05-15-2007, 07:42 AM
|
#110 (permalink)
|
|
In a pink and black world
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In the land of the free
Posts: 23,986
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ismi
This is true, as far as it goes; a family that randomly starts cueing around a deaf child is not that far different from a family that suddenly starts speaking Hungarian (to use your example) around a hearing child who doesn't speak English.
But how, then, does a hearing child gain the conceptual knowledge of what a beach and a peach are? They don't have any inherent advantage w.r.t. conceptual knowledge over a deaf child; their only advantage is that they have a tool (namely, the ability to recognize phonemes) that a deaf child does not. So, given a deaf child in the language acquisition phase, cued speech provides that tool.
Again, whether or not cued speech is the best language choice is debatable. But there is no inherent conceptual linkage - even for a hearing child - between the sound "beach" and the concept beach, or the sound "peach" and the concept peach. Language consists of a set of socialized representations of ideas, and a conceptual linkage is not required - look at all the false cognates in the world, for instance (English 'gift' versus the German 'Gift'), or the existence of constructed languages.
|
Ok so does that mean everyone who is around the deaf children would have to use CS at all times for the child to acquire language from it?
__________________
Shel~
"A child educated only at school is an uneducated child." -George Santayana
|
|
|