162 messages over 21 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 15 ... 20 21 Next >>
aodhanc Diglot Groupie Iceland Joined 6261 days ago 92 posts - 130 votes Speaks: English*, FrenchB2 Studies: Spanish
| Message 113 of 162 17 March 2012 at 7:21pm | IP Logged |
Марк wrote:
aodhanc wrote:
For example, if a priest was found to be saying Mass
in Irish, he
would be taken from the church to a nearby forest and executed.
|
|
|
Really? Could you give some proof? it's hard to believe.
|
|
|
Well, as it happened hundreds of years ago, I don't have that much specific proof. But
I can tell you that the Penal Laws were introduced into Ireland by the British in the
16th century. These laws were an attack on Catholics (who were of course Irish
speakers).
Here is a link for some further information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_Laws_(Ireland)
Under the laws, it was forbidden to speak or write in the Irish language in any public
sphere.
Masses were held not in churches, but in the countryside in secret, for fear of
persecution.
Of course, the Great Famine in the 19th century and the resultant deaths and emigration
also dealt a huge blow to the language.
2 persons have voted this message useful
| Solfrid Cristin Heptaglot Winner TAC 2011 & 2012 Senior Member Norway Joined 5335 days ago 4143 posts - 8864 votes Speaks: Norwegian*, Spanish, Swedish, French, English, German, Italian Studies: Russian
| Message 114 of 162 21 March 2012 at 8:30pm | IP Logged |
I am reluctant to disuss the political side of languages, but in issues like these, we are all guilty and we are all innoncent. We are all guilty since every nation has its share of atrocities. And we are all innocent because none of us has has any individual guilt in any of it.
The Vikings raped nuns and slaughtered priests and civilians of all sorts wherever they went. Do I feel responsible? No. But I would not expect them to keep Norwegian as an official language if enough Vikings had stayed behind either.
Yes the English did horrible things in Ireland, and the Soviet Union was responsible for horrible things in a number of countries, but that does not make any indviduals today responsible for any of it. Nor does it give anyone the right to demand that their language is used.
We cannot demand of any nation that they grant equal linguistic rights to those who they see as their former opressors. And it is the one who has been opressed who has the right to define whether they have been or not. Not the opressor. If Ireland had chosen to use Irish exclusively as their national language, and ban English from all public use, that would have been their right.
If the WW2 had gone differently we might have had a large German population here, but I doubt that we would have chosen to keep German as an official language once we got our freedom back. Ironically, in Norway the Germans were driven out by Russian troops, who liberated the entire northern part of the country. One man's opressor is another man's liberator.
How about we therefore agree to let each nation chose it's own way, and focus on the languages again?
7 persons have voted this message useful
| Марк Senior Member Russian Federation Joined 5057 days ago 2096 posts - 2972 votes Speaks: Russian*
| Message 115 of 162 21 March 2012 at 8:48pm | IP Logged |
Solfrid Cristin wrote:
I am reluctant to disuss the political side of languages, but
in issues like these, we are all guilty and we are all innoncent. We are all guilty
since every nation has its share of atrocities. And we are all innocent because none of
us has has any individual guilt in any of it.
The Vikings raped nuns and slaughtered priests and civilians of all sorts wherever they
went. Do I feel responsible? No. But I would not expect them to keep Norwegian as an
official language if enough Vikings had stayed behind either.
Yes the English did horrible things in Ireland, and the Soviet Union was responsible
for horrible things in a number of countries, but that does not make any indviduals
today responsible for any of it. Nor does it give anyone the right to demand that their
language is used.
We cannot demand of any nation that they grant equal linguistic rights to those who
they see as their former opressors. And it is the one who has been opressed who has the
right to define whether they have been or not. Not the opressor. If Ireland had chosen
to use Irish exclusively as their national language, and ban English from all public
use, that would have been their right.
If the WW2 had gone differently we might have had a large German population here, but I
doubt that we would have chosen to keep German as an official language once we got our
freedom back. Ironically, in Norway the Germans were driven out by Russian troops, who
liberated the entire northern part of the country. One man's opressor is another man's
liberator.
How about we therefore agree to let each nation chose it's own way, and focus on the
languages again? |
|
|
We cannot influence the states's decisions, yet we can estimate them. The language
policy affects people despite the history. You excuse any violation of human rights by
the government.
The state boarders are not given by God, people do not choose their state. Former
oppressions do not give the moral right to oppress anyone.
Saying that Ukraine was oppressed by the Soviet Union is absolute nonsense. Ukraine was
a founder of the USSR.
Edited by Марк on 21 March 2012 at 9:38pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
| boon Diglot Groupie Ireland Joined 6160 days ago 91 posts - 177 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish Studies: German, Mandarin, Latin
| Message 116 of 162 21 March 2012 at 9:34pm | IP Logged |
aodhanc wrote:
Марк wrote:
Irish is heavily oppressed in Ireland. Only 10 % of children study in
irish medium
schools and so on.
Doesn't it seem stupid? |
|
|
Mapk, I wouldn't agree that it's oppressed. It's simply not promoted or encouraged.
However it was certainly oppressed during British colonial rule, which drove it to the
brink of extinction. For example, if a priest was found to be saying Mass in Irish, he
would be taken from the church to a nearby forest and executed.
While only 10% today study in Irish-medium schools, the remaining 90% still have Irish
as a compulsory subject for the duration of primary and secondary education. So in
theory at least, everyone should be proficient in it. |
|
|
Irish isn't oppressed in Ireland. Quite a lot of government money goes towards Irish-language media, teaching, official documents and so on.
An interesting fact is that Irish has declined significantly since independence.
I'll give a few reasons:
1. It's a difficult language that has little in common in English.
2. It's taught badly.
3. It's associated with nationalism.
4. English speakers in general aren't very good at learning languages.
Perhaps it's a little bit like the situation in Canada. There are English speakers and French speakers, but most of the English speakers can't speak good French.
I think the Welsh are pretty good at speaking the Welsh language. We could probably learn a thing or two from them.
1 person has voted this message useful
| eilis91 Bilingual Tetraglot Newbie France Joined 4577 days ago 28 posts - 54 votes Speaks: English*, Irish*, French, Italian Studies: German, Yoruba
| Message 117 of 162 15 May 2012 at 3:47pm | IP Logged |
I strongly feel that politics should not be brought into linguistic matters. What's done is done, and now I believe it is
the responsibility of the Irish people to rebuild our language skills. In many cases, yes, Irish is taught badly, but so
many people do not make an effort themselves with the language. There are plenty of excellent novels to read as
Gaeilge, in addition to Irish language television and radio. Any non-native speakers I know who have truly made an
effort with Irish have become fluent. It is perfectly possible if you put the work in. Tír gan teanga, tír gan anam, and
so on and so forth.
1 person has voted this message useful
| mystimoon Triglot Newbie Canada Joined 4627 days ago 2 posts - 4 votes Speaks: English*, French, Irish
| Message 118 of 162 23 May 2012 at 5:10am | IP Logged |
Quote:
Perhaps it's a little bit like the situation in Canada. There are English
speakers and French speakers, but most of the English speakers can't speak good French.
|
|
|
Well, first off, from the sounds of my Irish friends it is a lot like our Canadian
learning system. It turns a lot of people off the language when it is forced. Also, it
is taught in a way that grammar is hammered in to us but practical speaking knowledge
learning is non-existent.
Also, as a Canadian I must clarify because it bugs me. The English Canadians are forced
to learn French but the Québecois (French speakers in the province of Québec) don't
have to learn English. I must establish that we have far more political issues between
the languages than people fully understand.
Also as a side note pertaining to this forum topic: I am a trilingual Canadian. I speak
Irish because that is the language my Great-grandparents, and grandparents spoke (They
refused to speak any English or French when coming to Canada). My parents also speak it
but I mainly spoke English growing up unless I was around my Irish-speaking relatives.
It just shows you that there are some families around the world that still cherish
their Irish heritage by speaking the language in a casual context and not so book-ish
like in school. Gaeilge isn't dead and I will pass it on to future generations.
3 persons have voted this message useful
|
Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6704 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map
| Message 119 of 162 23 May 2012 at 10:43am | IP Logged |
About Canada: the Québecois have probably more reason to be wary of admitting any English into their domain than the Anglophones of the rest of Canada have to fear a slide towards French in their territory. But the ways they use to obtain this may not always be pretty.
The way Irish apparently is taught in Ireland (and maybe French outside Québec in Canada?) is something of a mystery to me. It almost sounds like the language is treated as a dead language like Latin, and if the majority of the teachers never thinks of it as a living language it is hard to see how they should be able to teach it as one - they may not even be able to talk Irish fluently themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if those teachers were as disgusted with the situation as their pupils.
4 persons have voted this message useful
| William Camden Hexaglot Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6273 days ago 1936 posts - 2333 votes Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Russian, Turkish, French
| Message 120 of 162 23 May 2012 at 12:02pm | IP Logged |
boon wrote:
Quote:
I think that wherever England made colonies it somewhat "forced" English onto the natives (India is a good example.) |
|
|
That's partly it. On the other hand many natives learned English to "get ahead" in society. If you only spoke Irish you couldn't get too far.
This link seems to have all the info we need!
http://www.gaeilge.org/irish.html |
|
|
School children in Ireland, Wales and Scotland who spoke Irish, Welsh or Scots Gaelic in class during the 19th century were often punished. By such means was English encouraged. Not without reason, Irish language enthusiast Padraic Pearse referred to the education system in Ireland as the "murder machine".
1 person has voted this message useful
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.3750 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|