Is Deaf Culture still High Context?

Berry said:
We have talked a lot about thinking.. Largely discussing semantics versus logical thinking, what about other aspects of High Context / Low Context Cultures.

Here are a few:

Time structuring.

Relationships.

Appeals to authority.

Individualism as opposed to Communalism.

Privacy.

Politeness.

Competition.

Anyone want to comment about these or add others?
Click to expand...

jillio said:
Achievement.
Click to expand...


I think I should have started this thread with a concrete example of how deafness is directly connected to high context thinking rather than low context thinking.

So we can do so now.

If you were at a party with all hearing people, including yourself, and you were to say, "Pardon me. I am going to go sit on the toilet for a while, be back in ten or fifteen minutes." You are apt to get a lot of very predictable reactions.

"TMI."

"Do we REALLY need to know that?"

"Hey, you are all grown up now, you can go to the potty all by yourself."

"Need somebody to hold your hand?"

"If you fall in just holler, we'll come flush you."

On the other hand if you were at a party and everyone was Deaf, including yourself, the chances are all you would receive is recognition from one or more people that they had understood your message.

Why the difference?

Lets look.

Hidden in the banter of the hearing folk are certain Low Context assumptions.

1. Once you are an adult you do things on your own, without help from others.

2. That privacy is valued and you are expected to keep your personal business to yourself.

3. That is something bad happens in the bathroom all you have to do is holler and someone will come to see what is wrong.

Notice that Low Context hearing people take their hearing and speaking abilities for granted.

Hidden in the quiet non--banter of the Deaf folk are certain assumptions also.

To start with most Deaf people at some point in their lives notice they are deaf. That is they cannot hear. So if someone disappears, say into the bathroom, or anywhere, and something bad happens to that person --

Hollering for help isn't going to do you a lot of good if everyone in the house is deaf. They won't realize something is wrong until they notice you have been missing for a long time.

It won't do them a lot of good to run around the house or up and down the street yelling your name -- You won't be able to hear them and they can't hear you.

So Deaf people have more respect for sharing than they do for privacy and fully expect to keep close track of the people around them and expect the people around them to help them do it.

What do you call this kind of a group, culture, community, or family?

High Context.

It is interesting to note that not all hearing cultures are that Low Context. Some of them recognize that a stroke can happen in the bathroom and the victim may not be able to call out -- Therefore all the hearing and speaking ability in the world won't do you any good. These Higher Context hearing cultures also keep track of each other and value privacy less than sharing.

How do you teach a child to be High or Low Context in this type of situation?

Remember even the Lowest Context hearing culture will keep close track of their children.
So a child's first experience is High Context and most children are High Context. How does the child learn which one to become when it grows up?

If the parents insist the child share with them, but they never share with the child, and never with each other -- They just walk off to the bathroom or where ever -- The child learns that High Context behavior is for children and is childish. They learn that adults are independent, self willed, and don't rely on others.

If the parent shares with the child, and with the other adults around the child, telling them and each other where they will be and what they will be doing, then the child will think that sharing and keeping track of each other is a normal way of life to be continued through adulthood.
 
Berry said:
I think I should have started this thread with a concrete example of how deafness is directly connected to high context thinking rather than low context thinking.

So we can do so now.

If you were at a party with all hearing people, including yourself, and you were to say, "Pardon me. I am going to go sit on the toilet for a while, be back in ten or fifteen minutes." You are apt to get a lot of very predictable reactions.

"TMI."

"Do we REALLY need to know that?"

"Hey, you are all grown up now, you can go to the potty all by yourself."

"Need somebody to hold your hand?"

"If you fall in just holler, we'll come flush you."

On the other hand if you were at a party and everyone was Deaf, including yourself, the chances are all you would receive is recognition from one or more people that they had understood your message.

Why the difference?

Lets look.

Hidden in the banter of the hearing folk are certain Low Context assumptions.

1. Once you are an adult you do things on your own, without help from others.

2. That privacy is valued and you are expected to keep your personal business to yourself.

3. That is something bad happens in the bathroom all you have to do is holler and someone will come to see what is wrong.

Notice that Low Context hearing people take their hearing and speaking abilities for granted.

Hidden in the quiet non--banter of the Deaf folk are certain assumptions also.

To start with most Deaf people at some point in their lives notice they are deaf. That is they cannot hear. So if someone disappears, say into the bathroom, or anywhere, and something bad happens to that person --

Hollering for help isn't going to do you a lot of good if everyone in the house is deaf. They won't realize something is wrong until they notice you have been missing for a long time.

It won't do them a lot of good to run around the house or up and down the street yelling your name -- You won't be able to hear them and they can't hear you.

So Deaf people have more respect for sharing than they do for privacy and fully expect to keep close track of the people around them and expect the people around them to help them do it.

What do you call this kind of a group, culture, community, or family?

High Context.

It is interesting to note that not all hearing cultures are that Low Context. Some of them recognize that a stroke can happen in the bathroom and the victim may not be able to call out -- Therefore all the hearing and speaking ability in the world won't do you any good. These Higher Context hearing cultures also keep track of each other and value privacy less than sharing.

How do you teach a child to be High or Low Context in this type of situation?

Remember even the Lowest Context hearing culture will keep close track of their children.
So a child's first experience is High Context and most children are High Context. How does the child learn which one to become when it grows up?

If the parents insist the child share with them, but they never share with the child, and never with each other -- They just walk off to the bathroom or where ever -- The child learns that High Context behavior is for children and is childish. They learn that adults are independent, self willed, and don't rely on others.

If the parent shares with the child, and with the other adults around the child, telling them and each other where they will be and what they will be doing, then the child will think that sharing and keeping track of each other is a normal way of life to be continued through adulthood.
Click to expand...

That is an excellent example, and a post I wish the hearies around here would read. They might gain a greater understanding of what they believe is rude rarely is around here.
 
I had a very interesting discussion with a man from Indonesia. I was pregnant at the time (and hearing). He asked me if I was going to put the baby in a crib. I laughed. I told him that most Americans put their babies in cribs but I would be keeping my baby at hand to breastfeed. I had a beside bassinet and before too long, my baby was in bed next to me. It seemed so natural to me. This man seemed to think that it was normal, too.
 
sallylou said:
I had a very interesting discussion with a man from Indonesia. I was pregnant at the time (and hearing). He asked me if I was going to put the baby in a crib. I laughed. I told him that most Americans put their babies in cribs but I would be keeping my baby at hand to breastfeed. I had a beside bassinet and before too long, my baby was in bed next to me. It seemed so natural to me. This man seemed to think that it was normal, too.
Click to expand...

I love that tale. It is a shame more Americans don't find that normal.
 
One of my daughters was told by a CPS worker that she had to take the baby OUT of the bed and put it in a crib because there have been cases of a mother rolling over on her baby and smothering it. (I actually find this a bit incredible because I have slept with newborns fresh out of the hospital curled up in my armpit and every time they squeaked I woke up and I am a heavy sleeper.)

The worker also said that if anything were to happen to the baby because it was in the bed with the parents they would be charged with reckless child endangerment.

Scary stuff.
 
Berry said:
One of my daughters was told by a CPS worker that she had to take the baby OUT of the bed and put it in a crib because there have been cases of a mother rolling over on her baby and smothering it. (I actually find this a bit incredible because I have slept with newborns fresh out of the hospital curled up in my armpit and every time they squeaked I woke up and I am a heavy sleeper.)

The worker also said that if anything were to happen to the baby because it was in the bed with the parents they would be charged with reckless child endangerment.

Scary stuff.
Click to expand...

Evidently a new CPS worker.:roll: And one without children, lol.
 
Women have been sleeping with their infants for thousands of years. It must work or we wouldn't have so many people. :giggle:
 
Berry said:
We have talked a lot about thinking.. Largely discussing semantics versus logical thinking, what about other aspects of High Context / Low Context Cultures.

Here are a few:

Time structuring.

Relationships.

Appeals to authority.

Individualism as opposed to Communalism.

Privacy.

Politeness.

Competition.

Anyone want to comment about these or add others?
Click to expand...
I'm slowly learning about this low and high context thing, it also helps that I by coindence am reading some scholary books on sociology at the moment.

Trying to come up with an aspect:

Politics
 
Berry said:
OMG! You guys have helped me come up with a concept/term I have been looking for for a long long time and could not find because it did not exist -- But this leads directly to it.

When Shakespeare wrote -- Say "To Be or Not To Be" half of what he meant was cloaked in what he said, but was not stated. Almost like the schizophrenic salad Gregory Bateson described in his metalogues.

If a term exists for the way Shakespeare wrote I have never found it -- But it is right there. The examples I just read of language dysfluency sound very much like a cross between Shakespeare's writing and schizophrenic salad -- Except Shakespeare was very deliberate.

So I looked up metafluency -- and until this instant it has apparently existed nowhere else except in my own brain. (My brain gave birth to the word this morning, thank you.)

I like it. I am going to work on it.

Thank you both.

You made my whole month.
Click to expand...
Now you made me curious. Metafluency? If you make some new discoveries, please update us :)
 
Tomorrow.

I watched my daughter sign two hours of interviews. She was able to turn jargon into plain old ASL.

My pointy little mind is dull right now.

Have good dreams.
 
Influence of the internet on Deaf culture

This is a very thought provoking thread. As I was thinking about the stuff written about here, it struck me that increasing influence of the internet in a culture will push that culture towards being low context.

It seems to me that the many shared strands of a high context culture requires its members to live physically close to each other, along with restricting the flow of information from other cultures (e.g. the Amish).

The internet pushes in the opposite direction. It allows people to interact from opposite sides of the world and it's not a flow of information, it's a waterfall of information from all different cultures.

So, in answering the original question of this thread, it would appear that through the growth of the internet (and forums like AllDeaf), Deaf culture will inevitably become less high context. I know I may be stating the obvious, but the follow-up question I wanted to ask is "What contextual strands are lost as Deaf culture becomes low(er) context?"
 
Probably none as the persons utilizing ASL will stay within familiar context. Has it been determined which contextual style of thinking ASL is?

Implanted A B Harmony activated Aug/07
 
AJWSmith said:
This is a very thought provoking thread. As I was thinking about the stuff written about here, it struck me that increasing influence of the internet in a culture will push that culture towards being low context.

It seems to me that the many shared strands of a high context culture requires its members to live physically close to each other, along with restricting the flow of information from other cultures (e.g. the Amish).

The internet pushes in the opposite direction. It allows people to interact from opposite sides of the world and it's not a flow of information, it's a waterfall of information from all different cultures.

So, in answering the original question of this thread, it would appear that through the growth of the internet (and forums like AllDeaf), Deaf culture will inevitably become less high context. I know I may be stating the obvious, but the follow-up question I wanted to ask is "What contextual strands are lost as Deaf culture becomes low(er) context?"
Click to expand...

You have brought up a very interesting point. I do think that the move toward low context can be seen culturally in general. I attribute a great deal of that to increased use of the internet for communication. When the mode of communication is changed, it naturally will impact the culture in other areas as well.
 
When two people use ASL, even on a computer, they are forced to look at each other. There's a physical connection. That gets lost when writing in English (like here). Maybe that fact makes a difference?:hmm:
 
sallylou said:
When two people use ASL, even on a computer, they are forced to look at each other. There's a physical connection. That gets lost when writing in English (like here). Maybe that fact makes a difference?:hmm:
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct. So much content is in the personal contact. There is something triggered in the brain (neurotransmitters) when we see human face, and even more so, when that face is responsive to us.
 
sallylou said:
When two people use ASL, even on a computer, they are forced to look at each other. There's a physical connection. That gets lost when writing in English (like here). Maybe that fact makes a difference?:hmm:
Click to expand...

jillio said:
You are absolutely correct. So much content is in the personal contact. There is something triggered in the brain (neurotransmitters) when we see human face, and even more so, when that face is responsive to us.
Click to expand...

You both have highlighted an important point: Face-to-face communication is much higher context than faceless written words. Something precious is lost. I hate the rude comments and bile of many anonymous comments that are posted on the internet ("trolls" they are known as). They wouldn't be able to interact like that face-to-face.

A follow-up observation is that sign language has to be face-to-face, while English can be "lowered" (contextually speaking) to anonymous words. So Deaf culture has to be "higher" context due to this interpersonal aspect of its language.
 
Back
Top