tastyonions wrote:It must be a frustrating ordeal learning a language when you’re obliged to seek out a few old people in remote villages to hear any decent examples of it.
Hats off to those who persevere.
To be fair, I love talking to them. They generally have amazing stories and life experiences to share, especially the ones who know the traditional songs and stories. But, there's still young people in the Gaeltacht, thankfully. They're just not really writing much for ChatGPT to pick up on.
Le Baron wrote:Bad Irish from the depths of ChatGPT. For pity's sake. Give it a rest.
It's not just ChatGPT. His issue was also with the actual human users of Irish (from whom ChatGPT learned the language).
My whole point is that ChatGPT can't 'understand' and 'correct' itself. It can only mimic what it's been given, which is entirely different from any actual
learning. You asked how ChatGPT differs from children learning, and that's one key
way. ChatGPT can't understand it's wrong, because it only knows what data it receives. Children can pick up a textbook, or listen to native speakers and say "Oh, yeah, I'm doing it wrong" and then choose to fix it. It's part of the reason why I'll never say ChatGPT and LLMs actually "learn" anything.
Irena wrote: Cainntear wrote:
That is how language revival works. The language is inevitably changed in the process.
So are you saying that we're somehow against the language for trying to defend the rights of the remaining native speakers not to have their language "appropriated" by others right out of their mouths?
The way I see it, language revitalisation is utterly pointless if the remaining native speakers are sidelined by it.
I'm saying that that's the price to be paid if Irish is to be turned into the dominant language of Ireland. Is that price worth paying? That's for the Irish to decide. But you can't have it both ways. It's either something for the Irish masses (in which case, you'd better accept significant language change), or it isn't (in which case, Irish will remain a tiny language, and it'll very likely die within a few generations).
So basically native speakers and traditional speech communities be damned! Learners have more power and numbers, who cares what natives think? That's just as bad as anything the English foisted upon the Irish speakers, and I hope you can see that. Furthermore, there's no reason why language revival can't
be based on the language of the native speakers. In fact, I know many minority groups in America that are doing just that. They want to preserve what makes their language unique, so they base everything off the language of the elders and the strongest native speakers they can find. They're not willing to sacrifice it. And, guess what, people can
learn it, if they're bothered to.
Also, the Welsh and Hebrew situations are not comparable. Welsh does exhibit some diglossia, yes, but it's completely language-internal
change; that is, change among native speakers
, not learners not learning it properly and then forcing natives out (though if Hewitt is to be believed, and I think he is, that's starting to happen). And Hebrew didn't have any
living traditional native speakers, so again, not comparable at all.
Le Baron wrote:So they were sent there after having no instruction in Irish at all, nor any enquiry as to whether they even spoke it?!
Yep! Because the rule was you're in year X then you go. Bureaucracy at it's finest!
Oof, that's just awful. I'm surprised they weren't able to get an exemption for the study of Irish, having come in so late. Though maybe the school still wanted to force them off to the Gaeltacht with others of their age. Either way, that's very frustrating!