Language is often taken for granted,
or given the regard for humanity’s unloved child.
Diarmaid Ferriter of The Limits of Liberty ventured
his frown at human glibness on RTE One.
Irish people speak English owing to cultural
submissiveness, avouched Mr. Ferriter.
You cannot dominate someone who does not speak your language. These have been the English to speak English. They brought the language to Ireland.
I can agree that language is neither a prodigal son, nor daughter:
It does not spend much, and it can give a lot.😉
Most businesses in Ireland work on English language papers and cash. These are all kinds of English, to include American,
Australian, and whichever you like.
People make the cash owing to English language business talks.
People learn math and many more, in English language schools.
People get flu jabs from English language medics,
and buy bread from English language bakers.
Many people have never learned British English.
Irish English has a distinct sounding, one might find more pleasurable than that from over the river Thames,
as Pete McCarthy noted in his McCarthy’s Bar.
Getting rid of all this would not be freedom. It would be a disaster.
English is a lingua franca, a language spoken world-wide.
The Irish horizon for business and culture is all around
the globe, with Irish English.
It might have been a predilection for terms of power to inspire the name “Hiberno-English” for Irish English
in Wikipedia, for example
English was brought to Ireland as a result of the Norman invasion of Ireland of the late 12th century, says the resource.
Terms of power often do not work. The Irish isle was named Hibernia by ancient Romans who evidently thought it was
very cold, yet most probably comparing temperatures
in ancient Rome, Greece, or North Africa
― the regular ancient influence Romans preferred
to exercise in warm times of the year.
Further, William the Conqueror was actually French and his Normans never brought English anywhere. Normans influenced
the English into the widely known Great Vowel Shift.
Importantly, they did not do it with swords
Without people who speak, write, and trade ― in a preferably moderate climate, which both English and Irish isles certainly
have ― there cannot be any language learning
Polish was a forbidden language during the Partitions of Poland, as well as under the German occupation of World War II. The language suffered, but violence was unable
to teach another language, whereas there could be no reason to try
Polish people for especially enduring:
There is simply no such way to knock a human being as to make him or her speak another tongue, and hardly anything else has every happened in warfare.
This is why I tend to ignore the term of a “language shift”. Whoever made the thing up, he or she could never have been a grammar teacher and thus known it is work.
Mr. Ferriter may never have faced a classroom as well. There are two kinds of power, he said. The police and the military were the “hard power”. Language was the “soft power”.
I agree that saying “come in” can be physically more efficient than carrying people into rooms, especially if wholesome. Yet saying “fish and chips” does not give a Leo Burdock, unless
there are the cash and the consensus to make the deal.
Finally, political debates world round have proved humans phylogenetically capable of days and more of a language production as well as reception of no influence to thought or decisions.😉
Contrary to Mr. Ferriter, I do not think language could be conquest. I think Irish English should have a publicly accessible corpus.
Autonomous language environments always have own language corpora.
To date, no corpus of Irish English exists, said a paper from Limerick University in 1999.
I have looked up the Internet for an update. As of April 17 2016, the Limerick University says there is a corpus. There is yet no public access to it.
Bus tours in Dublin represent English with the Union Jack. The Irish flag is for Celtic.
I was a grammar teacher. For a tongue entanglement with terms of power, I would like to recommend a simple exercise.
Open a dictionary and think if you could put plus or minus signs next to words, plus for “good”, and “minus” for bad (or another way round). Think about a context. Naturally, I do not mean you should actually jot in the book. It is enough to think.
An “alarm clock” might be a plus as well as a minus, dependent on the time and the person to set the device. A “friend” could be good, provided it would not be your enemy’s friend. “Illness” could be bad to happen and good not to occur. The thing is the same with the word “power”.
There are intellectual and cognitive powers. Nobody would go stupefied, to fight “power” in this sense. “Power of money” could be good to get us the Leo Burdock. “Powers of the heart” might be horrible, in a fanatic.
Language itself never could have been a tool for overpowering. There is no language to have the affirmative only, and polite refusal is integral with all tongues and styles. Obviously, Roman or Norman invaders relied on weapons, not words.
Language has always been a plus-minus infinity, also with regard to things good or bad. Ascribing language learning or change to physical violence will remain a mistake. Having good language skill can open prospects, world-round.
Feel welcome to my grammar course. Language Mapping has nothing overpowering about it. I began learning American when I was little, absolutely not coerced. I actually do not believe in forcing skill on anyone. I believe people can be talked into some learning, however.🙂
The course is much of an invention and self-study guide. There was no American or any English in primary school curricula. Poland was a Communist country. I tried a course, but it was at a level lower than mine, so I gave up on it. I learned on my own, till 15 years of age. I passed high school entrance exams then, for advanced English profile.
I know about adaptation. For the high school, British spellings were the requirement. I did that, because I needed a high school certificate if I wanted to study further, and the school had a good renown. I did not need to learn to speak British, in which case I would have gone to a different school.
Having graduated with the highest mark, five (5) in Polish, I went to university. I studied American English (got classed with candidates of prospect in American already at the entrance exams ), and graduated in 2000, after a break, defending second-highest (four, 4), but that was university level and life’s events together.
I think the results were a success and good enough to say the grammar idea really can work. When I was a teacher, it worked also for other people.
My associations with language remain natural interest, success, and pride, not submissiveness. I would not have learned, had the matter been different. And life is life. Entanglement with terms of power does not make a language-friendly space.
Language skill cannot be conditioned:
Analysis of language neural and psychological reality allows rejection of operant conditioning. Linguistic finesse would be unattainable via punitive methods already at the neuro-motor level of human functioning. Reward learning might encourage linguistic permanence (Akmajian et al., 1984), yet never as qualities set, program, or reflex. Formation of reflex response, conditional or unconditional, has been the objective of behaviorist study and manner.