Learn ASL or SEE

SilenceGold said:
Any languages that uses motions of hands to express thoughts in a commication form while being independent from usage of verbal communications qualifies as a sign language variant. SEE is a form of sign language. So is ASL. :D

I agree with Bush_in_2004! with exception that aprilrain's post was asking people who knew about usage of sign language.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with what you are saying except that I believe the correct catagorization for SEE is an MCE (Manually coded English). SEE is not a language in and of itself.
 
anakin said:
so, you're saying that i grew up without a language? :Ohno:
Click to expand...
I think what Shel is saying is that SEE in and of itself is not a language in that it doesn't meet linguistic criteria. That is technically accurate. It is a manual form of a spoken language which is English and is refered to as an MCE or Manually Coded English.
 
ASL, like other whole languages, has own structure, grammar, characteristics in itself; there are other other "codes" that include signing and English components and can be used as teaching tool but these "codes" are not linguistically considered languages. They are portions of languages placed together for specific purpose.
 
dogmom said:
ASL, like other whole languages, has own structure, grammar, characteristics in itself; there are other other "codes" that include signing and English components and can be used as teaching tool but these "codes" are not linguistically considered languages. They are portions of languages placed together for specific purpose.
Click to expand...

Such as this post which novice signers use this structure of pidgin English.
 
anakin said:
so, you're saying that i grew up without a language? :Ohno:

i grew up with SEE.. it's still a language because others who do not know any sign at all won't understand what i'm saying. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Then you grew up with English as your primary language.
 
anakin said:
so, you're saying that i grew up without a language? :Ohno:

i grew up with SEE.. it's still a language because others who do not know any sign at all won't understand what i'm saying. :dunno:

.
Click to expand...

Much as I dislike SEE, I have to say there is the same linguistic value to anakin's argument as there is to saying "written English is not in fact English, it is a variant of English". Many linguists subscribe to this view.

People can learn to write it without being able to speak a word. Common in the d/Deaf world. Not just English. I knew an American soldier who could read and write Japanese but could only speak one or two words of that language.

And I'm willing to bet you that were you to be around a group of deaf people who use SEE they will be using it in ways that would horrify their teachers.
 
aprilrain said:
My daughter has a limited ability to be able to speak. She is now almost 7. Everyone said NOT to teach sign language, but now they have decided it is best if she learns sign language in order to be able to communicate.
My question is, which do you all prefer? She has no hearing problems. I don't know which she would benefit from more. I would like her to learn what most deaf children learn because she will be going to a group with other deaf children in order to meet others who communicate using sign. I would really appreciate your information. This is all very new to us.
Thanks,


April
Click to expand...

In the US we live in a very mono lingual world with a huge fear of other languages, and even a fear of intelligence itself. CODAs routinely grow up using two languages, having learned both so early as to not be able to remember not using either one.

I have never met anyone from India who did not speak at least 3 languages and I've met a few who spoke fluently in 5 or more languages.

I know a dozen Mexican's who are bilingual from birth and it never hurt them.

I personally believe ASL to be an asset to any person's life, from the crib onward.
 
I did not study SEE till I was a senior in highschool, and a quarter in my first year of college. I learned the difference between ASL and SEE, and knew I wanted to study ASL as well. It wasn't untill this fall that I was able to do that. One of the primary differences that my teacher expressed is that ASL relies on facial expressions, where as SEE you sign every word, tense, etc. What's challenging for me, in learning SEE first is that my ability to pick up on details has not been developed (for various reasons). It has proven to be challenging. Both my ASL teacher and his sister are deaf, and he was saying that with him his parents had him learn oralism and SEE first, and that it wasn't till learning ASL that he started to understand things. Where as his sister went straight to ASL, and didn't struggle nearly as much.
 
anakin said:
so, you're saying that i grew up without a language? :Ohno:

i grew up with SEE.. it's still a language because others who do not know any sign at all won't understand what i'm saying. :dunno:
Click to expand...

I'd say you grew up with incomplete language :lol:
 
rockdrummer said:
I am not sure I follow you. Can you elaborate? English is a complete and roboust language.
Click to expand...

English itself is a complete language
ASL itself is a complete language
SEE does not meet criteria for language

You already answered your own question

rockdrummer said:
I don't disagree with what you are saying except that I believe the correct catagorization for SEE is an MCE (Manually coded English). SEE is not a language in and of itself.
Click to expand...

rockdrummer said:
I think what Shel is saying is that SEE in and of itself is not a language in that it doesn't meet linguistic criteria. That is technically accurate. It is a manual form of a spoken language which is English and is refered to as an MCE or Manually Coded English.
Click to expand...
 
People seem to have forgotten that this is a HEARING child, not a deaf one. She has access to spoken English, 100%, but she is just unable to expressively use it. Why learn another language, and then have all the complications that happen with English as a second language, when she could just sign English?
 
Jiro said:
English itself is a complete language
ASL itself is a complete language
SEE does not meet criteria for language

You already answered your own question
Click to expand...
I could not draw that conclusion unless I know if Anikin can speak or not. I would defer to her for the answer.
 
rockdrummer said:
What I am saying is if she can speak and knows SEE how can you say she doesn't have a complete language?
Click to expand...

ah - about that.... lol I guess you missed the sarcasm :)
 
rockdrummer said:
I am not sure I follow you. Can you elaborate? English is a complete and roboust language

.
Click to expand...

English is a robust language, true, and one of the most complete languages around, but its strictures, especially in the area of prescriptive grammar, and its pretense of being logically consistent, forbid it from being complete.

The only candidate for a complete language would be mathematics, but every teacher I've come across refuses to accept it as one.

If English were to include ASL, especially the classifiers, into its existing grammatical structure it would be a far more complete language because compared to ASL English is crippled when it comes to describing real time events, size and shape, or spatial locations.

As it is spoken and signed languages, much like computer languages, are each best suited for some things and not for others. Which is why people will say English is the language of business and technology, French is the language of diplomacy, and Spanish is the language of lovers.
 
Back
Top