X Close

The war for the Irish language Gaeilge's return has been loudly politicised


September 19, 2024   8 mins

Last Thursday, a clutch of Irish-language (Gaeilge) activists burst into Belfast’s gleaming new station shouting “Tír gan Teanga, Tír gan Anam (A country without a language is a country without a soul)”. “What’s this all about?” a woman asked a protesting schoolgirl as activists unfurled the vast red banner of the An Dream Dearg campaign to mark out their sit-in. “We’re protesting for our language rights,” said the girl, “Ach, I’m so proud of youse,” the woman replied. At the same time, some other teenagers walked past, bemused. “Are they chanting in like Gaelic or something?” one giggled. To the tune of Irish folk and rebel songs, the organisers gave rousing bilingual speeches demanding that there be dual-language English and Irish signage at the showpiece new transport hub.

The dispute highlights the extraordinary revival of Irish underway in Northern Ireland, and the country’s divided politics, still overshadowed by its frozen ethnic conflict — both brought to international attention by the new, heavily Irish-language Kneecap film. At his office in West Belfast’s Nationalist Falls Road, An Dream Dearg’s Pádraig Ó Tiarnaigh tells me that after the Troubles, “the Irish language became intertwined with that sense of identity of what people feel to connect them to this place, to their heritage, to that sort of indigenous aspect of language and land”. Yet despite Westminster’s 2022 approval of the landmark Identity and Language Act, he says, “the status quo here is monolingual. It is English only, and by definition, the Irish language is excluded”. Activists face “huge political opposition from the DUP and others not to give any sort of equivalence or legitimacy in public life or in official government legislation to the Irish language”.

Since the passing of the Language Act, Irish has become increasingly part of the country’s public life. On Belfast’s East-West Glider metro system, buses heading to mostly Nationalist West Belfast announce their destinations in both Irish and English; those heading to mostly Unionist East Belfast pointedly do not. Living in a leafy Catholic area, I am surrounded by the Irish language: our street signs are bilingual, and Sinn Féin-branded Go Mall (“go slow”) signs are prominently affixed to trees.

A few weeks ago, our middle child started at an Irish-language nursery, one of more than 50,000 children across the island currently educated in Gaeilge (or in Ulster Irish, Gaeilg); when our youngest child was born, we chose a dual-language birth certificate. In our case, these choices were made for essentially apolitical, even romantic reasons: both my maternal grandparents were native Irish speakers, as were my wife’s family a generation earlier, and we want to undo the recent loss of our ancestral language. But within the context of Northern Irish society, the choice to adopt it is often viewed as an overtly political act, both by its supporters and its detractors.

For Ian McLaughlin, a DUP councillor representing the staunchly Loyalist Shankill area, dominated by paramilitary groups, Irish has become a weapon wielded by the Nationalist community against a politically divided Unionist constituency that is now, in Belfast, a minority. The greatest controversy is over Irish-language signage in “interface areas” — streets where Catholic and Protestant communities abut each other, and where Irish-language signage is routinely defaced. For some, like the Catholic writer Malachi O’Doherty, the presence or absence of Irish street signs may unintentionally function as the equivalent of the paramilitary murals and flags that still mark the transition from one area to another, heightening sectarian divisions.

“I think in many ways, it reflects a change in demographics in this area. That’s fine, but it also is taken by very many people within the Unionist community as Republicanism baring its teeth to show that they have more control in this city,” McLaughlin told me. “In many, many streets and areas, the change in signage was not asked for by the residents. It was asked for by Sinn Féin or other Nationalists and their public and political representatives. So there’s a whole issue in there about the democracy behind this.”

“If we’re promoting our identity, they might feel that it’s stepping on top of their identity, but instead of fighting against ours, perhaps they should shout for their own identity,” Ferdia Carson, an activist in North Belfast told me, as live traditional music wafted from the bustling Irish-language Caifé Ceoil below us. “Really like, if you want to be British, my Irishness won’t erode you. Personally, I have no interest in politics… We just promote and are looking for Irish-language rights as an Irish speaker, as a gaeilgeoir… So I’m called Ferdia Carson. So who founded Unionism? Edward Carson… He was a prominent Irish speaker and a prominent hurler, so if I was to meet him today, I’d speak Irish and I’d play hurling with him, even from completely different ends of the spectrum. When did this happen? When did Sinn Féin own Irish? And why can Protestants not take ownership of it?”

Indeed, many Protestants, as the Irish-language historian Ian Malcolm observes, descend from Irish speakers, with both the Presbyterian and Church of Ireland communities possessing strong, if now de-emphasised, traditions of Irish-language worship. As spoken Irish collapsed across the island during the 19th century, due to the Famine and the promotion of English in schools and church, Protestant antiquarians and activists helped ensure both the language’s survival and then its cultural revival. But the Gaelic League’s drift towards Irish revolutionary nationalism, and the shock of partition following the Irish War of Independence, saw the previously neutral language viewed with new disfavour by Ulster Protestants. The days when the burghers of Belfast could welcome Queen Victoria beneath huge Irish-language banners, or the Gaelic League could count the Grand Master of Belfast’s Orange Lodge as a member, were over. Under the new country’s Stormont government, official attitudes towards Irish oscillated between neglect and active discouragement, with Northern Ireland’s remaining rural Gaeltachts allowed to wither and die.

During the Troubles, Sinn Féin’s active promotion of Irish in furthering the Republican cause, like the Jailtacht” of Republican prisoners learning it in the Maze, simultaneously sparked its present-day revival in Northern Ireland while heightening Protestant perceptions of its politicisation. “The Irish language is a divisive thing in this city,” DUP councillor Sarah Bunting told me. “It has been used, it’s been politicised by Sinn Féin in the past. That quote that’s used to us as Unionist politicians, quite often, is that every word spoken in Irish is a bullet fired in the fight for a united Ireland… People still remember it being used against them through the Troubles. It’s not a fear of the language, it’s hurt that has been caused by people who have used the language in the past.”

As a result of the Troubles, “the Irish language developed even more negative connotations for people from the Protestant Unionist background, and I suppose that has intensified as they’ve seen the Irish language become much more visible”, Malcolm told me. “Personally, I’m from a Unionist background, Protestant. I wouldn’t describe myself as Loyalist, but I’d certainly be Unionist. And I regard the Irish language very, very much as my language.” As Malcolm observes, with Northern Ireland emerging from the conflict’s shadow, his stance is becoming increasingly common: “When I started teaching about 12 years ago, the vast majority of students in my classes would have been from a Catholic, Nationalist background. Now I would say the majority would be from a Protestant Unionist background. So, I think that shows the direction of travel, that animosity and hostility towards the language is diminishing.”

In East Belfast’s Turas cultural centre, on a street surrounded by UVF (Ulster Volunteer Force) murals and gentrifying new businesses, Irish-language activist Linda Ervine is trying to change local perceptions. “What we didn’t want to do was set up the Protestant version of the Irish language, we weren’t interested in that,” Ervine told me. “We just wanted to take our place within the Irish-language community, and the interest over the years has just grown and grown and grown.” Yet her plans this term to expand her thriving Irish-language nursery into a primary school or naíscoil in the heart of East Belfast were hampered by local discontent, with hundreds of “concerned residents” attending a meeting organised by Loyalist activists to express their opposition. “They had a public meeting, full of misrepresentation and out-and-out lies,” Ervine told me, “you know, if our children were doing PE they’d all be doing GAA, and before you’d know it, they’d be taking part in the Bobby Sands Cup. You know, madness. But our Facebook is open, our Twitter is open, and if you’d gone on last May you’d have seen our children with all their wee crowns celebrating the King’s coronation. So that’s the dangerous individuals we are.”

For Ervine, rather than a marker of apartness from Britain, the Irish language, like its daughter languages Manx and Scottish Gaelic, serves as a reminder of the intertwined cultural history of the British Isles, dating far beyond the Irish nationalist struggle to reject Westminster’s rule: “What it says to us is that we’re a group of islands and we have these familial ties to each other, and that’s something that we want to build on.” Ervine looks at the relatively uncomplicated bilingualism of official signage in Wales and the Scottish Highlands with something approaching envy. “If we think about ourselves being British citizens, and compare ourselves to the way minority languages are treated in other parts of the UK, there is visibility, there is signage, and of course, we have the right to do that, but unfortunately, the way it’s played out in the media, the way it’s seen then as something irrational and unreasonable, makes my job more difficult.”

As with so many things in Northern Ireland, the country’s troubled history makes alignment with mainland British norms harder. “It’s not valid to see the language as representative of Republicanism or only belonging to Republicanism, because it doesn’t… Should I, as a Protestant, be denied the opportunity to speak Irish, learn Irish, because of something that you see as a wrong in the past? No, that’s just madness.”

“As with so many things in Northern Ireland, the country’s troubled history makes alignment with mainland British norms harder.”

It is an undeniable fact that the revival of the Irish language in present-day Northern Ireland derives from the Nationalist and Republican movement, spawning a West Belfast Gaeltacht and a booming ecosystem of Irish-medium schools and cultural centres. Indeed, in some ways Northern Ireland’s heavily charged political atmosphere around Irish, like a time-delayed Gaelic Revival, means the language may be in a healthier state than in the Republic, where it is a compulsory school subject loathed by many. Yet the association with the Republican and Nationalist tradition also presents difficulties for Protestant Gaeilge activists and aspiring learners, forcing them into a position of defensiveness within their own community. “The only people I feel denying me my rights,” Linda Ervine said, “denying these parents their rights to have integrated Irish-medium education for their children, are other Protestants.”

“The Irish language is political, we can say anything is political, anything that has a cause can be defined as political,” Ó Tiarnaigh replied when I asked him whether Nationalist activists should de-emphasise the political aspects of their movement in pursuit of the language’s wider spread. “If you apply the exact same logic to the English language, which inevitably has been the language of conquest and Empire right across the world for centuries, would you say that the English language is a political language?”

In his classic text on ethnic conflict, the political scientist Donald L. Horowitz characterised ethnically divided societies as ones where “rather than merely setting the framework for politics, [group relations] become the recurring subjects of politics” as “conflicts over needs and interests are subordinated to conflicts over group status… and the symbolic sector of politics looms large.” Just like the post-BLM debate over imperial statuary in mainland Britain, demographic anxieties are subsumed in debates over the symbolic realm, in the Northern Irish context focussing on Irish-language signage.

The frozen ethnic conflict, and Northern Ireland’s tenuous position within the United Kingdom, simultaneously preserve strong attachments to cultural identity enviable to mainland eyes, yet also distort the country’s political life into essentially unresolvable tussles over symbolism and public representation. It is ironic that the Loyalist battle to preserve Ulster’s Britishness sets Northern Ireland apart from the easy bilingualism of Wales and Scotland, further embedding the country in an Irish historical and political context. Yet it is also ironic that the legacy of Nationalist and Republican Irish-language activism may hinder its broader acceptance, perhaps to the detriment of the language’s survival. As Nationalist and Loyalist activists wage a symbolic war with each other over the expansion of Irish into the public sphere, it’s hard not to empathise with Protestant Irish activists stuck in the middle, trying to promote the language itself while defanging it of its 20th century political associations.

“I believe the Irish language belongs to everybody, I’ve embraced it, I love it, it’s part of my DNA,” Malcolm told me. “And to be honest, it’s in the DNA of pretty much everybody who was born in Northern Ireland. The problem is that many people don’t realise that, but I think we need to de-escalate rather than escalate.” Yet in Northern Ireland history still looms like an oppressive cloud. Without its political conflict, there would be no revival of Irish in Northern Ireland; yet the politicisation that brought the language back from extinction still makes something as innocuous as street signs a symbolic battleground.


Aris Roussinos is an UnHerd columnist and a former war reporter.

arisroussinos

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

35 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Nell Clover
Nell Clover
13 hours ago

I recall in 1998 a joking observation by a civil servant advisor to Mo Mowlem (then Northern Ireland secretary) that the peace process might present a problem for the UK and Irish governments if the province used its new unity to push back against “policy”. In this context, policy was whatever was handed down from the governing apparatus of the EU or UK government and not a democratic manifesto policy. It suited the governors for the governed to be divided. It made governing simpler when the public were forever engaged in squabbles. In fact distract, divide, and rule was almost the default response to any problem in government. I left politics because of this.

I don’t care what language you speak. But the obvious downside of community groups identifiable by different languages is that it creates more in-groups and more barriers. It stratifies the citizens in yet another dimension. There become fewer intersections for common cause amongst the citizens, more distractions, fewer opportunities to build significant voting coalitions. Democracy is made toothless and the technocrats become less impeded by elections. There do remain citizen intersections but these now represent tiny minorities. Identity and access to an in-group becomes a political commodity to be traded for special privilege as Horowitz describes.

Does neither the author nor those quoted realise the irony of Irish language being promoted at the very time political institutions and demographics intend to make those with Irish “DNA” (I use this as loosely as the author’s quote has) a minority. Was the author’s selection of the “indigenous” quote a Freudian slip? Because the hallmark of indigenous-identified people everywhere is minority status and performative respect for their language even as they are treated like political pet monkeys. Like indigenous people elsewhere, the “protection” of the native language is a cheap token to distract from more substantive politics.

The arguments presented in this article feel very much like the song Zombie by the Cranberries. They are arguments about a fight that is in fact over, arguing over a past long gone, distracting us from the present and a looming dystopia. You’re fighting over language when your energy system is disintegrating, your quality of life is falling, your healthcare system is close to collapse, and your basic freedoms are being eroded. Distraction and division.

Last edited 12 hours ago by Nell Clover
John Murray
John Murray
16 hours ago

Very good article, although I think Ulster Protestants learning Gaelic these days tends to be more of a college-educated middle class thing (personal impression, if there are stats otherwise, fair enough).
I note the article did not mention the attempt by various Unionist/Loyalists to promote “Ulster Scots” as a counterweight to Gaelic.

B M
B M
2 hours ago
Reply to  John Murray

The original native tongue of the Ulster Scots was pretty much identical to the Gaelic language spoken in Ulster by the Catholics – they are to a large extent the same people, particularly the Highland Scots. That’s the irony of all this.

Josef Švejk
Josef Švejk
14 hours ago

Bilingual children have an advantage over the monolingual. Numerous studies attest to that. Choice should be with the parents until the children can decide. Diversity is good. Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireann na daoine.

William Shaw
William Shaw
6 hours ago
Reply to  Josef Švejk

True, but to make a living in today’s business world my chosen second language wouldn’t be Irish.
Learning French, German, Spanish, Russian, Japanese or Chinese would be far more profitable.

Peadar Laighléis
Peadar Laighléis
4 hours ago
Reply to  William Shaw

This is a constant debate in Ireland, but if the Irish language was taught well (it isn’t and makes for a waste of 13 – 14 years schooling), it would make for a good preparation to acquire additional languages. But then I think the mandarins in the Irish department of education don’t relish the idea of Irish professionals fluent in French, German, Spanish or Italian, taking advantage of the EU Freedom of Movement and finding employment on the continent.

Nick Croft
Nick Croft
3 hours ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Yes. I grew up on North Tyneside and when I go back there I can slip back into the local Geordie dialect with ease, much of which would be difficult for most other English speakers to understand. I think it’s important to preserve the language, culturally, but it’s essentially useless anywhere north of Berwick or south of Durham.

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
3 hours ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Yes, but today’s world is far from being a business world. In most cases children stick close to home. They might not have great jobs but they feel part of the community if they speak Irish. Also, in the relative absence of a business world, the key jobs become government jobs – teachers, council employees, police, fire brigade – and then being bilingual would be an advantage. Also, I would imagine there would be a need for bilingual people in the various EU committees.

j watson
j watson
9 hours ago

Stating the blinkin obvious but cross the border into Eire and they all speak English. They all get taught Gaelic but the primary language is English. Do they feel less Irish?
Go anywhere in the World and what non-native language do the kids get taught and most want to learn? Yep we all know the answer.
Is our language one of our most important forms of soft power? Possibly. We should certainly be a bit more self confident and chilled out about others protecting their own historic language. Ours remains the most important across the Globe. (It has of course made many of us a bit lazy when it comes to acquiring language skills)
Gaelic of course much closer to the language of the ancient Brits – just sayin.

Nell Clover
Nell Clover
7 hours ago
Reply to  j watson

I’m not sure English is ours (the English) anymore. The way we spell, the grammar we use, even the sounds of English in England, are rapidly changing in response to non-native influences. In just two generations the distinct speech and grammar patterns of Northumberland have completely disappeared and Estuary English increasingly takes on pidgin form due to non-native speakers replacing native speakers in London. Important features of advanced languages, like tense and possession, are being eroded and ultimately this will make English less exact and less precise, less useful for business and commerce. The international use of English is a poisoned fruit.

j watson
j watson
4 hours ago
Reply to  Nell Clover

Some elements of it’s evolution I cringe at too, but Orwell’s prose quite along way from the prose of the 17th century England.

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
7 hours ago
Reply to  j watson

Protecting the language is good, as is trying to defend a historic culture. Unfortunately, politicians and civil servants will try to make the language into a weapon. All of the politicians will soon speak the language and there will be a stigma against those who don’t. People in small groups will whisper about others; there will be an in-crowd.
Wales has had a lot of practice at this. In the north, where the druids are supposed to have concentrated when they were chased out, there has always been a very small number of people who have clung onto the language. In modern times, the north has become the centre of the tourist industry and people have to speak English to get a job, however much they hate to do it. This is why the Senedd has said that it wants Wales to move away from tourism, because it affects the purity of ‘Welshness’. Meanwhile, the south has gone through a destructive industrial revolution and there were huge waves of immigrants in the 19th century – from Ireland and from Northern England. This led to a language called (by some) Wenglish. The Wenglish in the south and the Welsh in the north are completely different.
Then the politicians came along and decided to try to standardise things by forcing children to learn Welsh at school. This has not been wholly successful. The problem was always that you could teach people Welsh if they wanted to learn but, having learned there is nothing to do but join groups who are proud of their ‘Welshness’. Almost all books, newspapers and TV are in English and that will always be the case because of the American influence. The internet is so English that France and Germany and others are struggling to keep going without their children reverting to American English.
The next act from the politicians was to say that all jobs working for the state must be filled by Welsh speakers in the future. (This was hurriedly changed to ‘those who speak a few words of Welsh’). This has led to a two-tier system. The teachers and the lawyers and the bankers – the middle classes – speak Welsh and teach their children Welsh because it is a guarantee of a good job and pension. The poorer people just want to survive and for that aim, normal life has to be in English.
I am a fan of the Welsh language. But it should be spoken because people want to speak it, not because it is forced. Can a language survive without force? Good luck to Ireland, which is just starting.
The Isle of Mann is going through the same process.

Nell Clover
Nell Clover
7 hours ago

I note that one county in Wales has just suspended school transport for all schools except Welsh-speaking and faith schools. This is so obviously discriminatory. It is a warning of what is to come.

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
3 hours ago
Reply to  Nell Clover

I live in an area where this is the case. But you are slightly wrong. There are more English schools than Welsh schools so you have to be prepared to travel further if you want an education in Welsh. The counties have a distance limit for free school transport – greater than a certain distance equals free transport. So if there are more English schools, the distances are smaller. You are then less likely to require free transport.

Last edited 3 hours ago by Caradog Wiliams
M Harries
M Harries
6 hours ago

“The Wenglish in the south and the Welsh in the north are completely different.”
That is an enormous exaggeration. Huge Immigration swathes decimated spoken Welsh on the streets – which caused my mother’s mother tongue to be English and then mine. Very often, for more technical terms, English terms are used by both north and south. But the ‘English’ terms are often ‘French’, which in turn I suppose are often ‘Norman’. There are some differences of words used between North and South, but is often spoken speed and accent that comprise perceived difference.
Shakespeare referrer to Welsh (Cymraeg) as the ‘British tongue’, as opposed to the Saxon tongue. Today, in Welsh, the English are referred to as the ‘Saeson’. Boudicca, born and bred in what is now England, commanded her army in a derivative of the modern ‘British tongue’. Thus, I don’t see why Cymraeg is considered only a matter for those west of Offa’s d**e. I suppose it was that d**e that primarily defined the otherness and foreignness of the British tongue in what is now England.
You can’t show ‘d**e’ now? Really? OK, ‘Offa’s border’!!

Last edited 6 hours ago by M Harries
j watson
j watson
4 hours ago

I concur some silliness occurs on the matter. But I don’t fret as much about where it might end up. Folks are sensible and practical. If it gets proper silly they just won’t vote for those who push it.
Learning and being proficient at English going to always be one of the most important things a child can be taught and learn if they are going to get on in life. The ardent Welsh sometimes forget how much their forebearers were to have their kids learn English for exactly that reason and why it was in the first curriculum after 1870 Education Act

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
3 hours ago
Reply to  j watson

I don’t think that people have forgotten. In the past, the rich Welsh people pushed their children out to England, so that there were better job prospects for them. The same is true today, of course, if you are willing to travel to the job. If you want to stay at home the reverse is true.
A lot of Welshness and Scottishness is really anti-English. But the internet has moved things from English to American, especially with YouTube. Today, many Chinese children and English children speak with an effected American accent.

B M
B M
2 hours ago
Reply to  j watson

It’s quite a lot different than the Brythonic languages of Wales and Cornwall, and most of pre Roman Britain. It’s very similar to Scots Gallic – to the extent that I can easily read Scots Gallic with my poor Republic of Ireland Gaeilge lessons from school. Welsh or Cornish? Not a hope.

Richard Hart
Richard Hart
1 hour ago
Reply to  j watson

All British Children should learn Spanish to a conversational level. Then we would be able to converse with 70% of the global population.

Gordon Black
Gordon Black
28 minutes ago
Reply to  Richard Hart

Eh … 7% of the global population.(630,000,000).

Last edited 28 minutes ago by Gordon Black
John Walsh
John Walsh
9 hours ago

Muslims will be in the majority in Ireland within 10 or 20 years, as they will be in the rest of the UK,they won’t be speaking Gaelic.

Nell Clover
Nell Clover
7 hours ago
Reply to  John Walsh

Gaelic lessons in many schools are under severe timetable pressure due to parents wanting education closer to their social preferences. In the next decade this upwards pressure is going to push very hard against several liberal ideals including the promotion of “native” languages. When a majority of parents aren’t Irish and retain close links with somewhere else in the world they won’t care that you are Irish in your “DNA” (it already sounds a bit blood and soil “racist”) and Gaelic will be sidelined once again.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
4 hours ago

A good feature length article on the irish language from unherd. Fantastic ! I think that the big unspoken here is immigration. Ireland is becoming a babble of foreign languages and hopefully we can keep a bit of Irish going for the next generation. Unionists learning the language is wonderful (whether middle class or otherwise) and gives me hope for a pluralist future. In 1798 catholic and presbytarian united under genuine republican ideals ( united irishmen) and hopefully we can unite again in a shared irishness that includes everyone ( including immigrants) and get some sensible immigration policies and maintain an irish identity and going forward.

Gordon Black
Gordon Black
4 hours ago

Language is analogous to measures: in the best interests of friendly communication, trade, commerce, science and technology we need one World standard of each. Natural evolution has favoured the English language and the French S.I. measures. (just good luck if you were French or English).
Petty parochial languages and measures such as Irish and Imperial are splendid conservation hobbies and these historic diversities should be encouraged but not paid for out of the public purse.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 hours ago

 the political scientist Donald L. Horowitz characterised ethnically divided societies as ones where “rather than merely setting the framework for politics, [group relations] become the recurring subjects of politics” as “conflicts over needs and interests are subordinated to conflicts over group status…
In today’s context, Horowitz’s statement refutes the mantra that “diversity is our strength.” Much of today’s heartburn revolves around group identity, with each group vying to be more aggrieved, more offended, and more special than the others. Who knew that man could be a tribal beast.

Brian Doyle
Brian Doyle
1 hour ago

Both Irish and Scots Gaelic was literally subjected to Genocidal Westminster policies
All to eliminate
But despite all that
” We still Sing “

Jim McDonnell
Jim McDonnell
24 minutes ago

I’m sure none of my ancestors would have thought so at the time this was happening, but the English were really doing the Irish a favor by turning them into English-speakers. Fluency in English gave Irish immigrants to the US a huge advantage over other immigrants. English is spoken world-wide, Gaelic only in Ireland. One can be proud of one’s heritage without deliberately sealing one’s self off from the rest of the world by clinging to an ancestral tongue that’s useless anywhere but home. Keep Gaelic alive? Sure. But don’t let it replace English.

Susan Grabston
Susan Grabston
6 hours ago

I wonder if there is some anger behind these choices. As immigrants to the UK my parents urged us to beome “more English than the English” (their words) to make the experiment work. Having watched the English increasingly concede their culture over the subsequent 40 years, I have now reverted to one of my parental languages in all private aspects of my life. It was a passive aggressive decision to ensure that my identity could no longer be eroded except on my terms. Whilst the inverse of this Irish initiative (in my case a withdrawal), it has given me more internal security, perhaps even stability.

B M
B M
2 hours ago

As a citizen of the Republic of Ireland and of Catholic extraction, this is an excellent article, that has explained the situation and historical context very well, kudos to the author.

David McKee
David McKee
16 hours ago

To the rest of the world, this piece will seem quaint to the point of barking mad. Proficiency in English gives you a big advantage in life. It’s not just the wealthy elite that wants its children taught in English, in some countries it’s the majority view.

So actively choosing to have your children educated in a language other than English, is akin to refusing to have them vaccinated for MMR.

Last edited 16 hours ago by David McKee
D Walsh
D Walsh
15 hours ago
Reply to  David McKee

They can all still speak English, just as well as you. They have lost nothing

David McKee
David McKee
13 hours ago
Reply to  D Walsh

That remains to be seen.

D Walsh
D Walsh
11 hours ago
Reply to  David McKee

No it doesn’t
When was the last time you met an Irish person who didn’t speak English ? yet you have met plenty who could speak English and Irish

Graham Stull
Graham Stull
7 hours ago
Reply to  D Walsh

I tend to agree. At the upper end of the social class distribution, the English speak well enough, as do the Irish of the same social class.
However, the English lower classes have a shockingly poor command of their only language. It is here the culture of multilingualism serves the Irish best. I attended a very rough school in the inner city of Dublin. The boys were, for the most part, socially disadvantaged and frankly had only basic literacy skills. But the fact of being forced to learn Irish gave them a perspective on what language was, which improved their spoken and written English as well.
The lower classes are also the ones who associate most with the nationalist culture of which the Irish language is a part. This, I think, gives them a leg up when it comes to learning it.