Quote:
Originally Posted by VamPyroX
I agree.
Considering sign language as a language is something that's argued most.
I've seen people who say that SEE and ASL are separate languages, while some say one or the other aren't languages at all.
Think of it this way... sign language is language that is signed instead of spoken, right?
Well, if SEE is a form of sign language... then SEE should be considered a language. After all, it's something that's done separate from English. While the grammar and structure are similar, they're done separately. 
I realized something a few days ago. You can tell if a person is speaking with an accent when they are speaking one language using the voice from another language. Well, the same applies to sign language. PSE is like signing ASL with SEE accent.  |
SEE follows the structure, syntax, and vocabulary of English. It is a manual mode of English. For a signed language to be considered a separate language, it must be demonstrated that it has a syntax, structure, and grammatical rules specific to that particular language. Extensive research by Stoke proved that ASL meets the criteria for a separate languge. SEE is a system devised to make the English language visual.
Being able to sign English doesn't make one bilingual any more than being able to write English makes one bilingual. It makes one bi-modal, but unilingual. However, fluency in both ASL and English (in all its forms) makes one bilingual, as English and ASL are 2 languages. But I thinkthe question addressed bilingualism in signed languages.