Quote:
Originally Posted by jillio
First off, this belongs in the sign language and oralism forum, not in the CI and HA forum....
|
Traditionally perhaps. Nowadays the combination of CI and CS is showing tremendous potential.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jillio
The negatives: CS is a phonetically based system intended to represent the phonemes and morphemes of a spoken language. A phoneme and a morpheme are, in and of themselves, free of meaning. CS does nothing toconvey contextual information, such as is conveyed in a whole language approach. Whole language approaches have been shown to provide greater reading comprehension and language fluency in both hearing and deaf children.
|
CS never claimed it stood by itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jillio
CS, like any other MCE, attempts to make visual that which is intended to be perceived auditorily. The auditory system processes information in a linear manner. The visual system processes information in a spatial and time oriented manner. Therefore, adding visual cues to a spoken language confuses the two linguistic systems. While individual words may be better lip read using CS, contextual comprehension is not improved due to the confusing linguisitic environment.
|
Intention is not being better lipreaders. Lipreading is part of the CS "system".
Quote:
Originally Posted by jillio
Few people using it is a negative, as it cannot sustain itself as a communication system unless many people use it.
|
That's not the fault of CS. Few people here are using Sign. That's not a fault of signlanguage.
[quote=jillio;1009985]Its negative if you are attemtping to integrate into a group of English speaking people who don't speak any Dutch. Likewise with a cuer.[quote=jillio;1009989]Again... that's not a negative. Sign has the same problem