Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar has conceded defeat in the vote over two constitutional amendments that would have broadened the definition of family and removed language about a woman’s role at home.
It’s less of a grey area because Ireland is a predominantly English-speaking country. The official name for his office in both English and Irish is Taoiseach. This is in contrast to the President of Ireland, whose official title in English is ‘President’.
I’m British and we never refer to Varadkar as the prime minister. Any news coverage here refers to him, correctly, as the Taoiseach.
EDIT: And this is coming from the country who, regrettably, are the reason why Ireland now has to be so careful to maintain their ancient language after centuries of us trying to eradicate their native culture.
In general I get that and my instinct was similarly that it was strange not to use the word. I’d use Taoiseach for Varadkar in a way I wouldn’t use the native language word for other world leaders, because I think of Ireland as a primarily English-speaking country and that’s the word they still use whilst otherwise speaking in English.
But then again, I can also see that British readers like you and I who follow current affairs are going to be a lot more familiar with the term Taoiseach (or, in Calamity Truss’s case, the ‘Tea Sock’) given it’s the country next door and so hugely intertwined with British politics. I could name every Taoiseach in the last quarter century just by virtue of how much those individuals have featured in UK news - through the peace process, the financial crisis and then Brexit. I couldn’t do that for the leaders of any other foreign country of Ireland’s size. So I think it’s not unreasonable to assume the average US or other reader might not not know what a Taoiseach is.
Thanks for your input. Maybe non-Brits won’t understand that I’m not trying to be elitist. It’s just that, as far as I can remember, even in our shit-tier tabloids, he’s called the Taoiseach. Sure, it’s confusing the first time but I don’t think it’s the hardest thing to pick up from context. Prime Minister immediately smacks like a mistake or a lack of care.
I think the best thing would be maybe refer to him as PM in the headline (if there’s no better alternative) but then as Taoiseach in the article.
They’re writing for a global audience, and most people in the world simply wouldn’t know what they’re talking about if they referred to the taoiseach as taoiseach. It’s no different from referring to the Spanish President of the Government (the actual title of the office) as the Spanish prime minister, yes, that’s not technically the correct term but using language most people will immediately understand and understand correctly is generally considered to be more important.
I understand their justification and I assume both the author and their editors are aware of the real term. However, before I noticed that this was from the AP, I assumed this story was from a less-prestigious source because referring to Varadkar as a PM felt like a mistake akin to if someone referred to Rishi Sunak as a ‘President’ (as the Spanish use it) or ‘Chancellor’ (as the Germans use it). I wouldn’t have even commented upon it if this was the Daily Mail or such but I’d have assumed the Associated Press would respect their audience enough to understand the word with context and perhaps a short disclaimer.
I think you’re overestimating the familiarity most people, even generally politically literate people, outside of Ireland and the UK have with Ireland and Irish politics.
Completely agree. It’s also a word that you cannot infer the importance of the post or their responsibilities. With things like Chancellor, Supreme Overlord, Premier, etc.
It’s less of a grey area because Ireland is a predominantly English-speaking country. The official name for his office in both English and Irish is Taoiseach. This is in contrast to the President of Ireland, whose official title in English is ‘President’.
I’m British and we never refer to Varadkar as the prime minister. Any news coverage here refers to him, correctly, as the Taoiseach.
EDIT: And this is coming from the country who, regrettably, are the reason why Ireland now has to be so careful to maintain their ancient language after centuries of us trying to eradicate their native culture.
In general I get that and my instinct was similarly that it was strange not to use the word. I’d use Taoiseach for Varadkar in a way I wouldn’t use the native language word for other world leaders, because I think of Ireland as a primarily English-speaking country and that’s the word they still use whilst otherwise speaking in English.
But then again, I can also see that British readers like you and I who follow current affairs are going to be a lot more familiar with the term Taoiseach (or, in Calamity Truss’s case, the ‘Tea Sock’) given it’s the country next door and so hugely intertwined with British politics. I could name every Taoiseach in the last quarter century just by virtue of how much those individuals have featured in UK news - through the peace process, the financial crisis and then Brexit. I couldn’t do that for the leaders of any other foreign country of Ireland’s size. So I think it’s not unreasonable to assume the average US or other reader might not not know what a Taoiseach is.
Thanks for your input. Maybe non-Brits won’t understand that I’m not trying to be elitist. It’s just that, as far as I can remember, even in our shit-tier tabloids, he’s called the Taoiseach. Sure, it’s confusing the first time but I don’t think it’s the hardest thing to pick up from context. Prime Minister immediately smacks like a mistake or a lack of care.
I think the best thing would be maybe refer to him as PM in the headline (if there’s no better alternative) but then as Taoiseach in the article.
They’re writing for a global audience, and most people in the world simply wouldn’t know what they’re talking about if they referred to the taoiseach as taoiseach. It’s no different from referring to the Spanish President of the Government (the actual title of the office) as the Spanish prime minister, yes, that’s not technically the correct term but using language most people will immediately understand and understand correctly is generally considered to be more important.
I understand their justification and I assume both the author and their editors are aware of the real term. However, before I noticed that this was from the AP, I assumed this story was from a less-prestigious source because referring to Varadkar as a PM felt like a mistake akin to if someone referred to Rishi Sunak as a ‘President’ (as the Spanish use it) or ‘Chancellor’ (as the Germans use it). I wouldn’t have even commented upon it if this was the Daily Mail or such but I’d have assumed the Associated Press would respect their audience enough to understand the word with context and perhaps a short disclaimer.
I think you’re overestimating the familiarity most people, even generally politically literate people, outside of Ireland and the UK have with Ireland and Irish politics.
Completely agree. It’s also a word that you cannot infer the importance of the post or their responsibilities. With things like Chancellor, Supreme Overlord, Premier, etc.
I’m not expecting people to know. I’m expecting the AP to educate their readers.