Beachd ùr bho CNSA

Unread post by **Gràisg** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 5:32 pm

Bho BBCAlba
'Tha Comhairle nan Sgoiltean Àraich (CNSA) air an ainm atharrachadh gu Taic.'

'Tha iad ag ràdh gu bheil rannsachadh à dùthchannan eile a' sealltainn nach eil duine a dh'ionnsaich cànan às dèidh trì bliadhna de dh'aois buailteach air an cànan sin a thoirt don ath ghinealach. '

Seo far am faigh thu tuilleadh

A-nis tha fhios agam gu bheil dad sam bith ceangailte le Fionnglagh buailteach a bhith conspaideach ach gabh air do shochair - mur a gabh thèid do dhubhadh às.

Unread post by **Níall Beag** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:13 pm

CNSA/Taic wrote:'Tha iad ag ràdh gu bheil rannsachadh à dùthchannan eile a' sealltainn nach eil duine a dh'ionnsaich cànan às dèidh trì bliadhna de dh'aois buailteach air an cànan sin a thoirt don ath ghinealach. '

Uell, tha sin ceart gu leòr agus tha mi air ràdh riamh gu bheil, ach mar as àbhaist, chan eil an ath rud a leantainn bhuithesan:

'S e a' chiad rud a th' againn ri dhèanamh 's e àite a bhith ann far an ionnsaich pàrantan agus clann Gàidhlig mus ruig iad trì bliadhna de dh'aois.

Mur a dèan sinn sin anns an aithghearrachd, chan eil cainnt gu bhith a' ruith o ghinealach gu ginealach.

Tha mi duilich, ach chan e "beachd ùr" a th' ann. 'S e an aon bheachd air a tha e air a bhith a-mach fad bliadhnachan.

Their mi na theireas mi a h-uile turas a tha sinn air a' chuspair seo: cha b' urrainn do Gàidhlig ruith bho ginealach gu ginealach mur nach eil Gàidhlig aig aon ginealach roimhe.

Tha e móran nas fheàrr cànan ionnsachadh bho duine a tha fileanta 'sa chànan.

According to all the academic literature, the most important thing in raising a child multilingually is having totally consistency of language use. The most basic version of this is "one parent one language" and there are minor variations on this (eg mum's language + dad's language + family interaction language) but the main thing as that you have to be able to use one language in one context and stick rigidly to it. Finnlay's "learn at the same time" plan doesn't allow this. It leaves the parents with too many gaps in their knowledge. The end result is two-fold:
1) The parents use less variation in their language, giving the child an impoverished model of the language.
2) The parents are forced to switch into English when any unexpected circumstance comes up -- perhaps even introducing English words into Gaelic sentences when a perfectly good Gaelic word exists, but they've just not learnt it yet. The child doesn't learn to compartmentalise the two languages and confuses them. If the child thinks Gaelic is English, he'll soon discover it's bad English and drop it.

Also, the first two years of life are the most crucial for developing the correct mental structures required to support the sound system of a language. It is exactly the wrong time for the child to be exposed to the beginner's accent as this converts the beginner accent into a native one.

Even if I'm overstating the problem, I still find it ridiculous that Finnlay keeps presenting these things as "the first thing we must do" and "the only way to save the language", because there are other, better things we can do.

Even if it's not harmful, it's still not the only way.

And I kind of resent the implication that Finnlay gets a bum deal here simply for being Finnlay -- we've discussed the technical merits of his ideas time and again, and every time we have found them wanting. He does get a fair hearing but he doesn't listen to feedback, so we always end up saying the same thing. It's understandable that some people get tired of this.

He's achieved a lot through hard graft and determination, but he has no particularly inspiring academic credentials and for a self-proclaimed expert on language learning he hasn't exactly learned many languages.*

I see no reason to pay much mind to his pet theory.

Edit:
* 1

Seonaidh · Unread post by **Seonaidh** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 11:02 pm

Gràisg wrote:A-nis tha fhios agam gu bheil dad sam bith ceangailte le Fionnglagh buailteach a bhith conspaideach ach gabh air do shochair - mur a gabh thèid do dhubhadh às.

Dè tha am buntainneas le Fionnlagh? Nach e buidheann a tha seo, seach pearsa?

TAIC: Teagasg Agus Ionnsachadh Cànan? No neach dhe Shiorrachd York?

Unread post by **Tearlach61** » Fri Oct 02, 2009 3:33 pm

Chan eil e a'moladh ach na tha mi fhìn a' deanamh le mo chlann agam fhèin.

Saoilidh mi nan robh au-pairean ann aig a bheil Gàidhlig gun dh'fhaodadh sin a bhith na chuideachadh do dh'Fhionnlagh còir san amas a th'aige.

Unread post by **akerbeltz** » Fri Oct 02, 2009 4:03 pm

Tha mi dol le Niall gu mór an-seo. 'S e an duilgheadas as moth a th' ann gu bheil am fiosrachadh seo (ann an saoghal na Gàidhlig) a' tighinn tro shùilean Fhionnlaigh.

Tha e fìor gum bi na Māori ann an Sealann Nuadh agus ann an Hawai'i ag amas air màthraichean a thoirt a-steach ro bhreith an cuid cloinne gun cluinn a ' chlann an cànan fiù am broinn am màthraichean.

Tha e fìos cuideachd gun lean a' chlann air adhart sna neadan cànain bho àm am breith.

Ach 's e an rud nach eil e ag innse cho tric 's cho àrd gun ionnsaich a' chlann an cànan aig glùn nam fileantaich mar is trice 's chan ann dìreach bho 'm pàrantan aig nach eil an cànan gu fileanta mar is trice.

Chan eil teagamh sam bith gur e an t-ionnsachadh òg an t-ionnsachadh bòidheach agus gu bheil feum again air Gàidhlig a chumail ris a' chlann bho àm am breith. Ach mar a thuirt Niall, cha b' fhiach droch mhodail a' chànain bho phàrantan aig nach eil deagh Ghàidhlig.

Chanainn-sa fhìn gu bheil feum againn Neadan na Gàidhlig a stèidheachadh sinn fhìn ach le comhairle nam Māori fhèin 's chan ann a-réir nas toil le Fionnlagh.

Chan e sgeulachd rùn a th' ann 's chan eil monopoly aig Fionnlagh air eòlas nam Māori.

http://www.kohanga.ac.nz
http://www.ahapunanaleo.org

Unread post by **Tearlach61** » Sat Oct 03, 2009 6:06 pm

Tha mi air a bhith leughadh leabhar a cheannaich mi an Anchorage nuair a bha mi ann o cionn cola-deug: Spoken Here, Travels among Threatened Languages le Mark Abley.

Tha earrain ann a tha toirt ciall dhan chuspair seo 's 's e seo eachdraidh Eabhra mar a thàinig i gu bhith na prìomh-chànain do chòir 's còig million neach ann an Israel. Ann an 1880, cha robh innte ach cànan creadimh a bhathar a' cleachdadh san t-sinagog. Ach bha duine ann à Lituainia air an robh Eliazer Peelman a chiadh dhan oilthigh ann am Paris 's chuir e roimhe nach bhruidhinneadh e ach Eabhra le Iudhaich eile. Ghluais e a Ierusalem an uairsin agus phòs e cuideachd 's fhuair iad pàist.

Mhionnaich e nach chluinneadh a phàist ach Eabhra. Cha robh mòran Eabhra aig a'bhean 's b'fheudar dhise a cumail na tosd sa mhòr chuid dhen ùine. Cha b'urrainn dhan phàist chluich le pàistean eile leis nach robh Eabhra acasan. Agus an Eabhra a chuala am pàist? 'S ann às a Bìoball a bha i 's athair ga leughadh a-mach. Mhair am paist balbh gu ruige ceithir bliadhna a dh'aois ach latha dhen na làithean thòisich e bhruidhin 's an Eabhra a'taomadh far a bhilean. A'chiad phàit aig an robh Eabhra mar prìomh-chànan.

Tha tòrr a bharrachd dhan eachdraidh. 'S e sgeul as fhiach leughadh ma tha ùidh agad ann an ath-bheothachadh na Gàidhlig.

Tha sin a' sealltain dhomh dè a ghabhas ri dheanamh ma tha thu daignean gu leòr sa chùis. 'S tha mi cinnteach gun chuala Eliezer tòrr comhairle mu rudan nach ghabhadh dheanamh. 'S cuiridh mi geall nach robh tòrr rannsachadh a bheireadh taic dhan iomairt aige agus gun teagamh, bhruidhinn tòrr pàrantan, thar na bliadhnaichean, ris an cuid cloinn ann an Eabhra a bha gu math caogalach. Ach a dh'aindeoin sin uile, tha Eabhra na prìomh-chànan de còrr 's còig million neach.

Saoilidh mi gu bheil Fionnghlagh 's Eliezer a'tarraing air an aon ràmh ann ann iomadach dòigh: tha an dithis aca a'moladh gun toisich sibh bho bhreith 's chan eil dìth cànan na cus bacadh dhut, an aon rud a tha dhìth 's e a bhith deònach.

Unread post by **Níall Beag** » Sun Oct 04, 2009 10:37 am

I'm glad you brought up Hebrew, a Thearlaich.

Now, any talk of the "first" child with Hebrew as a mother-tongue is mere propaganda -- the influence of the language of the scriptures on the "rebirth" of Hebrew is frequently overstated. At that time Sephardic Hebrew (the Hebrew of the Semitic/Arabic world, ie the Middle East and North Africe) was still a very much living language (in fact, it still is today -- my flatmate in Spain spoke it natively) and was the main source of non-religious vernacular.

However, with all these new parents coming in and teaching their kids "Hebrew" from a non-native perspective, the language changed rapidly.

Nothing wrong with language change, you may say, but what happened to the communities that had truly native Sephardic Hebrew?

Well, they've had to sit back and watch as a bunch of white settlers came in "seeking their roots" and trampled all over their language. They now suffer the humiliation of being considered teuchters for their "uncultured" way of speaking. A poor facsimile of their language is taught in schools and broadcast on TV and radio, and they're told it's "better" than the way they speak.

So it's good that you brought Hebrew up -- it's one of those "warnings from history". As I've said plenty of times, creating a new Galek could be the final blow to Gàidhlig that even English could not deliver.

Unread post by **akerbeltz** » Sun Oct 04, 2009 12:55 pm

While I don't doubt the good intentions of your friend, that would actually constitute major news in the world of linguistics.

As far as the linguistic world knows, there was no continuity in mother tongue transmission of classical hebrew. Following the diaspora, Jews across the board adopted local languages for day to day communication: Judeo-Spanish in Spain for exampl (= Sefardo), Yiddish (based on German) throughout much of Europe and so on.

As far as the Middle East was concerned, Jews that had remained adopted Arabic and Persian languages, leading to languages such as Judeo-Kurdish or Judeo-Arabic. Judeo-Arabic is perplexing at first sight because it's a form of Arabic but written in Hebrew letters.

All these have an admix of Hebrew in them but not enough to make them Hebrew per se.

At best you could argue that Neo-Aramaic is a continuation of Hebrew but Aramaic split from the (future) branch containing Hebrew about 2000BC. So that one doesn't fly either.

It WAS continuosly used as a liturgical language but that was a) not specific to the Middle East and b) not mother tongue transmission.

The common gripe between the Mizrahim (the ones that remained in the Middle East) and the returning diaspora from a linguistic point of view was that the Mizrahim had retained some classical Hebrew phonemes (for example /ħ/ and /ʕ/, which in modern Hebrew were merged with /χ/ and /ʔ/). However, the reason the Mizrahim retained these distinctions is simply because the local variants of Arabic shared these sounds with the closely related semitic language that classical Hebrew was. So that was a fluke.

So while I don't disagree with your general points about rapid language change brought about large numbers of learners at the expense of the "native language", Hebrew isn't a good example.

Unread post by **Tearlach61** » Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:16 pm

An ceist a th'agamsa, 's e mura robh a leithid Eliazer Peelman 's an iomairt aca ann, cò a'phrìomh-chànan a bhiodh ann an Israel an latha an diugh? Cuiridh mi geall nach e Eabhra dhen t-seòrsa eile a bhiodh ann.

Unread post by **akerbeltz** » Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:33 pm

'S e Yiddish an cànan a bhiodh aca. Sin an cànan a bu choitchinne eatarra. Tha na h-Orthadochsaich a' diùltadh Eabhra fhathast, eadar dà sgeul, tha iad-san sa bheachd gur e cànan an Torah a th' anns an Eabhra agus nach bu chòir do mhac an duine a chleachdadh air dòigh neo-chràbhach sam bith.

Seonaidh · Unread post by **Seonaidh** » Mon Oct 05, 2009 6:51 pm

Uill Acar-bhealts tha thu nad ysbrydoliaeth, no inspiration, dhomhsa.

Am b' urrainn sinn "orthadocsachd" a thoiseachadh a-measg luchd labhairt na Beurla? Ach an àite "Eabhra" gabhamaid "Beurla", agus mar sin a bhiodh mòran a' cur stad air bruidhinn Beurla...

Unread post by **akerbeltz** » Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:19 pm

Chan eil càil cearr air a' Bheurla agus mura be a' Bheurla, bhiodh cànan mór eile 'na àite...

Unread post by **Gràisg** » Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:31 pm

Uill nan robh sinn uile fo smachd Frangais saoil am biodh TGVs eadar Lunnainn agus Inbhir Nis?

Unread post by **akerbeltz** » Wed Oct 07, 2009 11:13 am

A bheil an TGV a' dol eadar Paras is Clarmont-Ferrand?

Seonaidh · Unread post by **Seonaidh** » Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:36 pm

Ach 's ann a tha TLM eadar Lunnainn is Inbhir Nis a thèid a ruith le Nationalised Express - uill, tha tè gach latha co-dhiù. Ach air sgàth 's nach eil slighean dealain eadar Sruighlea is Inbhir Nis, 's e trèana obair-uaireadair a th' innte (uill, trèana dhiosail). Gu mi-fhortanach, chan urrainn do thrèanaichean siubhal aig luaths mòr eadar Dùn Èideann is Inbhir Nis, air sgàth 's nach eil na slighean up to it like - 2 uair Peairt - Inbhir Nis ann an TLM!

Fòram na Gàidhlig