lcfcire Posted 14 January 2007 Posted 14 January 2007 Conas atá tu? tá mé go hiontach. Tusa?
Daggers Posted 14 January 2007 Posted 14 January 2007 And I'm the one whose words are meaningless? Yes, pretty much, since you asked the question.
Finnegan Posted 14 January 2007 Posted 14 January 2007 Moving away from language for a moment (because I'll tell you flat out, now, we aren't going to agree), I think the underlying issue here is your lack of understanding on Welsh nationalism. That's fair enough, apart from those few older members of the board that might remember back to the MAC bombings of the 60s and 70s (which would have then been rather laughably documented in the English press) - most people generally don't have a clue. Again, that's fair, really; the reality is that Welsh nationalism, with the exception of Meibion Glyndwr (who are largely misinterpreted anyway) isn't that prolific and is a big unknown (with the exception of the Plaid.) And yes, it's probably a fair prediction to say that just as many Plaid politicians are likely as self-serving and "incompetent" as members of any other party, though taking such a negative and cynical approach to politics and democracy is a little cliché and melodramatic for the context of this argument, no? Anyway, the complaint of a majority of Welsh nationalists is that the interests of the Welsh people are governed by a pannel of representatives (parliament) that largely represent England. Yes, the Plaid (like every party) are likely guilty of 'hamming up' their campaigns with 'dewy-eyed sentiment', but that's essentially marketing and every party does it. Whether or not that makes it right returns us to the previous comment, and I don't really want an argument about democracy and the state of modern politics. However, I'm confident in saying that most of those the Plaid canvas to - and most of those that vote - aren't voting with their hearts and their passion for the Welsh tongue or culture, it's an understanding and an agreement with the notion that Wales should be governed by it's own people.
Lemon Harpic Posted 14 January 2007 Posted 14 January 2007 However, I'm confident in saying that most of those the Plaid canvas to - and most of those that vote - aren't voting with their hearts and their passion for the Welsh tongue or culture, it's an understanding and an agreement with the notion that Wales should be governed by it's own people. Good God, why? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss this one speaks with a Welsh accent like you. Just as Premiership football managers generally pick the players who are most capable of kicking a ball at a net rather than picking British players, wouldn't it also make sense for the people of Wales to elect the politicians who are most able to provide public services, stimulate the economy and provide good weather than simply electing the politicians who are the most Welsh? People who vote don't always do so by the most logical of criteria. In the FT 2006 Awards, TPH - Mr Which Cheese Do You Like Best? - gained as many votes as I did for 'Most Thought Provoking Poster'. Now, TPH is much funnier than I am and about a squillion times more popular, but he is the king of the banal. The revelation that he likes Brie (or whatever) is probably the most thought-provoking thing he has posted on these forums. Logically, people ought to have given him a wide berth in that category and voted for the boy in more merited categories, but voters are idiots. You may like to think that there is more going on than "I'll vote for him 'cuz he is Welsh, innit?", but I suspect that, in most cases, there isn't.
Finnegan Posted 14 January 2007 Posted 14 January 2007 You miss the point, though I'm not sure whether you're doing so intentionally just to be pedantic and provocative. It's not necessarily about making sure some Welsher-than-thou master race are in supreme control of Ze Mudder Land. It's about having those elected into power in Welsh constituencies have complete governance over Wales, as opposed to having to vote against / with the English MPs who greatly outnumber them. The classically sited example is the Tryweryn incident, where all but one (out of 36) Welsh MP voted against the flooding of Capel Celyn to provide a 'back up' water supply to Liverpool - but it happened anyway.
Flynny Posted 14 January 2007 Posted 14 January 2007 The whole thing seems ludicrous to me, simply because you could go on subdividing Ad infinitum until you end up with every house its own nation and general anarchy. There's already talk of Yorkshire and Cornwall becoming their own nations, as well as Wales and Scotland. Hell why shouldn't Leicestershire be it's own little country? Why not the city of Leicester? Why not, say, the Belgrave area? They're certainly culturally distinct. You can go on splitting and splitting, but since most languages except English are half dead, the people are generally similar and we all live on the same island, what's the point of totally arbitrary boundaries?
Finnegan Posted 14 January 2007 Posted 14 January 2007 The difference being Wales is already a nation, whether it's "free" or not. As is Scotland. Traditionally and in political actuality, Wales, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland all have the same status - as unique nations with their own histories (as well as, yes, Lemon Harpic, cultures and languages.) The nationalists just want to govern that nation independently. What's difficult to get your head around, there?
Flynny Posted 14 January 2007 Posted 14 January 2007 The difference being Wales is already a nation, whether it's "free" or not. As is Scotland. Traditionally and in political actuality, Wales, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland all have the same status - as unique nations with their own histories (as well as, yes, Lemon Harpic, cultures and languages.) The nationalists just want to govern that nation independently. What's difficult to get your head around, there? Wessex and Mercia were once too proud nations. Should we ressurrect those as well? Wales has never been a self governing state anyway, even when England invaded it it was a bunch of seperate states. Culture is no more reason to make Wales a seperate nation than it is to make any region seperate, and the Welsh language is only spoken by 1/5th of the country, with many of those speaking it as a second language. Whilst we talking about tradition, what boundaries are we using here? Modern ones, or are we gonna split it straight down Offa's dyke? The entire thing is ridiculous.
Finnegan Posted 14 January 2007 Posted 14 January 2007 I actually find that patronizing and almost offensive. You can be as pedantic as you want, the fact of the matter is that, as stated, Wales is a nation. It is represented by it's own national sporting teams in it's own national stadium, events that are covered by it's own national media from their national headquarters. As are events from the national opera house which flies the national flag and has all it's documentation bilingually in English along with the national language. Did I mention the national assembly? The national museum? The national gallery? The national Eisteddfod? The national church? How are the Wessex national football team doing at the moment? What's being done by the Cornish national opera at the moment? Any idea what's on display at the Mercian national museum? Oh, and can you tell me, how widely spoken is the Yorkshire national language? Oh... wait. Nevermind.
DanTheFoxBhoy Posted 15 January 2007 Author Posted 15 January 2007 tá mé go hiontach. Tusa? Tá mé go han-mhaith, an bhfuil tu i do chónaài Eireann?
Hullfox Posted 15 January 2007 Posted 15 January 2007 How are the Wessex national football team doing at the moment? Two places ahead of Wales in the latest FIFA rankings.
Leicfox Posted 15 January 2007 Posted 15 January 2007 Happy new year, Finnegan. The issue is not nationalism per se, but language. There are two ways of viewing language. Either you see it as a tool, something we use to exchange ideas and information with other people, or you get all dewy-eyed and think of language as an important, sometimes even defining, part of a person's identity. The former is correct, though it may seem soulless and utilitarian to say so. If a group of happy idiots want to pretend that their language has some sort of mystical importance above and beyond it's usefulness as a tool for communicating with other people then this goes beyond being oversentimental drivel. It is a dangerous way of thinking. Anyone who has ever been into a corner shop where the owners, perfectly capable of speaking English, talk to one another in Hindi will attest to the power of language to exclude people. In the case of the cornershop the owners are excluding you because their conversation is none of your business. When inbreds in the Highlands speak Gaelic, when English would be a far more logical choice, it reflects a desire to isolate themselves from the outside world (something they achieve a little too well) and to create divisions when there is no need for them. That is the sinister reality that people try to obscure when they claim that language is somehow important in and of itself, when they try to make-believe that can forge some sort of connection with your ancestors ( ) or some other such nonsense. Welsh, Gaelic and even Irish are all dying languages. This is to be welcomed. They are dying because they no longer usefully serve the real needs of the people, because they do not reflect the type of society in which we now live. Instead of wasting effort trying to artificially keep a moribund language on life-support, why not learn French? Or Polish? Or Hindi? It is my hope that in the future Gaelic, Welsh, Cornish etc go the way of the Betamax and the 8-track cartridge, and that the pointless divisions they are intended to create remain just a distant memory. I agree on the basis that most people use it as a tool over you.
Leonisco Posted 15 January 2007 Posted 15 January 2007 Tá mé go han-mhaith, an bhfuil tu i do chónaài Eireann? I love the way that with all this heated debate going on, you're still trying to have a conversation in Gaelic like nothing's happening.
DanTheFoxBhoy Posted 15 January 2007 Author Posted 15 January 2007 I love the way that with all this heated debate going on, you're still trying to have a conversation in Gaelic like nothing's happening. Haha, it's not so much a debate as LH being a bigot. I'm chucking my two cents in here and there! Whether you're a linguist, nationalist, or just plain curious, language is an awesome tool
Daggers Posted 15 January 2007 Posted 15 January 2007 Haha, it's not so much a debate as LH being a bigot. I'm chucking my two cents in here and there! Whether you're a linguist, nationalist, or just plain curious, language is an awesome tool Top marks - I love languages too. Making an effort to understand people never hurt a soul...it's a shame that some people find it so problematic
DanTheFoxBhoy Posted 16 January 2007 Author Posted 16 January 2007 Top marks - I love languages too. Making an effort to understand people never hurt a soul...it's a shame that some people find it so problematic True that - I suppose in a way it is a culturally defining tool so many people will lump certain attributes with it, but if it floats your boat I say grab a paddle
Lemon Harpic Posted 16 January 2007 Posted 16 January 2007 Making an effort to understand people never hurt a soul. Languages like Welsh and Gaelic have the opposite effect. For the umpteenth time if you want to make an effort to understand people why not learn French, or Polish, or Hindi? Is it just coincidence that, now more immigrants than ever are flooding into Wales, Welsh people are suddenly discovering what a beautiful and poetic language Welsh is (as opposed to English, a language that immigrants at least have a basic command of, and helps them integrate) and the Welsh language is having a mini-revival? Is it possible - I want to you be reeeeeaaaaallllly open-minded here - is it just possible that there is a tiny chance that maybe, just maybe, some Welsh people are a little bit insular?
DanTheFoxBhoy Posted 16 January 2007 Author Posted 16 January 2007 Languages like Welsh and Gaelic have the opposite effect. For the umpteenth time if you want to make an effort to understand people why not learn French, or Polish, or Hindi? Is it just coincidence that, now more immigrants than ever are flooding into Wales, Welsh people are suddenly discovering what a beautiful and poetic language Welsh is (as opposed to English, a language that immigrants at least have a basic command of, and helps them integrate) and the Welsh language is having a mini-revival? Is it possible - I want to you be reeeeeaaaaallllly open-minded here - is it just possible that there is a tiny chance that maybe, just maybe, some Welsh people are a little bit insular? French, Polish and Hindi aren't any of Wales' national languages? And if a people are insular because they speak their own tongue... hmm. Not sure where to start with that one.
The People's Hero Posted 16 January 2007 Posted 16 January 2007 French, Polish and Hindi aren't any of Wales' national languages? And if a people are insular because they speak their own tongue... hmm. Not sure where to start with that one. I wouldn't bother mate, I really wouldn't bother.
Finnegan Posted 16 January 2007 Posted 16 January 2007 Is it just coincidence that, now more immigrants than ever are flooding into Wales, Welsh people are suddenly discovering what a beautiful and poetic language Welsh is (as opposed to English, a language that immigrants at least have a basic command of, and helps them integrate) and the Welsh language is having a mini-revival? You mean the mini-revival that's been kindling since the 70s, pre-"mass immigration"? You don't help yourself by sensationalizing things, you just make yourself look childish. The sooner you admit you're wrong, SosbanFach is (obviously) right and that you're being a prize raspberry - the sooner we can all move on, tbh.
Flynny Posted 16 January 2007 Posted 16 January 2007 I actually find that patronizing and almost offensive. You can be as pedantic as you want, the fact of the matter is that, as stated, Wales is a nation. It is represented by it's own national sporting teams in it's own national stadium, events that are covered by it's own national media from their national headquarters. As are events from the national opera house which flies the national flag and has all it's documentation bilingually in English along with the national language. Did I mention the national assembly? The national museum? The national gallery? The national Eisteddfod? The national church? How are the Wessex national football team doing at the moment? What's being done by the Cornish national opera at the moment? Any idea what's on display at the Mercian national museum? Oh, and can you tell me, how widely spoken is the Yorkshire national language? Oh... wait. Nevermind. Wales is a nation, true, but it doesn't really mean much other than in name. In reality it operates much more like a State does in the USA, who have their own flags and everything! Just because Wales has a degree of seperation and uniqueness doesn't warrant it splitting off, exactly the same as Leicestershire shouldn't. Your arguement, in essence, boils down to empty sentiment.
Daggers Posted 16 January 2007 Posted 16 January 2007 Your arguement, in essence, boils down to empty sentiment. No it doesn't. A nation is a group of humans who are assumed to share a common identity, and to share a common language, religion, ideology, culture, and/or history. They are usually assumed to have a common origin, in the sense of ancestry, parentage or descent. Leicestershire is not a nation.
Flynny Posted 16 January 2007 Posted 16 January 2007 No it doesn't. A nation is a group of humans who are assumed to share a common identity, and to share a common language, religion, ideology, culture, and/or history. They are usually assumed to have a common origin, in the sense of ancestry, parentage or descent. Leicestershire is not a nation. More than half the Welsh don't speak the language, there's more Welsh living in England than in Wales, they don't share religion, ideology, or particularly much culture. A load of the current area of Wales was never Celtic in the first place, Offa's dyke being a much closer boundary to how it was actually distributed. The modern line is pretty much arbitrary. Oh and it was never a single nation until England annexed it, either. Yeah.
Lord Nibblington Posted 16 January 2007 Posted 16 January 2007 Oh and it was never a single nation until England annexed it, either. Yeah. Really? Annexed the whole county in one go? When would that be then?
Flynny Posted 16 January 2007 Posted 16 January 2007 Really? Annexed the whole county in one go? When would that be then? Sorry, yeah you sorta have a point. It wasn't 'annexed' until the 1500's, at which point England and Wales becames one state. I should have said conquered, which happened in the 1200's. Point still stands, though.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.