SEE is a language... It's English...

[GrendelQ]

Could that be from seeing only what you want to see?
I have seen both sides in here.

In January, or whenever this first hit, I was very much interested in what people had to say about their experiences with SEE, positive or negative. But all constructive discussion about the use of SEE was obliterated by the usual gang bang mocking of the OP for being so positive about it.

The following from Jillio was basically what I took away as a good definitive statement about SEE, one that the OP seemed to agree with, but there's not a lot to back it up here. There are comments here about how SEE is used to teach English to those without access to sound. But, there is no calm and straightforward discussion of why SEE is flawed when used as more than just a bridge from ASL to English. I've seen some very intelligent discussions of that elsewhere. But, if you are a new parent coming here to see what's up with SEE as an option, you won't find an intelligently critical discussion of SEE here, just a heated brawl.

It is acceptable as a tool in teaching a child English. However, that does not make it a language. That makes it a tool for teaching a specific language, the same as writing is a tool for teaching a specific language. Neither one are languages. They are modes of a specific language.

ASL is intended for communication purposes, and it fulfills all the requirements for communication unassisted by any other language. SEE is intended for teaching and instructing, not for communication.

 

[shel90]

I'm surprised to see this topic resurrected, given that it's been beaten to a pulp on the forum many times over, and yet it's being treated as though the OP is just opening with this now. She acknowledged in this same thread many months ago that although referring to SEE as a mode of English was accurate, it couldn't be used as a full language or communication tool in itself, but rather as a teaching aid in developing her child's reading ability and building a vocabulary.

We don't use SEE ourselves -- my daughter has full access to English (in addition to ASL), so we don't have the gap many deaf kids have when it comes to learning to read and write a language they've never been exposed to in any other mode.

But I've seen Deaf teachers who use ASL as a primary language advise the use of a bridge such as SEE or SSE when teaching a primarily ASL-using child how to read and write English. I've asked about this outright of several Deaf professionals, and apparently they did not get the "all Deaf are against SEE" message. And I've heard from Deaf individuals who grew up learning SEE and found it to be a positive factor in both their learning of English and their later transition to ASL. Since participating on this forum, I've also heard from many who are very much against the use of SEE. But when you claim that this parent isn't listening to the Deaf, you aren't entirely accurate -- it just depends upon which Deaf you are referring to.

And although I've seen strong reasoning elsewhere that helped me decide one way or the other, it sure doesn't look as though those who were strenuously against were very persuasive in their arguments here -- offensive and dismissive, yes, but not very constructive in their discussion of why the objectives of SEE might be better served via another method.

Let me remind you this...


I've read on here many times that SEE is not a language. That comment is misleading, as it is a language.... English.

Very very first sentence in this thread.

 

[posts from hell]

Hearing parents who think they can come in and TELL the deaf what to do and what things are can screw off.. and these who support the previously stated hearing parents can screw off too.

 

[CSign]

To reiterate, I am not disagreeing that SEE in and of itself is not a "language." maybe I should have titled the thread differently. However, English is a language which I value just as I value ASL as a language. I have been well aware that SEE is MCE, just don't understand why it seems people here seem to dislike English. I'm trying to bridge the gap. Both are valuable and both serve a purpose.

I like how we all seem to forget that on page one I agreed to the fact that SEE in and if itself is not a language, rather another mode of English.

This quote was pulled from page 3.

 

[posts from hell]

I like how we all seem to forget that on page one I agreed to the fact that SEE in and if itself is not a language, rather another mode of English.

This quote was pulled from page 3.

Why so defensive about it then? THIS is what we're getting at.....

 

[shel90]

I like how we all seem to forget that on page one I agreed to the fact that SEE in and if itself is not a language, rather another mode of English.

This quote was pulled from page 3.

Then in that same quote you pulled from page 3, you had to say that people here disliked English.

I have been well aware that SEE is MCE, just don't understand why it seems people here seem to dislike English

That didnt help your case, didnt it? It just made it sound like just because we say SEE is too cumbersome, therefore, we dislike English.

That is how the flaming gets started. From simple comments like these that judge us and then you and others blame us. You did it as well.

 

[Banjo]

We type in English here at AllDeaf.com, therefore we vehemently hate English. Yeah, I can see the logic here.

 

[posts from hell]

Then in that same quote you pulled from page 3, you had to say that people here disliked English.

I have been well aware that SEE is MCE, just don't understand why it seems people here seem to dislike English

That didnt help your case, didnt it? It just made it sound like just because we say SEE is too cumbersome, therefore, we dislike English.

That is how the flaming gets started. From simple comments like these that judge us and then you and others blame us. You did it as well.

And we present the Owl Sock!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*fanfare*

 

[CSign]

Then in that same quote you pulled from page 3, you had to say that people here disliked English.

I have been well aware that SEE is MCE, just don't understand why it seems people here seem to dislike English

That didnt help your case, didnt it? It just made it sound like just because we say SEE is too cumbersome, therefore, we dislike English.

That is how the flaming gets started. From simple comments like these that judge us and then you and others blame us. You did it as well.

I said people here "seem to dislike English" which was my perception. I was villified because I chose to use English (SEE) instead of ASL. Everyone was all up in arms about the fact that I didn't use ASL first and I must be an "Audist" since I place such "high value on English".

The fact is I was in a much better position to provide my son with access to language through SEE because I was already fluent in English. All I had to do was learn the signs to give him complete access to it.

I think we can all agree that the time for acquiring language is in the first 5 years of life, and I didn't want my son to miss out. I also didn't want to haphazardly provide him with "access" to a language I did not know.

I made a point to work hard, and fully commit to learning the signs to support the spoken language surrounding my son.

It had nothing to do with whether or not I "value ASL". It had everything to do with the fact that in the early years I would have been a poor language model for him. Chances are good had I made a different choice, he wouldn't have done as well as he has.

 

[Daredevel7]

I said people here "seem to dislike English" which was my perception. I was villified because I chose to use English (SEE) instead of ASL. Everyone was all up in arms about the fact that I didn't use ASL first and I must be an "Audist" since I place such "high value on English".

The fact is I was in a much better position to provide my son with access to language through SEE because I was already fluent in English. All I had to do was learn the signs to give him complete access to it.

I think we can all agree that the time for acquiring language is in the first 5 years of life, and I didn't want my son to miss out. I also didn't want to haphazardly provide him with "access" to a language I did not know.

I made a point to work hard, and fully commit to learning the signs to support the spoken language surrounding my son.

It had nothing to do with whether or not I "value ASL". It had everything to do with the fact that in the early years I would have been a poor language model for him. Chances are good had I made a different choice, he wouldn't have done as well as he has.

LOL.... the bolded just added fuel to the fire.

Sigh.......I am all for parents making their own reasonable choices, including using SEE, but.....CSign, I honestly don't think you know what you're even saying sometimes.

 

[Rio]

Here we go again:roll:

 

[shel90]

I said people here "seem to dislike English" which was my perception. I was villified because I chose to use English (SEE) instead of ASL. Everyone was all up in arms about the fact that I didn't use ASL first and I must be an "Audist" since I place such "high value on English".

The fact is I was in a much better position to provide my son with access to language through SEE because I was already fluent in English. All I had to do was learn the signs to give him complete access to it.

I think we can all agree that the time for acquiring language is in the first 5 years of life, and I didn't want my son to miss out. I also didn't want to haphazardly provide him with "access" to a language I did not know.

I made a point to work hard, and fully commit to learning the signs to support the spoken language surrounding my son.

It had nothing to do with whether or not I "value ASL". It had everything to do with the fact that in the early years I would have been a poor language model for him. Chances are good had I made a different choice, he wouldn't have done as well as he has.

Look, this is not about what you have done with your son.


This is about how you worded some of your comments that offended people and how you choose not to take some responsibility for them. Instead, you just defend them and then justify your reasons for using SEE which is totally unrelated. We are not asking you why you chose it but why you complain about being judged when you are doing the same thing as well?

 

[GrendelQ]

Let me remind you this...


I've read on here many times that SEE is not a language. That comment is misleading, as it is a language.... English.

Very very first sentence in this thread.

What's going in here? So hard up for something to argue about that people need to dredge up comments from last year's threads that have already been argued to death and start up the argument all over again?

 

[shel90]

What's going in here? So hard up for something to argue about that people need to dredge up comments from last year's threads that have already been argued to death and start up the argument all over again?

That was at the very begining of this very thread by the OP. Not from another thread from last year.

Again, if you want to complain about people arguing, then I recommend not to make comments like these. It just judgemental and can lead to more flaming. Not a wise idea.

 

[posts from hell]

What's going in here? So hard up for something to argue about that people need to dredge up comments from last year's threads that have already been argued to death and start up the argument all over again?

hahahaha another underhanded attempt here. It's hard to believe I once had respect for you.

 

[Jane B.]

What's going in here? So hard up for something to argue about that people need to dredge up comments from last year's threads that have already been argued to death and start up the argument all over again?

That was at the very begining of this very thread by the OP. Not from another thread from last year.

Again, if you want to complain about people arguing, then I recommend not to make comments like these. It just judgemental and can lead to more flaming. Not a wise idea.[/QUOTE

This is the thread from last year! Why re-argue it all?

 

[CSign]

LOL.... the bolded just added fuel to the fire.

Sigh.......I am all for parents making their own reasonable choices, including using SEE, but.....CSign, I honestly don't think you know what you're even saying sometimes.

I do not understand how I am adding fuel to the fire. It is pretty clear that a vocal group of individuals don't like me because of my statements about SEE. At no time did I ever say it was the "best thing" to do, or that it was better than ASL.

If you'll note, I titled the thread with a happy face to show that I had no negative intent.

 

[shel90]

That was at the very begining of this very thread by the OP. Not from another thread from last year.

Again, if you want to complain about people arguing, then I recommend not to make comments like these. It just judgemental and can lead to more flaming. Not a wise idea.[/QUOTE

This is the thread from last year! Why re-argue it all?

Then, ask Quendal why she posted post #655?

Why are you asking me?

 

[Beowulf]

How in the name of God did it become hearies versus deaf? This is nuts.

 

[AlleyCat]

And it's 3 (give or take) hearies versus all the deafies on this forum who actually experienced life with ASL or SEE for themselves. Some of us do know what we're talking about. Apparently life experience isn't enough to give us any credit. I guess we are spouting off nonsense -- that's what I don't get at all. What a not-so-new low. This reminds me of what happened at Office Depot today. I'll post that in another thread.