Queen’s University, Belfast SYMPOSIUM: Language and Politics 23-25 August 2001 The EU and the Irish Language: Identity and Linguistic Diversity 1 Seán Ó Riain This article expresses the personal view of the author. Is cuimhin liom agus mé i mo pháiste go ndúirt m’athair liom tráth gur cainteoir dúchais Gaeilge a sheaathair féin, a fair bás sa bhliain 1934 in aois a 87 mbliaa dó. Is minic, mar sin, a chala m’atair an teanga á labhairt ina óige, cé gur beag tuiscint uirthi a thóg sé leis. Ach fanfaidh go deo i m’aigne an méid a dúirt sé liomsa faoin nGaeilge: “It was a beautiful lanage. Pity we lost it.” Níorbh amhlaidh domsa, toisc an Gaeilge a bheith go líofa ag mo mhátair agus nár leasc léi a heolas a roinnt linn. Cúis aoibhnis domsa i gcóaí ab ea mo chuid eolais ar ach gné den Ghaeilge a dhoimhniú. Ach ní fada gur thuas faoi deara nárbh iann an blas a faigheann a lán páistí eile ar fhoghlaim a Gaeilge, agus gur ró-mhinic gur crá croí an tairbhe leo í. Caitheas a blianta ag iarraidh teacht ar leigheas na faidhbe seo, agus is dóigh liom gur éirigh liom, in áit ach mbeifeá ag súil lena leithéid. Sin í ábar na cainte seo, ach sula bpléifead leis sin, ba mhaith liom an t-ábar a shuíomh sa chomhthéacs Eorpach is gá, ar liom. [I remember as a child when my father told me that his grandfather was a ative Irish speaker who died in 1934 aged 87. My father therefore ad often heard Irish spoken as a youngster, although he understood little of it. One remark he made to me about Irish, however, made an indelible mark on my attitude to it: “It was a beautiful language. Pity we lost it.” Because of my mother’s fluency, and the amount of Irish she spoke to us, I was in the fortunate position of not having lost it. Deepening my knowledge of Irish became a life-long pleasure. I soon realised, however, tat other children’s experience of Irish was far from being a pleasure, and tat all too often it meant years of toil with no apparent reward. I subsequently spent long years searching for a way to cange this, and I think I fially found one, in a most unlikely place. That it the subject of my talk toay, but before dealing with this point, I would like to situate this discussion in its essential European context.] How does European identity relate to the Irish lanage? A common feature would appear to be equity or equal treatment, expressed in Irish as "cothrom a Féinne", the fair play caracteristic of the ancient Irish band of heroes, the Fiana. The Irish lanage lacked this equitable treatment for many centuries, and its absence today for most European langages may imperil both Europe's identity and its linguistic diversity. Although the present interatial lanage order pays lip service to the importance of human rights, and to the equality of individual rights irrespective of langage, in practical terms it rejects them by perpetating linguistic injustice. This presentation looks at a radically different system, which would give Irish eal status with all other atial languages in the EU, while immeasurably improving the teaching and learning of Irish. The present EU communication system is compared on a number of criteria to three other systems (Annex I). The EU Communication System “The majority of Europeans unfortately do not yet give consideration to the lanage problem, because they believe tat it can easily be solved by the use of English. I completely disagree : the internatioal use of an ethnic lanage implies significant problems of learning and, above all, of cultural colonialism and political ineality.” (Bonino 1996:42). EU Commissioner for Consumer Affairs, Emma Bonino , March 1996 Although little discussed, Europe does ave a langage problem - how to balance the needs of efficient and effective communication with the eally vital need to protect and promote cultural and linguistic diversity. The topicality of this problems will be apparent from the following paragraphs. Current policy gives us a translation 1 The present article is an update of a bilingual, Irish-English, pamphlet (Ó Riain 2001) which was launched by Minister of State Mary Hanafin, T.D., on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Brian Cowen, T.D., at Iveagh House, Dublin on 11 July 2001. The Northern Ireland launch of the pamphlet took place on the occasion of the Symposium Language and Politics at Queen’s University, Belfast, on 23 August 2001. bill of over Euro 2 billion per year (Alterman 1997: 7). The costs are set to increase exponentially with EU enlargement (in 1994 with 9 official working langages the possible combination of lanages for translation/interpretation was 72 ; now, with 11 lanages, it is 110 ; following EU enlargement, if all present candiates join, with 23 langages, it will be 506). In 1995 the French Minister Lamassoure put forward the idea of limiting the number of working langages to the five “most often used” (French, English, German, Italian and Spanish). The suggestion was rejected by the European Parliament by a huge majority (Ó Riain 1997:520). The Franco-German summit of May 2000 agreed that each country would support the lanage of the other, as both feel under pressure from English. French Foreign Minister Védrine decided in September 2000 that all French diplomats should learn German. However, Spain often opposes the use of German as a working language, and demands tat Spanish be given eal status to German. On 19 March 2001 French President Jacques Chirac called for “an alliance of the Latin-based lanages, to counter the domiance of English.” In July 2001, accordingly to Die Zeit of 5 August 2001, EU Commission President Prodi decided tat initial drafts put to meetings of the Commission should be in English only, “to increase efficience”. He soon received letters from the French and German Foreign Ministers, Hubert Védrine and Josca Fischer, strongly opposing his proposal, and pointing out tat it ran the risk of weakening the Commission’s legitimacy be making it more distant from many EU citizens. Finally, in August 2001, a congress of 1,600 teachers of German in Luzern, Switzerland, passed a resolution “criticising the EU authorities for paying insufficient attention to the promotion of multilingalism.” The process of European integration will clearly ave profound implications for all European languages. The effective disappearance of physical frontiers will increase the importance of language as a mark of identity, and this may benefit Irish. But wat of langage use in tomorrow’s Europe? The present tendency of increased use of English as a lina franca, without any formal decisions on the matter, is viewed by many as a solution. This “solution” however, leaves a number of fuamental questions answered. (Fettes 1991: 201-213). English as a European lingua franca? First, the use of English gives a considerable advantage to the 16 % of EU citizens who are ative English speakers, and to speakers of closely related languages (German, Dutch, Danish and Swedish), over all other Europeans (Héraud et al.1995: 39). How can this be reconciled with the concept of eal opportunity (1), which is fundamental to long-term political stability? Second, how can the use of one ethnic langage as a European linga franca be reconciled with the EU policy of supporting and promoting linguistic diversity? How does it contribute to linguistic diversity tat over 90% of young Europeans study English in preference to all other European languages, even those of their closest neighbours? (Chiti-Batelli 1987: 106). Third, how can the use of a language, the ast majority of whose native speakers live outside Europe, contribute in any way to the strengthening of a European identity , a sine a non of European unity? Is it not more likely that the use of English would further strengthen American cultural dominance in Europe? (some 80% of films on European cinema screens are American; 2 % of films on US cinema screens are European, according to Phillipson 1996:1). The use of French, German, or Italian as an EU lingua franca would be less objectiable from this perspective, as a large majority of their users actally live in Europe. Fourth, learners need years of residence in an English-speaking country, or unusual linguistic talent, to reach the standard of ative English speakers. Would the further anglicisation of Europe not confer increased privileges on the European élite who are rich enough, or talented enough, to reach this standard of English? English is a beautiful language, with a superb literature, much of it produced by my fellow-countrymen. It may be likened to a red rose, which is an almost universally popular flower. But the popularity of a arden full of red roses, where there is no other flower, is at least questionable (Bormann and Frank 1994: 137), and we Irish are familiar with the tendency of English to displace other langages. In addition, some recent publications (Cushing 1994: 1-16; Piron 1994: 82-88) question how many aircraft crashes may be due to misunderstandings caused by the inherent ambiguities of English (2), and the difficulty of its complex sound-system for non-ative speakers (Wells 1987: 779), based on its position as the sole working langage of internatioal aviation. Human Rights, language rights? In the past half century the Council of Europe (and at the global level, the United Nations system) as created a system of interational law, based on indivial human rights and fundamental freedoms. There as been a radical move away from all previous practice, towards a recognition of wat are essentially the equal rights of all human beings.