EU green light for Scots Gaelic

From the BBC website:

EU green light for Scots Gaelic

A new agreement means Gaelic can now be used formally in meetings between Scottish government ministers and European Union (EU) officials.

The memorandum of understanding on Scots Gaelic is similar to one signed for Welsh last July.

However, the move does not see it added to the EU's list of "official" languages. English is among the 23.

The Scottish government will also have to pay the costs of any translation of Gaelic into another language.

The agreement also allows for correspondence to EU bodies to be written in Gaelic. Responses will be offered in the language.

The UK's representative to the EU, Sir Kim Darroch, and the Scottish government have signed the deal.

'Progressive step'

Secretary of State for Scotland Jim Murphy said the move was a strong sign of the UK government's support for Gaelic.

He said: "Allowing Gaelic speakers to communicate with European institutions in their mother tongue is a progressive step forward and one which should be welcomed."

Culture Minister Mike Russell said: "This is a significant step forward for the recognition of Gaelic both at home and abroad and I look forward to addressing the council in Gaelic very soon.

"Seeing Gaelic spoken in such a forum raises the profile of the language as we drive forward our commitment to creating a new generation of Gaelic speakers in Scotland."

According to the 2001 census, 92,400 people - 1.9% of Scotland's population - use or understand Gaelic.

Of these people, 58,652 said they could speak it.

Misreading signs

The language is protected in Scottish law under the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005, which also requires public bodies to make greater use of it.

In August, the Scottish government announced an extra £800,000 for a project promoting Gaelic in schools.

The money took the level of funding for the government's Gaelic Schools Fund to £2.15m this year.

In January, the Scottish government embarked on a drive to become more bilingual, through plans including recruiting more Gaelic speakers and encouraging correspondence in the language.

However, Highland Council's Gaelic committee later criticised ministers over the lack of bilingual road signs, and called for them to be introduced on the A9, A96 and A82.

Transport Minister Stewart Stevenson initially referred to anecdotal evidence of motorists performing u-turns after misreading the signs, before later saying the government was seeking to "fast track" the review.

Does anyone have more information about the U-turns that people mistakenly make after reading Gaelic? Sounds like there's quite a story in that one.

I've driven a lot in the Western Highlands and have never been confused by a bilingual sign.
Possibly foreign visitors have though.

Maybe people see a bilingual sign and think "My God, we've driven to Ireland! Turn back!"

I got a bit lost after picking up my car at Prestwick once, with my sons in tow.

I was looking for the road north but trying to avoid Glasgow and denying I was lost
You can imagine the field day my kids had when they saw this sign

Vinny and nerb both made me laugh.

Tapadh leibh, OP.

tonya, how does that differ from tapadh leat? I would have assumed your version was plural (speaking to more than one person.)

My version is plural, Diana; but it's also used in a formal sense which, since we're on SiT, I opted for :)

Tapadh leibh+ is plural or formal; +tapadh leat+ is singular or informal - like the French +vous, I suppose.

Ah, that makes sense. Irish doesn't do that, so I didn't realize that Gaelic did. Thanks for the explanation.

You can imagine the field day my kids had when they saw this sign

I thought it was going to be this sign

In Ireland they have areas with monolingual signposting, in Irish only, ha ha. But then it's quite easy to get lost on roads in Ireland even if you can understand the signposts.

I'm all in favour of supporting minority languages. But I think you can spend too much money on initiatives that aren't the most effective use of that money, and I'm inclined to suspect that this comes into that category.

I've been to that place in Orkney a few times iviehoff, but never on the way to Aberdeen from Prestwick!

It's quite easy for me:
Signposts reminding us of the historical names of places are good, and even necessary.
Traffic instructions in Gaelic are a waste of money

"Ah, that makes sense. Irish doesn't do that, so I didn't realize that Gaelic did. Thanks for the explanation." 'S e ur beatha, Diana.

"I think you can spend too much money on initiatives that aren't the most effective use of that money." If less than one billionth of what was spent on killing 500,000 Iraqis and displacing a few million more is expended on communication I won't lose sleep over it - really.

"Traffic instructions in Gaelic are a waste of money" Unless, of course, they are in your part of the planet - and in your language. Else, I'm in favour of Spanish road signs in New York.

If less than one billionth of what was spent on killing 500,000 Iraqis and displacing a few million more is expended on communication I won't lose sleep over it - really.

The highest estimate I've ever seen of the total expected costs of the Iraq war, including the present value of caring for the wounded, is one trillion dollars. That was for the US expenditures. Let's generously add another trillion for the coalition partners and a third trillion for Iraq. One billionth of three trillion is three thousand.

I think I would agree with you, that if this whole project cost less than a billionth of that, i.e. $3000 or about £1800, then it's not worth losing any sleep over. It would have cost more than that over here, but perhaps labor is cheaper in Scotland.

:)

Unless, of course, they are in your part of the planet - and in your language
But they aren't, anywhere. Nobody reads Scottish Gaelic as a first language over English any more, let alone is monolingual in it, even if you could find someone who speaks it as a first language.

I say that as someone who lives in North East Scotland, visits the west regularly, has several friends originally from the Western Isles who grew up speaking Gaelic before English, and who has a number of friends who put their kids to the local Gaelic school

There are more French and German speakers driving in the Western Highlands and Islands, and apart from a few "links" and "gauche" signs at the airport and ferry exits, very little concession is made to them, although that might actually prevent some acidents

Is the situation in Scotland different from Wales? I remember a similar discussion about Welsh road signs (which I can't find anymore). I said that Welsh signs were more or less a waste of money because everybody who grew up in Wales and passed the driving test speaks and reads English fluently. I was rebuked for my opinion and was told to be wrong.

In northeastern Austria there are Czech road signs telling drivers to drive on the right side of the road. Czech drivers tend to drive in the middle of the road because the roads in their country have fewer potholes there.

It's not much different from Ireland either, istvan. There is no one who is literate in Irish who is not literate in English.

Is the situation in Scotland different from Wales?
yes - there are a lot more predominantly Welsh-speakers in Wales, although no reports of any monolingual Welsh-speakers these days.

However, I would draw a distinction between ancient place-names in Welsh or Gaelic, which I'm all for, and modern traffic signs with instructions in Welsh or Gaelic, which I'm against

Agreed, there's nothing wrong with bilingual (or even Gaelic only) place-name signs. On the other hand, Gaelic or Welsh traffic signs are just unnecessary and possibly confusing. It's been some time since I visited the Gaeltacht in Ireland, so I don't know if there are any such signs.

Edited by: istvan

It's been some time since I visited the Gaeltacht in Ireland, so I don't know if there are any such signs.

I have now three times tried to post a link to a picture of an Irish road instruction sign but the link just won't show up in the message, LP really doesn't like it for some reason. So google images for Géill Slí or Go Mall or the like, and you'll find some. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Geill_Sli-2.jpg

Edited a fourth time by: iviehoff because the link just wouldn't show up

Thanks, iviehoff.

I'd say this one Géill Slí is self-explanatory, and I might understand what Go Mall means after I have come off the road and hit the embankment.

#20 -- Either the URL of the link or the name you were trying to give it probably had an apostrophe in it.

The Thorn Tree god's don't approve of apostrophe's in link's.

I'm with nerb and istvan that instruction signs in Irish, Welsh, or Scots Gaelic are not a good idea. You want to keep such signs to a minimum (and you want people to understand them).

Speaking of which, I saw a sign last month on I-95 in Delaware that said "Notice: E-Z Pass only this lane." What in the world is the point of saying "Notice" at the top of that sign? Are people more likely to read it if you tell them to? I doubt it, and it just takes more time, which may be an issue for non-native speakers and other slow readers..

Are people more likely to read it if you tell them to?
Since they're only being told to read it if they start reading it anyway, it seems a bit Alice in Wonderland.
However, having been in meetings where the boss insists on some daft wording like that in a public notice, and being portrayed as insanely picky and pedantic for objecting, I've got a good idea how these things get passed

I worked in Wales for seven years and we were planning interviews for a much sought after job. We were advised to run two separate assessment centres in parallel: since many of the Welsh applicants' first language was Welsh they should be allowed to speak and write in Welsh.

This was not political correctness (although our approach was most certainly being monitored by politicians) - the Welsh advocates argued that whilst all Welsh applicants could speak fluent English, they would be at a disadvantage on two grounds: they feel more confident speaking in Welsh; they write better in Welsh than in their second language, English.

I took the advice. In the end, an applicant from England was appointed, despite the expectations that I - a Scotsman - would almost certainly appoint a Welsh person. It's not just that I applied equality of opportunity; it's also that appointing the best person for job made my life easier, political fall-out excepted.

As for Scots Gaelic - actively promoting a language, and culture thereby, which was ruthlessly and systematically suppressed is no bad thing.

It is a bad thing if people can't read important road directions due to excess verbiage.

That's the problem with promotion of culture by committees - it's just as likely to have the opposite effect to that claimed

As for Scots Gaelic - actively promoting a language, and culture thereby, which was ruthlessly and systematically suppressed is no bad thing.

Quite so. My concern is whether this right of access to the EU in Scots Gaelic is the best use of scarce financial resources for language promotion. My suspicion is that it is a very poor use of the money, and it could be spent much better.

Despite Irish being the official language of Ireland, so that all EU materials must be translated into Irish; despite everyone at school in Ireland having to learn Irish; despite bilingual signs and much more everywhere; despite one of the most influential and long-serving of recent prime ministers of Ireland, Charles Haughey, being an Irish language enthusiast who spoke it fluently; the active use of Irish still seems to be mainly restricted to a few small Gaeltacht areas, and a few enthusiasts and academics elsewhere. Plainly all that support over many decades means that Irish Gaelic is more lively than Scots. But on a scale showing Welsh and Scots Gaelic, I think you might still put Irish nearer Scots. Maybe that's because Welsh was never reduced to quite the low level that Irish was, a position from which it is much harder to recover. But in general the number and distribution of Welsh users across extensive areas of Wales, and the use of the language in public administration, makes the treatment of Wales as a two-language country across its full area much easier to justify, although it hasn't made much of an inroads back into the working communities of the south.

But what the Irish experience tends to suggest is that you can spend a huge amount of money on language recovery, and not achieve very much. I tend to suspect that some of this new Scots Gaelic spending is in that category.

Although use of Scots Gaelic is now said to be rising among the younger age groups, I believe that the age distribution of Scots Gaelic speakers is such that the number of native speakers must fall for quite sometime before it might begin to rise again. I suspect that continued local grass-roots measures in the core area, and gradual extension of the area where the language is promoted in that way, are probably better use of the money than this.

But there were still a good number of Scots Gaelic speakers left when the "ruthless and systematic suppression" stopped.
The language has continued to decline except among middle-class enthusiasts. You can still hear people speaking it among themselves in the Outer Hebrides, but the Gaelic population of those islands is gradually being supplanted by urban dropouts from all over Europe, who might of course take up Gaelic as a hobby, and often do

Languages die for lots of reasons, and "ruthless suppression" is not the only reason, though we may choose to focus on that to the exclusion of other factors when trying to make people feel guilty.

I'm not saying the decline is a good thing, in fact I find it sad, but you have to be honest about it, as iviehoff has been above.

I like the word verbiage - but only because it serves as an example of what it describes.

I take your points, iviehoff. A friend works for the RNIB - he thinks their resources could be better deployed and many (younger) blind people agree. Alas, the Boards of Trustees think otherwise.

when trying to make people feel guilty

I give up.

On the other hand, Gaelic or Welsh traffic signs are just unnecessary and possibly confusing.

I've driven in Wales many times and am not a Welsh speaker, and I can honestly say that I've never been confused. Everything is bilingual and I have no trouble identifying the English on signs. Having bilingual signs has also taught me to recognise and understand a limited amount of Welsh. And why shouldn't speakers of minority languages have the opportunity to use their language in all aspects of daily life, even if they're bilingual?

Well that's a nice thought, and that's how all these committees start off - with a proposition that it would sound mean to disagree with. But why should it start and stop at the Welsh border? Don't Welsh-speaking drivers ever drive into England? What about the Urdu and Hindi speakers in the UK who probably outnumber Welsh and Gaelic speakers? Could we find some room on signs for them too?

I like the idea of learning Welsh from road signs though. I'm studying the words on this one and hope to use them soon

I think it says the guy who wrote this was out to lunch (sort of).

I'm all for cultivating minority languages in regions where they are spoken, however, I'm not fully convinced that road signs are an appropriate medium. Then again, I don't really think that bilingual signs are a big problem either, but perhaps the money could be used for other purposes.

Don't Welsh-speaking drivers ever drive into England?

Of course they do and I'm sure they realise that Welsh does not have official recognition in England (and Welsh speakers do not form a cohesive, contiguous community in England). I think this argument is flawed - do Italians expect to see Italian-language signs when they drive in France, for example?

What about the Urdu and Hindi speakers in the UK who probably outnumber Welsh and Gaelic speakers? Could we find some room on signs for them too?

Urdu and Hindi are not endangered languages and don't need to be promoted in the same way. There could also be an argument made that they are not indigenous to the UK, so shouldn't expect the same level of backing (I'm not saying that I agree with this - just presenting a possible viewpoin).

If you spend any time in the London borough of Tower Hamlets, you'll see plenty of bilingual street signs (English/Bengali) and passing through Southall station near Wembley the other day I noticed that the station sign was written in English and Punjabi. It's possible - I don't know, as I've never been to either - that there is some bilingual signage (English and Urdu or Gujarati, for example) in places such as Bradford and Leicester.

I'm all for cultivating minority languages in regions where they are spoken, however, I'm not fully convinced that road signs are an appropriate medium.

Road signs are just one element in the promotion of minority languages - not the be-all and end-all.