere in Switzerland, the learn at least one other language, often German. I don’t know if any courts function in Romansch. Kids who want to go to University will need another language.
This multilingualism is seen as entirely ordinary and not a matter for comment or surprise — as it should be. That seems a much more sensible model for the development of Irish than some of the suggestions I’ve seen (though, as you note, I don’t know how many are real demands).
Would the DUP oppose such an idea? I expect they would, but that would then show them up as reactionary b—ts, for there can be no sensible objection to it.
(Mind you, I’d object to the road signs if they were the same as in the Republic. Not because they are bilingual, but because the English place names are in capital letters and yet is is well known that an initial capital followed by the rest of the name in small letters is much easier to comprehend when driving a car. [The French are just as bad, all capitals])
We don’t need to look as far as Switzerland- just look at what happens in Wales.
Emmet
is this what is being proposed?
I had a look on the SF website and I just can’t see that in the relevant section.
I would be grateful for a link. Thanks
Gio, sorry you have lost me. I haven’t proposed anything or referenced SF policy. Are you talking about a previous comment?
Korhomme suggested SF go to Switzerland, I suggested they need only to travel to Wales to see how it could work. Wales in in the UK which the unionists hold dear- so maybe a better place to look?
Emmet
I too am sorry. I thought from your comment you might have some knowledge of the SF proposal.
It is hard to find the actual detail.
Gio, still confused. It is hard to find what detail?
I was commenting on Korhomme’s suggestion for SF to visit Switzerland.
The knowledge (or lack of) I have about the SF proposal has nothing to do with my comment. I was merely pointing out to see a successful language Act just travel the short distance to Cymru. I think the Unionists could also do well to go for a visit and see how a native language is treated in Britain.
Emmet
No problem. I was only asking if you knew what the actual proposals entail in any detail.
If you don’t know you don’t know
So how would you deal,now, with a murder case involving two people of eastern European origin?
While I’m aware that Welsh is promoted in Wales, I think it’s more widely understood than Irish is in NI.
I mentioned Switzerland because I thought that Romansch was in much the same position as Irish in NI — very much in the minority, yet worthy of being supported.
Other European countries have multiple languages; Belgium has French and Dutch, but both populations are substantial. In the South Tyrol region of Italy, German is the ‘natural’ language though very much in a minority overall.
Exactly! Wales brought the Welsh language back through some very successful policies. At the middle of this century Welsh was in rapid decline- I think it became a minority language in the 1920s. There have been more repressive forces in our part of the world that had ensured Irish declined a lot earlier.
I don’t think anyone has anything to fear from being multilingual. The huge misconception is that by educating young people in various languages you somehow confuse them and lessen their ability to speak the languages- whereas the reality is that learning other languages actually strengthens your mastery of your primary language.
Sadly Unionism (and the unionist people) will never take to Irish because of prejudice.
I learned German at school but have been fortunate enough to travel to the country on many occasions to reinforce what I learned- I feel I am fluent in German- well I can comfortably negotiate any conversation with the odd slip up.
I did Russian at University and still feel fairly confident in that (basic level)- I kept this up with 2 visits to Russia as well as watching the Russian news.
I rote learned Latin at school and felt it was pointless. Since then I have realised I can pick up some Italian (although the Austrian Romansch speaker I met sounded more like German!).
At school I learned Irish and spent several summers at the Gaeltacht and I felt I was fairly fluent by the time I finished school. I have lost the opportunity to speak Irish and now feel I am so rusty that I would make a fool of myself in conversation.
I had opportunity to use Russian, German and even Latin but sadly I have not had the same opportunity with Gaeilge. If there was an Irish Language Act we could easily see the revival of Irish, not to the detriment of English. Even if we forced a multilingual society it would only have benefits for society. As much as I despise all that Israel has come to represent- they too have created/revived their language.
SF and the Irish Language lobby can sulk and huff all they like because there will be no ILA. The Orange Order (you know the 34000 secretive,sectarian, fundamentalist,Protestant tail that wags the one million unionists ? dog) have spoken out against any capitulation to republicans.
Question…….Why do unionists oppose an Irish Language Act?
Simple Answer…… Because it was proposed by themuns
That cuts to the chase, Martin.