Madam, - It is unfortunate that Kevin Myers cited President McAleese in his criticism of the State's Irish language policy (An Irishman's Diary, June 30th). Far from needing assistance "to address the citizens of Ireland in Irish", the President can deliver spontaneous and fluent Gaeilge - as she did when she met Irish people in Oberá, Argentina, last March.
Also on that occasion, I heard the local community comment in admiration at her fluency in their native Spanish. This may remind us that, far from being educationally oppressive, the learning of one language develops the intellectual capacity to learn others.
It is a truism that English is the new lingua franca: TV programmes in Brazil and Argentina and Paraguay are subtitled from English just like those on TG4. It doesn't mean that these South American countries are about to abandon their culture by abandoning their language.
It meant a lot to us emigrants to hear our President speak to us in Irish. Perhaps if Mr Myers took that into account it might take the edge off his anger at the State's effort to promote the language. - Yours, etc.,
Father LIAM HAYES, SVD, Oberá, Argentina.
Madam, - An old and - one might have sensibly imagined exhausted - argument once again reared its ugly head in the pages of your paper.
I refer to Kevin Myers's foolhardy, misguided and frankly pitiful attempt to stoke the fires of controversy through his ironically titled column, An Irishman's Diary, whose foul content blighted the June 30th issue of The Irish Times.
The opinion put forward by Mr Myers, as clichéd and unoriginal as one might have expected, was that because the majority of people lack a workable understanding of the Irish language, it should be abandoned. He argues that Irish is being forced upon a people who resent it, given that it was made redundant by the supposedly superior English tongue.
This argument, put forward by one who could most flatteringly be described as west-British in outlook, was born originally of an enforced inferiority complex, now long since redundant, supported by the poverty and ignorance of the populace, and maintained by the relatively well educated and wealthy "nobility". Such an odious testament to long defunct British imperialism has no place in the 21st century, least of all in a nation, which despite lingering problems of governmental organisation and cultural confusion, is still the economic marvel of most.
With regard to Mr Myers's championing of the Feely sisters, it is clear that there is a flaw in any system which, as a pre-requisite, requires the complex understanding of a unique and, to most, alien language. There is, however, no doubt that in these times of globalisation and cultural imperialism our ancient tongue must be protected and our unique culture be integrated into our modern nation.
The argument put forward by Mr Myers is old, lame and pointless. While it may be unrealistic to believe that some day we will all speak Irish in our everyday dealings, and that our politicians will magically become bilingual, we must strive to ensure that those of us who demand a right to conduct our business in Irish and enjoy the use of this country's own special tongue will not be deprived of this right by a small-minded, attention-seeking minority of ill-informed revisionists such as Mr Myers and his ilk.
To the anti-Gaeilge lobby I would suggest that, if indeed the language causes you such discomfort, perhaps you should relocate to a country which does not practise it, leaving this land to those who believe that bilingualism, while not necessarily for everybody, is a threat to none. - Yours, etc.,
RÓNAN MADDOCK, Oakpark, Carlow.