What's the situation in Northern Ireland?
Are there any railway signs in Irish Gaelic and/or Ulster Scots?
(genuinely curious)
Not if the Bigots i.e. the DUP have anything to do with it
This is very true, but the DUP totally oppose use of Irish Gaelic, so therefore if they have their way you won't see bilingual signs in Northern Ireland, though possibly in Ulster Scots having said that, but definitely not in Irish Gaelic, even though most of the place names come from it.
Everybody in N Ireland has access to education, so everybody can speak English. Only the politically minded want bilingual signs, to bolster their political views, and to annoy 'the other side'.
I've always been against bilingual signs which are a sop to a political ideology. Every citizen has access to education, English being taught as standard. There are NO citizens who CANNOT speak English.
I was actually thinking that they would be appropriate in N. Ireland as *most* NI place names derive from Irish, not for any political gain. For me it's just about respect to the etymology and origin of the place name. And yes, of course everyone speaks English, hence why we are talking about signs that are
bilingual, not English being replaced with another language.
Interesting stuff - thanks.
I've been over a couple of times - found Northern Ireland a fascinating place (I say that as a Scot, albeit from the east coast - I think NI has a little more in common with west coast Scotland...).
My understanding (and I may well be wrong here) is that the Unionists pushed Ulster Scots as a counter to Irish Gaelic - i.e. if you want "your" tongue on signage/ forms/ then we will insist on "our" tongue - which is why I wondered whether one or both had made it on to any railway signage (as Gaelic seems to be on more and more signs in my old town, despite it being a part of Scotland where it was never spoken).
I'm all for bi-lingual signs to aid tourists, but not to benefit residents. If residents of an area of anywhere in the UK don't speak English, I suggest they learn, and this isn't a bigoted opinion, it's a reasonable one.
One trend on the Forum is that "safety" is often used to shut down an argument.
You may like modern liveries on trains with bright headlights but we must retain yellow fronts BECAUSE SAFETY.
You may think that DOO functions well on millions of journeys but we must retain a guard pressing a button to open doors BECAUSE SAFETY.
That kind of thing. Safety is the be-all-and-end-all, it's an absolute (as far as Forum debates go).
So, if there are areas of the UK where a significant proportion of the population speak a "minority" language and don't necessarily have good English, shall we amend signs so that they can understand the potentially dangerous environment of a train station? Apparently not, since it's their own fault that they don't speak English, and the onus is on them to learn the language (rather than for the railway to deal with the reality of some people needing additional help in finding their way around/ keeping away from danger/ locating an exit)?
Maybe you are right in thinking that people ought to learn English, maybe you are reasonable rather than bigoted. I don't know. But maybe the railway should deal with the reality of language in modern Britain and signs should be amended in circumstances where there are a large number who would benefit from a bi-lingual sign.
I'm not too fussed about token/ political things like Welsh/ Gaelic in areas where precious few people use those languages - but I can understand why people are so keen to use language as a tool of political identity - if's certainly not the worst aspect of nationalism.
I quite like the Latin signs at Wallsend (though I say this as someone who only realised much later in life that Wallsend was where Hadrian's wall... erm... ended!).
But I do think that the railway would be better focussing on being of practical assistance to people and dealing with the realities of how things are (rather than the How I Would Like The World To Be merchants).
There are some places in the UK that have had significant immigration from other countries. Either we deal with that (and try to find ways of making the railway accessible to those people) or we decide to be unhelpful to make a political point. But, what's easier? A few signs in Polish/ Punjabi or mandatory English courses for a million people? Shouldn't the railway try to help?
