LL-L "Language survival" 2005.09.08 (01) [A/E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 08.SEP.2005 (01) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Commands ("signoff lowlands-l" etc.): listserv at listserv.net
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
text from the same account to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or
sign off at http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West) Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Elsie Zinsser <ezinsser at icon.co.za>
Subject: LL-L Language survival" 2005.09.08

Haai julle,

Goed Mark, ek sal stilbly maar jou taalgebruik gee jou weg!  :-)

Groete,
Elsie Zinsser

>Ek sal julle laat raai in watter taal ek my onderrig ontvang het. Elsie en
>Ron bly aub eers 'n bietjie stil.

----------

From: Críostóir Ó Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Language survival" 2005.09.07 (07) [E]


Heather Rendall wrote:
"I have not belittled Welsh - just the means used in the 70s to introduce 
Welsh into primary schools [...] in came the inspectors (into both schools) 
and insisted that the children from English speaking homes should be taught 
separately and kept apart in the school from the Welsh speaking children."

Such a policy could hardly encourage the children of English-speaking homes 
to take up fluent Welsh. Therefore I wouldn't support it.

"At the time I sugegsted that using both languages equally in the school 
would be a better policy if a bi-lingual community was the aim. I and others 
of alike mind were over ruled."

It depends on the linguistic composition of where you lived. If Welsh 
speakers comprised just 30-40 per cent of the area (or less), this sort of 
"bilingualism" would not have worked. English in Wales in the 1970s was 
supreme, and the Welsh-speaking children (who would have known some English) 
would have simply switched to English to keep in wit! h their 
English-speaking peer majority. It was highly unlikely in the 1970s that 
English-speaking children would know any Welsh, or wish to learn it.

"Everything we feared came to pass - the children warred with each other in 
the playground on langauge grounds: friends were split up and told not to 
play with each other. It was not the aim I deplored it was the means."

See above. The simplest situation would be to have two schools in the 
district, one Welsh-speaking and the other English-speaking. Any children of 
whatever linguistic background could be sent to either, but the language of 
instruction in one would be Welsh, and in the other it would be English. 
Parents could then choose which language they wanted their child(ren) 
educated through.

"Please do read without bringing your own prejudices to the text."

I would be unique in the annals of humankind if I could read without any 
prejudice whatsoever, as would you. It is just that I find it very difficult 
to be prejudiced in favour of English.

Go raibh maith agat,

Criostóir.

----------

From: Críostóir Ó Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Language survival" 2005.09.07 (13) [A/E]


Mark Dreyer wrote:
"I cannot imagine how it is that Welsh goes from strength to strength, while 
the mother-tongue of my maternal Grandmother's people dropped from over 
three hundred thousand under English hegemony in 1919 to twenty thousand 
(averred & untested) under their own leadership in 2005. It is a scandal."

This is quite simple. Broadly speaking, the state in Wales uses Welsh 
publicly, whereas the state in Ireland (north and south) does everything but 
use Irish - in contravention, I may add, of its own laws and constitution, 
which declares Irish as "the first official" and "national" language.

Most Irish speakers communicate with state agencies in English (even in the 
Gaeltacht) because those agencies have no visible commitment to Irish - for 
instance, if you are filing a tax return and you are an Irish speaker, would 
you be willing to take a chance filling it in in Irish when the form is 
entirely in English? The state's commitment to Irish is as minimal as it can 
get away with.

Of course, the irony is that about 32 per cent of the population of Ireland 
(41 per cent in the south and 10 per cent in the north) classify themselves 
as Irish speakers, and capability in Irish is extremely widespread among all 
social groups. The problem is that this vast pool of potential users find 
themselves most often in an English-speaking milieu, with no social 
incentives to use their language. This attitude is worsened by a state that 
provides almost all services entirely through English. Advances for Irish 
over the past two decades (Irish-medium schools, for instance) have been 
through the passionate and indefatigable commitment of individuals and 
self-motivating groups, not the government.

To put your mind more at ease, Mark, in terms of the number of potential 
speakers of Irish: there has been an increase in self-reporting Irish 
speakers (in the south) from a low of 17.6 per cent in 1911 to 41.9 per cent 
in the 2002 census. Most of these are capable in Irish, but do not use it as 
their daily language. 55.0 per cent of households in the south in 2002 have 
at least one Irish speaker. In terms of regular users, 339,541 persons spoke 
Irish daily in 2002 - 5,991 of these were aged 3-4 years (so not at school) 
and 72,834 were aged 20-65+ (also not at school). In terms of percentages, 
daily users represented 5.4 per cent of those aged 3-4 years and 2.5 per 
cent of those aged 20-65+. At the same time, potential users among these 
groups (i.e., including those who did not use Irish daily) was 10.3 per cent 
of 3-4 year olds, and 35.8 per cent of those aged 20-65+. In other words, 
there is a decline in habitual Irish use among potential Irish speakers as 
they get ol! d, so that 52 per cent of those aged 3-4 years who can use 
Irish do so, but only 15 per cent of those aged 20-65+ who can use Irish do 
so.

Go raibh maith agat,

Criostóir.

==============================END===================================
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or at
  http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
======================================================================