NÍAON TÍRANN GAN TEANGA:THERE IS NO COUNTRY WITHOUT A LANGUAGE

KAITLYN CONWAY

KAITLYN CONWAY studied English and Sociology at Notre Dame. She now works at

a medical software company. She would like to thank Lyn Spillman, Tara MacLeod, Brian

O’Conchubhair, Kevin Whelan, Dr. Iarfhlaith Watson, and UROP for their help with her paper.

Introduction

Even before the establishment of the Republic of Ireland as a free nation1after the Irish

War of Independence (1919-1921), the Irish language wasviewed by many Irish people as a

major unifying feature of the country and a symbol of national pride.It became a rallying point

for the people who wanted to establish a free nation outside of British control. The forbidden

language was heralded as a defining part of Irish national identity, and something that therefore

must not be lost to the British. Many Irish people thought it would revive in the future, once they

were free. Even now, some say that “the Irish language is an inclusive expression of identity for

a broad spectrum of people” (NicPháidín and Ó Cearnaigh 2008:viii). However, nearly a century

later, it has not achieved a widespread revival.

Only 42% of the population of the Republic can speak some Irish (Central Statistics

Office 2006:13), a number which indicates only that the person uses the language, but not

necessarily frequently or outside of the education system. Most of these people have acquired it

in school (Ó Riagáin 2008:58).When other factors such as fluency and frequency of use are taken

into consideration, only 3.22% of the population uses Irish on a daily basis and outside of the

educational system (Duisburg-Essen).

Linguistic ambivalence is pervasive. The only section of Ireland where Irish is regularly

spoken is the Gaeltacht, areas in a handful of counties mostly on the western coast of the island

(see Figure 1), but even that is changing. In the remainder of the country, use is scattered and

largely irrelevant except for show, though it has seen some growth in popularity in Dublin as part

of a cultured, intellectual movement.

As Iarfhlaith Watson says, “arguments in favour of learning Irish, or of reviving it, tend

to be founded on the assertion that Irish is an essential element of Irish identity” (2008:66).The

1 Henceforth, when Ireland is mentioned, I will be indicating the Republic of Ireland unless otherwise noted.

2

country is officially bilingual, and Irish is its first language. Irish has flourished in some respects,

as exemplified by its being named an official language of the European Union in 2007. Micheál

Mac Gréil and Fergal Rhatigan’s work in 2009 reports a general positive shift in views of Irish.

In fact, positive feelings about it, such as supporting preservation of the language, as well as

other factors, were held by over 93% of the survey population (2009:vii). If this number is

considered alone, it would seem that Irish is becoming a stronger force in Ireland.

But the language continues to struggle in terms of usage in its home country. Irish is

almost always coupled with English, the dominant language of the country. The language is

fading in the Gaeltacht, and is losing its power as a community language even though the

number of individual speakers is rising. If not for the strong support reported for the language

movement, it would seem that Irish language is not a major part of Irish identity.

This project tries to ascertain the current place of the Irish language in current views of

Irish national identity. I believe that in urban centers, like Dublin, it will be written off by most

of the citizens as being unimportant to national identity—they will appreciate its cultural value

and see the intellectual reasons for keeping the language alive, but will not view it as something

that makes them distinctly Irish. They will attribute ‘Irishness’ to factors such as where their

parents were born and raised and where they themselves were born and raised. I draw this

hypothesis from Fiona Gill’s work with Scottish borders communities (2005), which showed

how heritage was a more important factor in determining national identities than the actual

location of the town itself.

It is important to note that Mac Gréil and Rhatigan’s (2009) work on attitudes to Irish did

not undertake a sub-sample of the Gaeltacht regions. I believe that views in the Gaeltacht

compared to other views are key to understanding the real role of Irish in perceptions of Irish

3

national identity. One can support the language, but have no desire to speak it oneself. I think

that the project will find that in the Gaeltacht, the view that Irish language is important to Irish

identity will still be prevalent. Because they preserve the culture associated with it and the

language itself, residents of the Gaeltacht will most likely report that they think it is something

that is very important to their views of themselves as being uniquely Irish.

This research also has implications for questions about language and national identity

elsewhere. If language is unimportant for national identity, then what role does language play for

people as a unifying aspect of their lives? The project will also have implications for the fate of

different minority languages worldwide. Without these, we lose an element of “global diversity”

(Watson 2008:70) that the world should be able to enjoy.

This study looks to answer the question of how the Irish language plays—or does not

play—a role in Irish national identity. I investigate the strength of the language in its native

Gaeltacht regions, as well as beyond, and comparing student versus non-student groups. The

base questions of the study are: why is the language spoken by so few in spite of having so much

support? How is identity perceived in relation to the language?

National Identity and Language

First, it must be acknowledged that the terms this paper works with—national identity,

citizenship, nationalism, nations—have multiple meanings and are subject to interpretation. It

must also be noted that the ideas of what defines a people as a nation are constantly changing.

The nation’s past has a large effect on how people determine the identifying aspects of their

nation and individuality, and events constantly alter this perception. Cultural ideas also bind

people together into nations. Tom Paulin (1983) says that “fundamentally, the language question

4

is a question about nationhood and government” (9). The question I consider is whether or not

national identity is related to language.

National Identity Theories. National identity is constantly in flux (Smith 2009:12).

Every person has an interpretation of what makes them a part of a nation, and this is affected by

their background, which may include patterns such as immigration. Smith defines national

identity in a series of three points: aggregating people, uniting politics, and being defined by

geographic borders (2003:3).Smith’s definition of nation is also useful: “a named human

population occupying a historic territory and sharing common myths and memories, a public

culture, and common laws and customs for all members” (2003:24).These factors also play into

ideas of national identity.

With these two definitions in mind, we can define national identity as it is used in this

paper as the way individuals define themselves as part of a large group to which they form

affiliations, both in terms of geographical location and political sway. This paper in particular

focuses more on national identity as a way of identifying oneself with the nation in which one

lives. Identity can be formed by many different aspects of culture, including language. A nation

for this paper indicates the group to which such affiliations belong, including boundaries defined

by political values and geography.

Politics and culture in nation formation. Many factors, including politics and culture,

determine the formation of ideas of nations, nationalism, and national identity. This was

particularly evident in Ireland, as movements that were key in building national identity (namely

the Irish War of Independence) have been geared towards both political ideals and cultural

ideals. The two are not synonymous, though they are closely related. In the case of Ireland, the

two ideals were both significant factors at the same moment in the War of Independence. This

5

makes it easy to connect the language with national identity. This paper is focused on the cultural

side of the evolution of symbols determining national identity. It looks at how the symbol of the

language has been maintained in spite of its state of decline, and what that indicates about Irish

national identity.

Cultural artefacts. Anderson (1996) argues that “nation-ness, as well as nationalism, are

cultural artefacts of a particular kind” (3). The ideas of ‘nation’ are firmly tied to the ideas of

‘culture.’ Past ideas of culture are “cultural artefacts.” To understand concepts of culture,

nationalism, and national identity, one must understand the historical context that makes them

significant. Feelings of national identity are tied to artefacts and other factors and they have

deeply rooted historical ties. Culture is key to being part of a nation. Gellner even declares that

a man’s culture, the idiom within which he was trained and within which he is effectively employable, is his most precious possession, his real entrance-card to full citizenship and human dignity, to social participation. The limits of his culture are the limits of his employability, his world, and his moral citizenship (1987:16).

Hence, the importance of culture cannot be neglected. It is a defining characteristic of all people.

Smith (2009) also points out that many aspects of culture are actually created, and this is

part of national identity as well: people who create nations also have to create histories and

traditions for their states. They choose what to maintain and what to neglect. Cultural artefacts

are often taken as symbols of a nation, representing their values and history, and they change

over time. Smith says that they “have helped to shape people’s images of the character and

history of their nation, as much as their own concerns influenced the selection of artefacts that

came to embody the ‘essence’ of the nation” (2009:84). The effect of cultural artefacts is two-

fold, as they both affect the people and are affected by the choices of the people.

Arguably, the Irish language is one of these cultural artefacts. This may be why the push

to strengthen it has gone on for so long. Indeed, Watson (2008) says that “the Irish language has

6

been a symbol of Irish national identity since the nineteenth century (and before) and, to a large

extent, the revival of the Irish language has been predicated on such national pride” (71). The

people have long considered it to be important, so neglecting it would be a failure of sorts. In

support of the language being a cultural artifact, Watson also says that, “to the majority of people

in Ireland the Irish language is primarily of symbolic importance” (2008:71). It may not be

useful in everyday life, but it remains in the culture because it has been maintained as a

significant symbol for a long period of time. The people choose, to a degree, to keep the artefact.

However, the question then becomes focused on what has the most power in determining

national identity: cultural artefacts, or aspects of everyday life? Does Irish get enough attention

and use to qualify as part of everyday life?

Identity in borders communities. As Fiona Gill argues in her study of a Scottish Borders

community (2005), one of the factors that affects considerations of national identity is ancestry.

She finds that an individual’s national identity may have more to do with ancestry than cultural

aspects such as language.

The study focuses on a community that could classify themselves as either English or

Scottish because of the town’s geographical location. Gill asserts that national identity can be

considered in both a private and public context. She found that as individuals, the people in the

border town had a clear sense of identity and how to identify themselves as English or Scottish.

Gill found through interviews with the people of the town that, in some cases, “their identity is

based on a lack of belonging and a deep sense of difference” (2005:90). However, as a group,

there was more fluidity to the ideas of identity. However, the group used the common basis of

ancestry to determine their national identity, indicating that where one’s family is from is an

important aspect of national identity.

7

Historical Background

As discussed in the context of cultural artefacts, history is part of national identity. It is

important to note that in spite of the Irish War of Independence and after nearly a century of

being governed by the Dáil Éireann2, which pushes the idea of Irish being a major part of Irish

identity and lifestyle, the language has still not been restored to a point where it is the driving

force of culture (O’Byrne 2007).

By the time the English officially annexed Ireland in 1801, the language shift was already

underway (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:26). English became the language of administration in Ireland, and

those looking for upward social mobility learned it. The power of English language led to Irish

being labeled as “the language of a social underclass” (Ó hUiginn 2008:8). This was its status by

the time just before the Great Famine in 1845. However, Ó hUiginn also notes that “on the eve of

the Great Famine there were probably more native speakers of Irish than at any time in the

history of the language” (2008:9). The Famine (1845-1852) contributed significantly to the

decline of the language. The Famine decimated the rural West of the country—the Gaeltacht—

both through the massive death toll and emigration.

ConradhnaGaeilge. ConradhnaGaeilge, or the Gaelic League, was formed to promote

the language and became closely associated with the freedom movement. Pressure from the

League began to make changes in the government’s acceptance of Irish as early as the late 1870s

(Ó Tuathaigh 2008:26). The League’s goals primarily revolved around achieving a bilingual

nation. It’s important to note that “the bilingual policy was not, therefore, one designated to meet

the needs of an already existing bilingual community, but rather it sought to create one” (Ó

Riagáin 2008:56). This is a huge task for any policy.

2 House of Representatives of Ireland

8

As the Gaelic League continued their campaign, the language gained strength, to the

point that “by 1922 some Irish was being taught in almost a quarter of all schools in the country”

(Ó Tuathaigh 2008:27). However, these successes did not make the language stronger, as it was

also the case that “by the early twentieth century Irish was spoken by less than one in five of the

population” (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:27). Despite revival efforts, the language was still facing a steep

decline.

The Irish War of Independence and the formation of the Irish Republic. Many of the

key policy makers in the formation of the Irish Republic were strong supporters of the language.

In fact, Irish “became central to the new national consciousness which formed late in the 19th

century” (Paulin1983:12). As such, “from the outset the Irish state tried to deal with language

loss by declaring Irish its national language in the hope of re-establishing it as the language of

everyday life” (Romaine 2008:17). It was not just about the language: it was also about building

an Irish identity through establishing it as important within the formal state (Watson 2008:66).

The men creating the new government viewed the language as key to national identity.

Therefore, the construction of the Irish Republic was not just the formation of a new

government, but also an effort to construct a distinct Irish identity symbolized by language. The

two movements grew hand-in-hand.

This led to the emphasis of Irish in legislature, starting with the draft of the first

Constitution of Ireland in 1922, which called for two official state languages, Irish and English

(Ó Riagáin 2008:55). Ó Tuathaigh (2008) says that “the leaders of the main political groupings

in the new state accepted that the government of an independent Irish state had an obligation to

give official support and recognition to the most irrefutable mark of a distinctive Irish ‘nation,’

on whose behalf an independent state had been claimed and established” (28). Policies such as

9

the maintenance of the Gaeltacht, inclusion of Irish in the educational system, ensuring basic

competence in the language from workers in public service, and standardizing and modernizing

Irish were also included in the constitution (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:28), though not all of them have

been rigidly enforced.

Promotion of Irish Language in Modern Ireland

The government puts a lot of emphasis on the promotion of Irish, as is shown in a

statement released in 2006 that reaffirms their positive views on it. They continue to aim towards

language revival. In part, this is achieved through education, where Irish is a required subject.

Irish also finds outlets in the media, both on television and in print, and receives support to that

end from Forasna Gaeilge. The language is also growing in Northern Ireland.

Irish Language Media. Irish popular culture is an important outlet for Irish language.

This tie was initiated in the formation of the Gaelic League, which wanted to strengthen Irish

language literature as well as the spoken language (Purdon 1999:37). This set a precedent for

preserving all things traditionally Irish, from the language to literature and music. In the modern

age, Irish has gained strength not only through literature and print media, but also through radio

and television. These services are good both for fluent speakers of Irish who want to be able to

use the language more and for people who want to improve their skills.

One must consider the role of media because “minority-language speakers have long

argued that access to public services is a vital part in the recognition, maintenance and promotion

of their languages” (McDermott 2007:101). Compared to other minority languages elsewhere,

Irish has a strong place in the media of Ireland. There are Irish language television programs,

radio stations, newspapers, magazines, and a strong internet following. Of particular interest to

10

this study, media also factors into developing a sense of national identity: “in the early years of

broadcasting, the media were closely linked to the development of a national character”

(McDermott 2007: 107). By broadcasting in Irish, people once again show the support it has in

the state and the dedication it has fostered.

Like anything else, the effects of media vary and are stronger in some areas than others.

Ó Riagáin’s 1997 report lists some differences in how media are used depending on age. Older

participants in his study were more likely to watch or listen to Irish radio or television, while

younger participants were more likely to participate or attend Irish music sessions, concerts, and

dances (1997:166). Another view of the media comes from Breandán Delap, who argued that the

media has not helped the language to grow, because while several newspapers and a single TV

station, Irish just barely recognized and used when it comes to national news (2008:152-153).

While the media provides it with many opportunities, Irish may not actually be making strides in

strength because of it.

Government Support of the Language. As stated early, the government of the Irish

Republic has always supported the Irish language. In 2000, the Planning and Development Act

was imposed to protect the integrity of the Gaeltacht regions (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:38). Most

significantly, in 2003 the Achtnad Teangacha Oifigiula (Official Languages Act) was passed to

provide a framework to provide public services in the Irish language (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:38). It

requires that certain services be provided by the government in Irish. The Act should enable Irish

speakers to conduct business in Irish. However, the reality of the situation is that conducting

business in Irish is still uncommon.

In January 2007, Irish became an official language of the European Union. This was a

surprising move, as it is most assuredly a minority language, though it may have been done in

11

accordance with the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. The act of making

Irish an official language of the European Union suggests that it is doing a lot more strongly than

the census numbers show. It could be argued that if there was no hope for it, then it would not

have been named an official language of the EU. However, it could also be viewed as a purely

symbolic gesture, one meant to include the Republic more firmly in the EU.

Statement on support of the Irish language. As recently as 2009, the government has

reaffirmed their support of reviving the Irish language in a 20-year strategy for the language.

This was based on a statement of support they issued in 2006, which said that “it is the aim of the

Government to ensure that Irish becomes more visible in our society, both as a spoken language

by our citizens and also in signage, literature etc.” (Government of Ireland 2006:8). The

government even goes as far as to declare that “the Irish language is of particular importance for

the people, society and culture of Ireland” and that it is “important to the identity of the Irish

people and to world heritage” (2006:4). The government does not hesitate to identify Irish as part

of Irish identity, but the question still remains about the language’s actual importance to the

people. This is a change from their stance in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, when the state largely

removed itself from the promotion of the Irish language (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:37). During those

periods, the Irish speaking community had to mobilize itself to strengthen and grow. This led to

movements like the formation of the gaelscoileanna, and, to a degree, the actions of those

genuinely interested in the language have been more successful than the government initiatives.

Though supportive of the language, “the legislature conduct[s] only the tiniest portion of

its business through Irish” (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:32). Many different sections of the government

were established to strengthen Irish but these actions of promoting it were taken to promote the

12

still vague vision of bilingualism (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:35). There has also been a shift in policy

and attitudes towards it. It

has become less a matter of identity-formation for a ‘national community’ (an indispensible mark of ethnicity, in which the policy objective was to secure universal competence in the hope of achieving widespread use), and more a matter of the state’s dealing with the Irish-language community as a sectional interest, with distinct needs and demands (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:36).

This suggests that the language is on its way out as a marker of Irish national identity. It is

significant for certain sectors, but not for the whole. If that is the case, then Irish may die out for

the most part in the next few centuries. If this is not the case, then why is the revival movement

still not achieving what it has set out to achieve?

ForasnaGaeilge. ForasnaGaeilge is the specific governing body of the Irish language,

and it works to promote the language all over the island. The body was formed as a cross-border

body in 1999 in the aftermath of the Good Friday Agreement to merge other language promotion

groups (Forasnagaeilge.ie). ForasnaGaeilge lists its functions as:

promotion of the Irish language; facilitating and encouraging its use in speech and writing in public and private life in the South and, in the context of Part III of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, in Northern Ireland where there is appropriate demand; advising both administrations, public bodies and other groups in the private and voluntary sectors; undertaking supportive projects, and grant-aiding bodies and groups as  considered necessary; undertaking research, promotional campaigns, and public and media relations; developing terminology and dictionaries; and supporting Irish-medium education and the teaching of Irish (Forasnagaeilge.ie). 

This body is a major contributor to supporting Irish as a working language—not just in the

Republic, but in Northern Ireland as well, where there is a growing community of Irish speakers.

ForasnaGaeilge supports Irish language education, newspapers, and internet functions. For

example, the group recently renewed a contract with Oideas Gael3 to keep providing the online

Irish language magazine www.beo.ie (Forasnagaeilge.ie).

3Irish language cultural center in county Donegal.

13

ForasnaGaeilge also works closely with both governments in support of the language. In

2009, the government of the Republic released a 20-year strategy for the Irish language, in which

ForasnaGaeilge is given a prominent role in support of their goals (Forasnagaeilge.ie). The 20-

year strategy supports the “foundation of the Constitutional status of the language and follows on

the Government’s Policy Statement on Irish published in December 2006” (Department of

Community, Rural, and Gaeltacht Affairs). The plan aims to gather strength for Irish globally,

and includes plans for training colleges for people to teach in the gaelscoileanna.

Irish Language Requirement in Schools. Irish is a required subject in schools in Ireland.

This policy was introduced in 1922, with the idealistic and perhaps unattainable objective of

gradually replacing English as the main medium of instruction (Romaine 2008:18). However, by

teaching compulsory Irish in schools, it was hoped that transmission rates outside the Gaeltacht

would grow, or at least stabilize. In addition to this requirement, language summer camps have

been offered for students since between 1904 and 1906 (Purdon 1999:44).

The teaching requirement is one of the strongest commitments to reviving Irish. To a

degree, it is successful. The 2006 census reported that the age group with the highest percentage

of Irish speakers is 10-14 year olds, followed by 15-19 year olds and 5-9 year olds— the typical

school-going cohort (Punch 2008:50). However, many Irish youths in mainstream public schools

never gain proficiency in the language.

There is a contradiction inherent in the idea of reviving Irish through the school

system. This is apparent “in the favourable opinions at the Irish language expressed by the adults

of Ireland while they (as in the state and parents) attempted to use the education system to revive

the Irish language in the next generation rather than making the effort to revive it in their own

generation” (Watson 2008:71). Parents want their children to learn Irish, but are indifferent about

14

assuming the responsibility themselves. They profess to want to see it succeed, but do not

proactively pursue that idea.

Gaelscoileanna. Schools where Irish is the working language (gaelscoileanna) also exist

in Ireland. This movement began in the 1970s and there are currently 169 primary schools

(gaelscoileanna) and 38 gaelcholáistí (post-primary schools)4 (GaelscoileannaTeo) that teach

exclusively via Irish. They serve over 37,800 students outside of the Gaeltacht

(GaelscoileannaTeo). The number of the schools in all areas of the country has steadily risen

over the years (Figure 2). These schools now play a vital role in language transmission.

The gaelscoileanna developed mainly through the efforts of parents and language

activists (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:37) and they have seen significant expansion since the 1970s (Ó

Riagáin 2008:60). Students in gaelscoileanna typically outperform students in Irish-medium

schools in the Gaeltacht (Ó Giollagáin and Mac Donnagh 2008:112). Even then, it is difficult for

children—even if they are raised at home with Irish—to remain strong Irish speakers.

In recent years, the schools have been the source of controversy, both in terms of

academics and class considerations. Gaelscoileanna have been criticized for making the

experience for immigrant students difficult and for being elitist. As immigration rates to Ireland

increase, the language requirement has been relaxed, as it can be seen as anti-integration (Ó

Conchubhair 2008:229). This view of the schools being anti-immigration came sharply to light in

Dingle (An Daingean) when the English-medium school was closed down, leaving only an Irish-

medium school in the Gaeltacht area. This was said to discriminate against a Russian-born

student who did not have sufficient background in Irish to flourish in an Irish-medium school (Ó

Conchubhair 2008:230). Parents took legal action against the school, lobbying for a bilingual

4Gaelscoileanna: 138 in the 26 counties of the Republic of Ireland, 31 in the six counties of Northern Ireland; gaelcholáistí: 36 in the 26 counties of the Republic or Ireland, 2 in the six counties of Northern Ireland.

15

track for students. The parents “felt their children could not cope with the all-Irish policy” (The

Dingle News Jan. 8 2008). Students who attended the school but did not live in the Gaeltacht also

said that they were being ignored. Language policies can upset immigrants because it challenges

their traditional views, such as which language should be spoken at home so that the children

learn the different language well (Spolsky and Shohamy 1999:36).

However, some immigrants actually view Irish as something that helps them fit in when

they know the language fluently (Duncan 2008). They support their children learning Irish as

well, because they see them as being Irish, and therefore needing to learn the language. To avoid

discrimination, gaelscoileanna often set admissions rates for foreign-born students at 5% of

admissions. In some schools, this number was far surpassed (Duncan 2008).

Elitist perception. The gaelscoileanna have also been criticized as spawning a sense of

elitism instead of just promoting the Irish language. They are very “fashionable” in the view of

some parents, though others send their children there because it is less likely that children of

other races will be there. Indeed, one parent is directly quoted in The Sunday Business Post as

saying that she sent her children to a gaelscoil because “[her] child wouldn’t have to mix with

‘blacks’” (qtd. in O’Regan 2007). The reporter does, however, conclude that parents like her are

more likely to be the exception than the rule. Some parents perceive them as a better location for

their children, because they will receive more individual attention at the smaller gaelscoileanna.

The success of the schools can also be attributed to more than the class of children attending:

parents in the gaelscoileanna also participate more in the schools. This may be related to class

and background, but it may also be due to other factors (O’Regan 2007).

Irish Speaking in the Population

16

The Gaeltacht. The Gaeltacht consists of areas in seven counties (Donegal, Mayo,

Galway, Kerry, Cork, Meath, and Waterford; see figure one) where Irish is the working

language. Approximately 91,862 (about 2.3% of the country’s total population) people aged

three and over live there, and 70.8 percent of them speak Irish (Romaine 2008:13).

History. The Gaeltacht are mostly on the western coast of the country, where the British

did not focus their language enforcement efforts as strongly because the areas were harder to

reach. The social networks were localized, and “the relative stability of these networks was an

important factor in sustaining Irish-speaking communities” (Ó Riagáin 2008:57). As non-

agricultural activities grew later in the twentieth century, the Gaeltacht began a shift to speaking

English, as well as becoming smaller. Today, Irish struggles to remain in place there. Romaine

points out that “the loss of speakers is twice as great in the Gaeltacht (1.8 percent) as in the

country as a whole (0.9 percent), indicating that the gains made in terms of number of people

reporting themselves as Irish-speakers in the census are largely the result of school-based

reproduction” (2008:15).

In the 1950s, many English speakers immigrated to the area, sparking the present

growing prevalence of English in the community (Ó Tuathaigh 2008:35). As things stand now,

English is actually the dominant language of school-aged children in the Gaeltacht (Ó

Tuathaigh2008:40). While this is not the case everywhere, its presence cannot be ignored. As

Punch (2008) says,

among the 72,000 daily Irish speakers outside the education system, 22,500 are Gaeltacht dwellers and 49,500 live elsewhere in the State. A possible worrying feature is that over two thirds of the 14,000 daily speakers of school-going age in the Gaeltacht do not speak the language on a daily basis outside of school (53).

17

Though the Gaeltacht population is less than the rest of the country, this is still a significant

difference. Does this come down to a question of how boundaries are drawn, or is the language

shifting out of the Gaeltacht? It would appear to be the latter.

The growing prevalence of English. When the Gaeltacht boundaries were drawn in

1957, the boundaries were “overgenerous in their inclusion of many areas in which Irish was

little used” (Romaine 2008:18). This problem has not been remedied, and it contributes to the

decline of the language in these areas. Ó Tuathaigh (2008) goes as far as to say that “the fate of

the Gaeltacht under government policy constitutes the most calamitous failure of state policy”

(30).

However, Aidan Punch (2008) pulls the numbers apart and has this to say:

The data on the number of Irish speakers is well behaved with the decline in the number of 5-19 year olds in Gaeltacht areas who were able to speak the language being caused by a drop in the underlying population. In fact the percentage able to speak Irish actually increased from 84.1 per cent in 2002 to 85.8 per cent in 2006 (51).

Irish is still strong in some respects in the Gaeltacht areas. While they will undoubtedly never be

purely Irish speaking areas, the Gaeltacht will most likely remain the language’s stronghold.

Why did English become prevalent in the Gaeltacht areas? The answer comes again in

the fact that as non-agricultural work grew in these rural areas, so did interactions between Irish

and English speakers. Ó Riagáin (2008) says that “the overall effect [of this] was to diminish the

possibility of maintaining Irish” (57). Now, tourism in the Gaeltacht has increased the

bilingualism of the people living there, and English is becoming much more prevalent. Thus,

some scholars argue that Irish is losing its place in the Gaeltacht as the language of a community,

instead becoming the language of that is associated with class and specific interest groups.

Language Use Outside of the Gaeltacht

18

However, “outside the Gaeltacht only one quarter of those who grew up in Irish-language

homes use Irish with the same intensity in their current homes” (Ó Riagáin 2008:59). The rates

of bilingualism stay stable more as a result of education in schools than as a result of

transmission of it in the home (Ó Riagáin 2008:59). In any case, Mac Mathúna (2008) says that

“the relative weakness of the Gaeltacht means that the Irish spoken in other areas of the country

will be of increasing importance in the future” (89). If Irish is going to grow stronger, it must not

only be strengthened in the Gaeltacht, but also not lose its hold outside of these areas.

Recent Studies of the Irish Language. According to the most recent survey done on the

Irish language (Mac Gréil and Rhatigan 2009), it is gaining support in Ireland. Indeed, Mac Gréil

and Rhatigan say that “the crucially important ‘social status’ of Irish is on the increase in the

Republic” (2009:2).This view is not unique, as Carnie (1995) reports the same finding. In that

case, Irish has been on the rise for 15 years. However, the language’s current speaking numbers

do not necessarily agree with either finding.

The major factor here is that people report being in support of the language revival, but

do not actually speak Irish. Fifty-two percent of Mac Gréil and Rhatigan’s sample supported the

Irish language being preserved, and 40.3% called for it to be revived (Mac Gréil and Rhatigan

2009:35).Many of those who support the preservation of the language think that it should be

preserved in the Gaeltacht, and not necessarily anywhere else. This suggests that Irish is going to

stay around in people’s minds for some time, even though the number of speakers does not

reflect the same idea. Some younger people also appear to be in favor of reviving the language,

and that bodes well for the continuation of efforts to strengthen it.

It is also reported that there is a “socio-cultural environment in modern Ireland which

does not encourage the use of Irish” (2009:70). Part of this is due to a hesitation on the part of

19

people to use Irish in conversations when they are not sure of the competency of other

participants in the conversation. The language will never gain strength if it is not used outside of

the school system. While it is popular in some circles, this has not yet become a strong enough

force for everyone to speak Irish: as stated before, many people proclaim support for the

language, but few of them actually speak it.

The Predicted Future of the Irish Language. Scholars have varying opinions on what is

going to happen to Irish. It may still make a comeback. However, some scholars like Andrew

Carnie (1995) argue that even with the support of the government, it will die out in a generation

or two. Carnie said 15 years ago that the future of the language is still uncertain. Peter K. Fallon

sums up the situation very well: “the Irish language today is hardly a vital, living language (with

a still shrinking core of Irish speakers, almost no Irish speaking monoglots, few neologisms or

terms to deal with today’s technical innovations)” (2005:176). Ó Riagáin also has a dark

prediction for the future, saying that “the Official Languages Act 2003 signals a false dawn or,

maybe, a last hurrah” (2008:65). Hindley even goes as far as to declare that it is “now

incontestably apparent that the revival of Irish based on abstract ideas such as national identity,

culture, tradition, and heritage, divorced as they are from the forces of everyday reality for

ordinary people has finally failed” (1990:149-150).

Others say the opposite about Irish. Its recognition as an official EU language in 2007 is

seen by many to confirm its place as a rising language in Europe. Since the 1998 Good Friday

Agreement, use of it has grown in Northern Ireland (Romaine 2008:12). Starting in the late

1960s, Belfast developed a Gaeltacht Quarter, which has flourished. In the rest of the Republic,

proportionally speaking, the number of Irish speakers has gone up since the 1861 census, but

20

down from the 2002 census. The 2006 census reports that 1.6 million out of a 4 million

population (41.9%) can speak some Irish (Romaine 2008:13).

However, the majority of those who said they could speak it also reported that they never

use it (Romaine 2008:14). Even in the Gaeltacht, only 27.5 percent reported using Irish on a

daily basis outside of the education system (Romaine 2008:14). Romaine (2008) continues to

point out that “comparison of the more recent figures from 2002 and 2006 reveals a continuing

fundamental weakness in intergenerational transmission, within and without the Gaeltacht” (15).

Parents are not teaching their children Irish at home, and thus the decline of the language

continues despite the educational system requirement. Breandán Delap points out that “a major

report on the usage of Irish in the Gaeltacht has stated that Irish will cease to become the primary

language of home and community in the Gaeltacht within fifteen to twenty years unless

something radical is done to stem the decline” (2008:161). Stopping the decline requires the

language to be spoken in the home.

Romaine also states this: “many [minority languages] will not be widely used, if indeed

at all, in everyday communication; they will cease being grounded in continuity of practice, and

instead become primary vehicles for the articulation of identity” (2008:19). Thus, even though it

may not be reflected in the numbers of people using the language, Irish can still be considered a

part of Irish national identity. This makes up for a lack of speakers with a surplus of support.

In fact, “successive surveys have shown that a majority of the public supports policies to

maintain Irish in the Gaeltacht, to provide Irish-language services on the national television

channels, to use Irish on public notices etc., to provide state services in Irish, to employ public

officials who could speak Irish, and to support the voluntary Irish-language organizations” (Ó

Riagáin 2008:62). The language cannot be entirely separated from ideas of Irish national identity

21

(Watson 2008:69), giving a backbone to support policies on maintaining Irish. Yet, “the majority

of people in Ireland believe that promoting the Irish language is important to the country and to

them personally, but a lower percentage believe that actually speaking Irish is important to being

Irish” (Watson 2008:71). As stated earlier, people don’t want to directly take on speaking the

language to keep it alive. One remaining question is: if Irish language is important enough to

identity, will Irish speakers keep it alive?

Irish Students. Many Irish students view Irish as a useless subject, because it forces them

to learn a language that they will never use. In 2005, a poll taken by TNS MRBI5 showed that

62% of students polled thought the subject should become optional after the Junior Certificate,

while 34% thought it should remain compulsory (Mac Murchaidh 2008:214). 52% of the 18-24

year olds said that Irish should remain a required subject. Clearly, some students still believe that

Irish is a beneficial language to learn, perhaps more for cultural than practical reasons.

Questions and Hypotheses

Questions. This study investigates the role of Irish language in national identity. It looks

at the interplay of variables such as being a student at a gaelscoil and where a person lives and

was raised, and where there family is from, in relation to their feelings of national identity and

their attitudes towards the Irish language. A Gaeltacht sub-sample was studied to analyze the

position of the language in hypothetically all-Irish speaking areas of the country. The base

questions of the study are: why is the language spoken by so few in spite of having so much

support? How is identity perceived in relation to the language?

Hypotheses. Because of the addition of the Gaeltacht sub-sample, I expect my results to

differ slightly from those of Mac Gréil and Rhatigan (2009). First of all, I believe that I will find

5Market research and business insight.

22

that the language does play a role in Irish national identity, but in different ways depending on

the area and how the people there use Irish. Its consideration as an important aspect of national

identity will be especially apparent in Gaeltacht areas because of its emphasized importance, and

less important in areas such as Dublin, where it has an intellectual appeal but may not necessarily

be viewed as part of identity. Speaking the language will have an effect on interpretations of its

importance. People in the Gaeltacht will most likely be in support of reviving it because they use

it every day. They will support government actions concerning the language and continuing

support of it. People in Dublin will not view it as a key component of national identity because

they do not use the language as much. If they do view it as part of national identity, then they

will be more likely to support preserving the language in the Gaeltacht, but not reviving it around

the country as a whole. I expect that many Irish people don’t want to take the burden of language

preservation onto themselves. People support it because they view it as important, but in the

sense that future generations should carry on the tradition, instead of those professing support

learning it themselves.

Methods

Surveys were conducted from January to April 2010 in Dingle, Galway, Dublin, and

surrounding areas. I selected these areas for specific reasons. Dingle is a Gaeltacht area where

the language is controversial. Galway, on the other hand, is in the Connemara district, one of the

strongest Gaeltacht areas. Dublin provides an urban contrast to both of these areas. I also focused

on young people’s attitudes to language revival. I conducted eight supplementary interviews in

Dublin to garner more detailed opinions about the Irish language.

23

I passed out surveys at high schools to gather information from students currently

involved in mandatory Irish language classes. I stood on street corners in Dublin to gather non-

student data in Dublin, as well as gathering responses on the campus of University College

Dublin. I also relied on surveys I passed out on trains between Dublin and Galway and Dublin

and Tralee (train service is not available all the way to Dingle).

Results and Analysis

The following findings result primarily from the 370 surveys conducted, with

supplemental data from eight in-person interviews.

Survey Sample. The sample was generally evenly divided into gender and areas

conducted, as shown in the following tables (see Tables 1 and 2).The study population was

almost evenly balanced between students and non-students, but was biased to the young (see

Tables 3 and 4).

The primary relationships I explored were concerned with whether or not a person speaks

the language, their proficiency, where they were from, where their parents were from, and

opinions on the future of the language. Most of the results were determined using the chi-squared

test, Cramér’s V, and/or Fisher’s exact test. These tests are the best for determining relationships

between nominal data, which my survey primarily was. These tests, in conjunction with

descriptive data, gave me an idea of what relationships were significant outside of my small

sample.

Language use is linked to where a person is from. As shown in Tables5.1 and 5.2, where

a person is from is related to whether or not they use Irish. This is a moderately strong

relationship. Irish use is not restricted to the Gaeltacht alone. However, the relationship between

24

living in the Gaeltacht and opinion on the future of the language is not statistically significant

(Fisher’s exact test= 0.575). This indicates that hypothesis 1b is false. People from the Gaeltacht

are no more likely to be in favor of reviving the language than people from more urban areas.

The relationship between the respondent’s mother being from the Gaeltacht and the

respondent’s ability to speak Irish was significant (see Table 6). This suggests that there is a

relationship between where one’s parents are from and one’s Irish ability, which supports

hypothesis 1. The finding also hints that there is still some intergenerational transmission of the

language, though the scope of the surveys does not allow much speculation on the subject. Some

parents may choose to pass on fluency while others do not, and some who are not fluent may

strongly encourage their children to become fluent. However, the relationship between the

mother being from the Gaeltacht and the respondent’s opinion on what the future of the Irish

language should be was not statistically significant (see Table 6). Respondents were also more

likely to speak Irish if their mothers spoke Irish (see Table 7). These findings are indicative of a

tie existing between heritage and the Irish language, which may extend to ties between heritage

and national identity, combining both language and family.

The relationship between the respondent’s father being from the Gaeltacht and the

respondent speaking Irish is statistically significant (see Table 8). Like the mother, the father

being from the Gaeltacht and the respondent’s opinion on the future of the Irish language are not

statistically significantly related. One is also more likely to speak Irish if his father speaks Irish.

Like the relationship between variables for the mother and the respondent, this reinforces the

idea that speaking Irish has a cultural, traditional element to it. Irish may be more a part of a

dated cultural identity than a consideration in a modern national identity.

25

I explored the idea of a relationship existing between heritage and feelings of national

identity. A person’s place of origin and their national pride may be related: some locations may

promote a more patriotic outlook while some focus on local community loyalty. The relationship

between origin and national pride is statistically significant (see Table 10). However, the

relationship between where a respondent’s mother is from and how the respondent ranks their

feelings of national pride is not statistically significant (see Table 10). The same remains true

when considering the relationship between where one’s father is from and feelings of national

pride (see Table 10). This shows that people’s national pride is a result of where they themselves

are from, regardless of where their parents are from.

Some of the interviewees6 tied language into identity. One respondent said: “The main

thing for me would be that it [the language] would give me a sense of identity, you know? So

that I would feel Irish and I would be involved in the Irish culture in some way.” Another

respondent agreed, saying: “I think that the Irish language is very important to Ireland, and the

Irish people, and I think that, I mean, other countries have their own national language and it

should be promoted, I think, because there is our national identity, and I want to be Irish with the

Irish language.” For these people, language is a part of what makes them uniquely Irish.

Several said that they would like the chance to learn the language again, because it wasn’t

taught well in school when they were students. One respondent told me: “If I had me way, I’d go

back to an Irish class.” One woman, though she did not have much Irish herself, noted that she

was “very proud to be Irish. I’m proud of my family and all, they’re all into the Irish.” Keeping

Irish is important to people whether they speak it or not because it is a part of their culture. This

6Five said they spoke Irish, three said they did not, and four clarified their response by saying that they have a “cúplafocail,” an Irish phrase meaning “a couple words.” When people say that, they are typically referring to having very basic Irish, and will occasionally use a word or two in everyday conversation. Several have grandchildren who attend gaelscoileanna, and therefore try to speak some Irish with them. One was teaching a neighbor’s child to speak Irish.

26

same woman says “I think it’s [the Irish language] all we have.” Ireland is a changing country,

and learning the Irish language is a way to hold on to what the country had in its past.

The importance respondents gave to being Irish and speaking Irish are related variables,

supporting hypothesis 2 (see Table 11). Yet, the majority of respondents—both Irish speakers

and not—responded that being Irish is “very important” to them. The relationship may have

appeared due more to there being many more Irish speakers in the sample than non-Irish

speakers. The important factor then is that most people responded that Irish is “very important”

to them regardless of their Irish speaking ability.

The relationship between how important being Irish is to a person and fluency in the

language is statistically significant (Fisher’s exact test=.009). Most respondents fell into the

category of being somewhat fluent and feeling that being Irish was very important. This leads me

to conclude that having at least some proficiency in the language also ties one to report feeling

very Irish, lending some weight to the idea that speaking Irish is an important factor in national

identity. However, most respondents in general responded that they feel “very Irish” regardless

of any proficiency in the language and any other factors.

The relationship between speaking Irish and opinion on the future of the language is

statistically significant (Fisher’s exact test= 0.01). Most speakers—and the majority of the survey

population in general—support preserving the language in the Gaeltacht, with restoring it in the

country as a second popular choice. It is interesting to note that most of the survey population

does not and has not at any point lived in the Gaeltacht. This is evidence that the language is

moving out of the Gaeltacht, and could even be said to support the idea that Irish is becoming

more significant throughout the country. It is clear that the language base is shifting, though

perhaps in a minor way.

27

Speaking Irish does seem to have an effect on feelings of national pride (χ²= 17.4863,

p<.05). 30.44% of the respondents who responded that they speak Irish reported having “very

strong” feelings of national pride. This relationship has moderate strength (Cramér’s V=.2285)

and is statistically significant (Fisher’s exact test =.002). However, the modal category of

respondents said that they have very strong feelings of national pride regardless of whether or

not they speak Irish (37.61% of the survey population). The correlation between speaking and

feelings of national pride may be due to the imbalance of Irish speakers throughout the study. It

could also be the case that Irish is simply not a significant factor in national identity for most

people. Feelings of national pride are also not influenced by age (χ²= 96.0197, p<.05). This is a

moderate relationship (Cramér’s V=.2442).

Students were more likely to speak Irish (see Table 12), but this is most likely because

they are required to learn the language, and this trend will be more pronounced in secondary

school because they have to know the language fairly well for their Leaving Certificates. Indeed,

one respondent wrote in her free response that “Ideally, most people are in favor of conserving

the Irish language. In practice, this is much more difficult to do. From my own experience, my

use of the Irish finished when I finished secondary school—similar to most people. It was a pity

because at that stage, my Irish was at the highest standard in preparation for my leaving cert.”

This continues into college because many third level students retain a sense of proficiency

because of their secondary school experiences.

The relationship between the type of school one attended and one’s opinion on the future

of the Irish language is not statistically significant. Irish is a required subject in all schools, so

students can cultivate affection for the language—or lack of one—no matter where they

28

attended. Immersion in the language in a gaelscoil does not automatically equate to a student

supporting the language revival movement.

Age and speaking Irish are related (χ²= 40.6245, p<.05). This is a strong relationship

(Cramér’s V=.3397). There may be two reasons for this. One, the Irish language is part of a

cultural movement: speaking it to some degree is considered “hip” in some circles of society.

The other reason comes back to the language requirement in schools. A degree of fluency is

required to graduate high school, and respondents may be reporting that they speak the language

because of that. Frequency of use then becomes important, and as discussed earlier, the language

is rarely or sometimes used by the majority of respondents. 17 percent of people who speak the

language report using the language “Frequently,” “Often,” or “All the time” in the home, while

21.56% report using it “Frequently” or “Often” outside of the home.

Having a basis in the language at home appears to encourage speaking both in and

outside of the home. The relationship between where the respondent learned Irish and whether or

not they speak it is statistically significant (Fisher’s exact test = .018). Most who report speaking

it say they learned it at school, though obviously this depends some on the fact that not all who

don’t speak Irish answered the question of where they learned it, if they once had the language.

Where someone learned Irish and their use of it at home is a significant relationship (χ²=

89.7343, p<.05) of moderate strength (Cramér’s V=.2055). Where a person learned Irish and

whether or not they speak it outside the home are also related variables(χ²= 45.1352, p<.05). This

is a weak relationship (Cramér’s V=0.1657).

Free Response. The surveys also included a section where respondents could comment

on whatever they felt like. I received a few interesting responses. While they may not be

representative of the whole, they do exhibit aspects of how people view Irish that should be

29

noted. One 32-year-old female emphasized the need to modernize the language so that people

would use it more:

[1.] With 2 parents from Connemara, am very familiar with the Irish language and would like to see greater freedom given to it to manage with the times. The language of Eminem is not recognizable to the English of Shakespeare, yet the Irish of literature of the same (Elizabethan era) does not vary much from the Irish spoken and written today. It should be ‘bastardized,’ not industrialized. It needs to progress. 2. Glad to see Des Bishop at forefront of embracing new technology 7 . Irish (throughout its history) was a spoken, not a written language, YouTube Irish programmes would improve this, make it more accessible and appealing.

In conversations I had with other people, many brought up this idea of bringing the language into

modern times. They want the language to adapt to the 21st century, in terms of it being part of the

computer age. Part of the problem with speaking the language seems to be that it is a struggle in

some ways to relate it to things that are now important to people. Another issue with updating the

language has been addressed in terms of education. Many of the teaching tools for Irish are

outdated, and some people feel that the language isn’t taught like a foreign language in many

respects, though that is exactly what it is for most people learning it.

This lack of being in the modern age was also tied to feelings of national identity. One

comment from a 44-year-old male particularly caught my interest. It is from an outsider’s point

of view, and I thought it was very poignant: “I’m English, so my views are colored. Many Irish

treat their culture as an artifact to be polished and preserved, not as a dynamic constant

reinvention that it should be.” Irish has not evolved with the times in many respects. This shows

in people’s opinion that the language is stagnant and needs to adapt more to modern times. To

progress and carry on, it has to embrace modern times. It also reflects the fact that the language

itself may be one of these artifacts, “polished and preserved” because it always has been,

unchanging because no one is sure what will happen if it changes.

7 Her emphasis.

30

Conclusion

This investigation explored relationships between speaking Irish and feelings of national

pride. It looked at this concept through the lenses of age and where a person lives and is from.

Survey work revealed that speaking Irish is no longer concentrated in a specific area, and is

related to feelings of national pride. However, it does not follow that not speaking Irish leads to

lower feelings of national pride. It is an important idea for many people who are Irish, whether or

not they speak the language. Younger respondents were more likely to speak Irish, and age does

not have an influence on feelings of national pride.

The situation of the Irish language is endlessly complicated. Opinions about it are

passionate. Some feel that the language is crucially important to Irish identity and heritage.

Others view it as a useless relic and are strongly opposed to its inclusion in legislature and the

extra government funding that goes towards the Gaeltacht. However, no one really wants to see

it die out. But how does a country go about maintaining a language that is not up to date with

modern times?

The Irish language requirement in schools plays a large role in the maintenance of the

language. While in school, most students have a passable ability in Irish because they have to

have that to pass their leaving certificates. Thus, the younger one is, the more likely they are to

speak Irish. As time goes on, this ability fades for many people. Some maintain it. They may

move to the Gaeltacht or end up employed in a position that requires speaking ability in Irish.

Some who grow up in the Gaeltacht might remain in the Gaeltacht, and continue to live there and

speak the language. Schools seem to play more of a role than transgenerational passing of the

language. For Irish to be strong, it must have a combination of both of these factors.

31

Speaking Irish is also no longer necessarily a requirement—or necessity—for living in

the Gaeltacht. Many of the areas maintain the tradition, but several other areas do not. English is

prevalent in the Gaeltacht now. It is not practical for the society to function entirely in Irish,

though some areas can and will function mostly in Irish. Location is not longer important for the

language.

As some say, the language suffers from a lack of modernization. If people want Irish to

strengthen in Ireland, then it must adapt to modern times. Keeping the language regulated to only

the Gaeltacht areas is not entirely helpful: it is more crippling, as it labels Irish as something

restricted to people who live in those areas. Irish is gaining strength and popularity in Dublin.

The language can be maintained, though a complete reversion will most likely never happen.

Some communities may continue to use mostly Irish, which is a positive step for the language,

but a further positive step is to support and incorporate it country-wide, a concept that has to be

established and emphasized outside of the school system. A person having proficiency in the

language in secondary school only boosts the language’s levels of use for a few years: it has to

extend beyond that to really be helpful.

The language is associated in some ways with national identity. However, speaking the

language isn’t a sole determinant of feelings of national identity. Neither is where a person is

from, or where their parents are from. While speaking the language seems to have an impact on

feelings of national identity, someone who does not speak the language is just as likely to feel as

though national identity is very important, and they may acknowledge that the language is an

important part of what contributes to national identity.

These findings resemble the findings of other studies, especially MacGréil and

Rhatigan’s 2009 work. However, by expanding on the sample pool and adding analysis of the

32

Gaeltacht, it adds a new dimension to previous research. Analyzing the Gaeltacht in this manner

was important because it is traditionally a stronghold of the Irish language. Looking at the

situation of the language there speaks significantly to the situation of Irish in the country as a

whole. Therefore, it’s important that the finding on the significance of national identity remain

similar to past studies even with the Gaeltacht sub-sample.

Limitations of this study include the sample size and method of data collection. Future

research should include a much broader spectrum of respondents and should focus exclusively

on certain areas. By collecting data on trains, I received a wide variety of respondents and also

from a wide variety of areas, which limited how significant the location variable is. Future

research should also have a broader range of ages, because this study was relatively biased to the

young population. This may have caused a heavier influx of Irish speakers, because so many of

the young students still have Irish skills they developed in preparation for their Leaving

Certificates.

Identity theory more generally could also been more significant in the study. Variables

like class should have been taken into account as well for something that people use to determine

their identity. Another aspect of the issue to explore would be to investigate how non-Irish

perspectives form different opinions on the importance of Irish language for Irish people. Group

identity versus self identity could also have significant affects in studies on the dynamics of the

language.

This is also important work for minority languages elsewhere. This study shows that

minority languages can survive as cultural artefacts, though support from both the government

and some of the people are needed. National identity for the Irish is not necessarily based

strongly on language, but it does seem to be important. Minority languages may serve as a

33

broader common base for national identity in other countries as well. While each case is unique,

those languages may learn from the examples provided by the Irish language in the struggle for

its revival.

34

References

Anderson, Benedict. 1996. Imagined Communities. New York and London: Verso.

BCI and ForasnaGaeilge. 2004. Turning On and Tuning In to Irish Language Radio in the 21st Century. Dublin: BCI Dublin.

Carnie, Andrew. 1995. “Modern Irish: A Case Study in Language Revival Failure.” Papers on Endangered Linguistics. Retrieved November 30, 2009. (http://dingo.sbs.arizona.edu/~carnie/publications/PDF/Endangered.pdf)

Central Statistics Office. 2006. “Census 2006: Volume 9: Irish Language.” Retrieved February 21, 2009. (http://www.cso.ie/census/census2006results/volume_9/volume_9_irish_language_entire_volume.pdf)

Conventions of Europe. Retrieved April 19, 2010. (conventions.coe.int)

Delap, Breandán. 2008. “Irish and the Media.” A New View of the Irish Language.152-163. Ed. By Caoilfhionn NicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Department of Community, Rural, and Gaeltacht Affairs. Retrieved May 8, 2010. (http://www.pobail.ie/en/IrishLanguage/)

The Dingle News. 2008. “Parents to take legal action against PobalscoilChorcaDuibhne.”The Dingle News, January 8, 2008. Retrieved October 21, 2009. (http://dinglenews.blogspot.com/2008/01/parents-to-take-legal-action-against.html)

Duncan, Don. 2008. “Ireland’s Language Dilemma.” Time, October 23, 2008.

Fallon, Peter K. 2005. Printing, Literacy, and Education in Eighteenth-Century Ireland: Why the Irish Speak English. Lewiston, Queenston, and Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press, Ltd.

GaelscoileannaTeo. Retrieved March 1, 2010. (http://www.gaelscoileanna.ie/).

Gellner, Ernest. 1987. Culture, Identity, and Politics. Cambridge, New York, and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

Gill, Fiona. 2005. “Public and Private: National Identities in a Scottish Borders Community.” Nations and Nationalism 11:83-102.

Government of Ireland. 2006. “Statement on the Irish Language.” Retrieved February 21, 2009. (http://www.pobail.ie/en/IrishLanguage/StatementontheIrishLanguage2006/file,7802,en.pdf)

35

Harris, John. 2008. “Irish in the Education System.” A New View of the Irish Language.178-190. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Hindley, Reg. 1990. The Death of the Irish Language: A Qualified Obituary. New York and London: Routledge.

Mac Gréil, Micheál and Fergal Rhatigan. 2009. The Irish Language and the Irish People. Dublin: Crotare Printing Ltd.

Mac Mathúna, Liam. 2008. “Linguistic Change and Standardization.” A New View of the Irish Language.76-92. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Mac Murchaidh, Ciarán. 2008. “Current Attitudes to Irish.” A New View of the Irish Language. 212-223. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

McDermott, Philip. 2007. “Broadcasting for Minorities: The Case of the Celtic Languages.” Language, Power, and Identity Politics. 101-122. Ed. By MáiréadNicCraith. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

NicPháidín, Caoilfhionn and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. 2008. A New View of the Irish Language. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

O’Byrne, Anne. 2007. “Learning a Strange Native Language.” Social Identities 13:307-323.

Ó Conchubhair, Brian. 2008. “The Global Diaspora and the ‘New’ Irish.” A New View of the Irish Language. 224-248. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Ó Giollagáin, Conchúr and Seosamh Mac Donnacha. 2008. “The Gaeltacht Today.” A New View of the Irish Language. 108-120. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Ó hUiginn, Ruairí. 2008. “The Irish Language.” A New View of the Irish Language. 1-10. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh.Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Ó Laoire, Lillis. 2008. “Territories of Desire: Words and Music in the Irish Language.” 121-139. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Ó Riagáin, Pádraig. 1997. Language Policy and Social Reproduction. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

36

Ó Riagáin, Pádraig. 2008. “Irish-language Policy 1922-2007: Balancing Maintenance and Revival.” 55-65. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

O’Regan, Nadine. 2007. “A new class apart?” The Sunday Business Post, April 15, 2007. Retrieved February 27, 2010. (http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2007/04/15/story22668.asp)

Ó Tuathaigh, Gearóid. 2008. “The State and the Irish Language: an Historical Perspective.” A New View of the Irish Language.26-41. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Paulin, Tom. 1983. A New Look at the Language Question. Derry: Field Day Theater Company Limited.

Punch, Aidan. 2008. “Census Data on the Irish Language.” A New View of the Irish Language.43-54. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Purdon, Edward. 1999. The Story of the Irish Language. Dublin: Mercier Press.

Romaine, Suzanne. 2008. “Irish in the Global Context.” A New View of the Irish Language. 11-25. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

Spolsky, Barnard and ElanaShohamy. 1999. The Languages of Israel: Policy, Ideology and Practice. Clevedon: The Cromwell Press Ltd.

Smith, Anthony D. 1986. The Ethnic Origins of Nations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Smith, Anthony D. 2003. Chosen Peoples. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Smith, Anthony D. 2009. Ethno-Symbolism and Nationalism. London and New York: Routledge.

ULTACH Trust. Retrieved April 19, 2010. (www.ultach.org)

University of Duisburg-Essen. “Who speaks Irish?” Retrieved February 21, 2009. (http://www.uni-due.de/DI/Who_Speaks_Irish.htm)

Watson, Iarfhlaith. 2008. “Irish Language and Identity.” A New View of the Irish Language.66-75. Ed. By CaoilfhionnNicPháidín and Seán Ó Cearnaigh. Dublin: Cois Life Teoranta.

37

Appendix

Figure 1

(http://www.answers.com/topic/gaeltacht. Accessed February 2008)

38

Figure Two. (Gaelscoileanna Teo)

39

Table 1. Respondents by Gender (n={364}) %Male 45Female 55

40

Table 2. Respondents by Location of Interview %Train: Galway-Dublin 26Train: Tralee-Dublin 27Dublin 28Gaelscoileanna 19

41

Table 3. Respondents by Age %18-25 6026-33 1034-41 742-49 650-57 558-65 566-73 674-85 1

42

Table 4. Respondents by School Enrollment (n={354}) %Student 57Non-Student 43

43

Table 5.1 Use of Irish (n={365})Have you ever lived in the Gaeltacht?

Do you speak Irish?

No Yes Not Sure Total

No 82 6 2 90Yes 197 74 4 275Total 279 80 6 365

χ²=16.2844 p<.05, Cramér’s V=.2112 (moderately strong)

44

Table 5.2 Use of Irish (n={360})Do you speak Irish?

County Live No Yes TotalDublin 51 140 191Galway 4 29 33Westmeath 1 5 6Mayo 1 2 3Offaly 5 3 8Clare 1 2 3Cork 6 14 20Limerick 3 2 5Tipperary 2 2 4Laois 1 4 5Longford 0 1 1Wicklow 1 7 8Kerry 4 45 49Waterford 0 1 1Monaghan 0 1 1Meath 3 2 5Kilkenny 1 0 1Kildare 2 7 9Wexford 2 1 3Louth 1 2 3Cavan 0 1 1Total 89 271 360

χ²=33.42 p<.05, Cramér’s V=.30 (moderately strong)

45

Table 6. Mother from the Gaeltacht (n={370})Speaking Irish .001*Not Speaking Irish .628

Fisher’s Exact Test. *significant, p<.05

46

Table 7. Language Use (n={366})Do you Speak Irish?

Does your mother speak Irish? No Yes TotalNo 72 128 200Yes 17 144 161Not Sure 1 4 5Total 90 276 366

χ²=31.1911, p<.05, Cramér’s V=.2919 (moderately strong)

47

Table 8. Father from the Gaeltacht. (n={351})Variable Fisher’s Exact Test

Use of Irish .000*Opinion of the Future of Irish .993

*significant, p<.05

48

Table 9. Use of Irish (n={355})Do you Speak Irish?

Does your father speak Irish? No Yes TotalNo 73 135 208Yes 11 123 134Not Sure 2 11 13Total 86 269 355

χ²= 32.6697, p<.05, Cramér’s V=.3034 (strong)

49

Table 10. National Pride (n={370})Variable Fisher’s Exact Test

Where you’re from .001*Where your mother’s from .282Where your father’s from .359

*significant, p<.05

50

Table 11. Use of Irish (n={356})Do you speak Irish?

How important is being Irish to you?

No Yes Total

Not Very 13 13 26Somewhat 25 58 83Very 40 204 244N/A 1 1 2Between Somewhat and Very

0 1 1

Total 79 277 356χ²= 20.5981, p<.05, Cramér’s V=.2405 (moderate)

51

Table 12. Use of Irish (n={353})Do you speak Irish?

Are you currently a student? No Yes TotalNo 54 98 152Yes 29 172 201Total 83 270 353

χ² = 21.4227, p<.05, Cramér’s V=.2463

52