ASL, SEE, PSE, etc.

[jillio]

Typically hearing parents of a deaf child have never been around deaf people; they go to "experts" who do more to frighten them and bully them into using the experts favorite system than to reassure them.

Most parents do the best they can with what they know.

Children do the best they can given what they grew up with.

If anyone, hearing or deaf, doesn't understand this they must hate themselves and their parents. You can feel sorry for these people, you can offer them understanding -- But don't let them make their problems your problems.

If we knew each other and you wanted to be my friend I would learn SEE.[/QUOTE]

That's so sweet of you.

 

[InnocentOdion]

Gadgetki....in your case, from your post above, I'd suggest you use HOVRS.

What's that?

 

[Tousi]

What's that?

The Video Relay Service (VRS), Gadgetki was talking about. HOVRS is just one of about 15 VRS services in this country right now and I suggested HOVRS because it's my understanding that just about all of their staff (interpreters) use ASL exclusively.

 

[SxyPorkie]

ASL. was my first langauge.. but i married hearing man.... he had hard time understanding ASL... so i switched to PSE... now my family complained that i still use PSE... I guess I am using both...

 

[InnocentOdion]

The Video Relay Service (VRS), Gadgetki was talking about. HOVRS is just one of about 15 VRS services in this country right now and I suggested HOVRS because it's my understanding that just about all of their staff (interpreters) use ASL exclusively.

Oooh, okay! Thanks for that.

 

[BecLak]

As I am just beginning to learn sign language. ASL is by far the easiest. I am Australian and have checked out several signed languages such as AUSLAN, BSL, ASL, SEE, and PSE etc. I still find ASL the easiest to learn.

BTW, SEE is Sign Exact English; ASL is American Sign Language; but what does PSE stand for?

 

[dogmom]

Pidgin Signed English

 

[dogmom]

PSE - Manual Coded English System, not a language of itself

 

[BecLak]

Thanks Dogmom.

 

[dogmom]

BecLak

 

[KarissaMann05]

She is right. I am using SEE and have been all my life. Learning ASL, pretty tough because it is like I am addict to SEE and have a habit using SEE all the time. I rarely sign for 13 years and went back to SEE again. SEE and ASL are not the same. Can I ask why most rather use ASL than SEE? Why is it easier for them to use ASL than SEE, is it because it is quicker or...? I am trying to understand why there are three different deaf language today than just one. I have met many deaf people, some used ASL, SEE (rarely) and PSE. It is all not the same, it is hard to focus on what they are saying in ASL and PSE because I am used to SEE and in hearing world all my life.

Yeah, I understood what you do mean. I used to sign in SEE when I was a child, because my family depended on English language and now I'm kinda of mixed-up PSE and ASL. I don't sign in ASL very much, cos of my family sometime don't understand ASL. So I only use PSE mostly unless SEE is nesscasry for my family in order to understand better.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

I don't have a problem with SEE, cued speech, PSE, ASL or whatever system is being used. What I do have a problem with is when the systems are not clearly explained.

ASL is a language. PSE is a contact language resulting from a blending of English and ASL. I would imagine PSE has been co-existing with ASL as long there were English-speaking hearing people co-existing with Deaf people. Those two I would keep separate from the other manual methods for this reason.

Cued speech, SEE and CASE are completely unnatural and doesn't even make sense why or how they came into being other than methods developed by oralists. I have yet to see CASE in action, so I won't comment on it.

ASL and PSE shouldn't really be looked down upon. ASL is a language, beautiful in its own right. PSE is just... well.. it happens? You know? You can't really blame people for mixing ASL and English together.

For the other half? Well, I won't look down the people that grew up with them. It is not their fault that they grew up with cued speech or SEE. However the educators that choose to use it, well... if they are going to use it, they should EXPLAIN to the students what functions they serve and how they work. Otherwise, these students will grow up with no understanding of what they are using.

I have seen too many kids that get a blending of ASL/PSE, SEE and cued speech. It is terribly awkward when you see them convert between SEE and cued speech readily without even understanding the purpose of those systems. Then sometimes they would use SEE-only signs with the endings included, then switch to ASL conceptual signs out of the blue! Again, I don't really blame them. Why? I grew up with people that called themselves interpreters who did that! It confused the beezus out of me when I saw SEE and cued speech being used for the first time after using ASL for the first 10-14 years of my life. :roll: I had people try to instill SEE and cued speech into me, but I had managed to survive this attitude by using PSE; they didn't like it, but that was as far I was willing to compromise. So it's not the kids' fault for copying the "interpreters," they didn't know any better. So I applause any SEE or cued speech users that stick to one system, and feel empathy for the ones that can't distinguish the differences, but ASL or PSE is preferred on my end.

So I find the Deaf who turn away people who use SEE or cued speech to be ignorant. Anyone with an open-mind would at least try to make a connection, and would try to convince the SEE/cued speech users that ASL or PSE is easier and less cumbersome. Deaf people who turn away PSE should really look deep in themselves, because I have seen so-called ASL purists convert to PSE readily from time to time. Talk about hypocrisy?

I am glad to see I am not the only one that is grumpy about not finding good-quality interpreters. I blogged this issue earlier today.

 

[dogmom]

souggy, what is CASE?

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

Conceptually Accurate Signed English. One of the parents mentioned it to me, and showed me examples. But like I said, I need to see it for myself in order to understand its purpose.

But... yeah... in regards to the English sentence: "my nose is running."

ASL: NOSE+FLOW (complete with its own body language and facial expression)
PSE: MY NOSE+FLOW (may or may not lacks body language, but usually retains facial expressions)

SEE: MY NOSE IS RUN ING (often with muted facial expressions)

What I have been seeing lately is this format...

MY NOSE+FLOW (used cued speech in place of IS) RUN (used cued speech in place of ING)

I don't know where or how the three systems managed to mingle and formed that awkward way of communicating... but it's out there. None of the educational people format their sentences like that, but it seems to be something that is common with students that have experience with both SEE and cued speech and don't know the difference between the two. * sighs * They are really intelligent, once I figured out how to communicate with them, but they are confused.

 

[aaroncues]

Cued Speech = natural for native cuers

I take offense to the claim that Cued Speech is completely unnatural. This statement seems to be made out of ignorance. All you need to do is observe native deaf cuers interacting with each other at cue camps or social functions and you'll realize that deaf cuers are communicating naturally with each other just as hearing people do with spoken language. Deaf cuers have managed to turn an artificial code into a natural mode of communication out of necessity because it enabled their parents, siblings, and deaf peers to understand them better and facilitate better communication. We even have unconventional ways of cueing such as flipping the hand upside down or not moving our mouths out all which is "cue-whispering" in our own circles. I think that linguists would have a field day watching how deaf cuers interact with each other.

Cued Speech may be a "code" for spoken language, but deaf cuers acquire cued language in the same fashion that hearing people acquire spoken language and deaf signers acquire ASL.

When in your broad statement you have issues when these systems are "not clearly explained." I agree since Cued Speech is still widely misunderstood. Here's what I think about Cued Speech in context of the other systems. It should not even be considered in the same class or category since it's so drastically different from the signed English systems.

What I'm really intrigued by is your statement that some kids don't understand the difference behind PSE/SEE-type systems and Cued Speech. To be honest I've never seen this phenomenon in the United States. Is it really a rampant issue in Canada?

Now when we get into the mucky waters of mixing modalities, that's a whole another issue that I share your concerns in terms of education. The whole point behind Cued Speech is to improve access to the spoken language of your home and community. "Oralists" may consider Cued Speech too visual for them, but they also don't realize the benefits it has for those who don't get enough auditory input from cochlear implants or hearing aids. On the other hand deaf children who have hearing parents may not do as well language-wise because their parents are learning at too slow of a rate how to sign, delaying the child's language development.

There's at least one or two programs in Minnesota that I'm aware of where parents are given the option to decide how much exposure their children receive to sign language in addition to using Cued Speech. Typical scenario is that they use Cued Speech for English classes and depending on IEPs sign language for conceptual classes such as math. Perhaps the most ideal version of Bi-Bi educational programs?

Children have the capacity to learn many different modes of communication, but surely how they learn it is another story.

Some notes in terms of linguistics:

Cued American English should be considered a class of English, not a separate language on its own because cueing is just one form of expressing the same language just as speech and written prose are. When you cue, you cue the exact same information that you would as you speak. Sometimes I like to refer to cue-talking as the true form of simultaneous communication or "simcom." Difference Between Cued Speech, Cuem, Cued English, and CL

 

[dogmom]

for detailed explanation, souggy! That was very useful

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

Languages evolve naturally. Put two deaf people together without any language background, and they will develop their own language between the two of them over time. There is a case of this being studied about a sign language that is being developed naturally by a Deaf community.

I don't consider cued speech to be natural, because it wasn't created by the deaf, but rather imposed on them. Perhaps over time, it will be considered as such, but that will take more than a couple of decades. But since it did not evolve naturally, but rather just a system that someone had devised and wrote about. Does that make sense?

So the tone you are picking up is resentment and rejection of how I was raised. Nothing more. I can converse in cued speech and SEE, as long it is straight. However if ASL/PSE is mixed with SEE, I get confused. If cued speech is mixed with either one of the threes, I get confused. But yes, someone that is fluent in SEE or cued speech can use them with ease as long they can keep it pure.

The mixture of SEE and cued speech is not a problem here at all. One have to remember that to hearing folks, deaf education is a bloody petri dish for them. So the kids that are coming up with these pidgin forms of SEE and cued speech because they are from mainstream schools, which are unable to decide which system to stick with. From my experience, it is more a conflict of interest among the educators themselves, than the actual students, regarding which models is better: SEE or cued speech. There is a lot of politics going on among hearing "Teacher of the Deaf" and unfortunately kids are suffering from the internal bickerings.

For example: the middle school, which shall remain nameless, I went to, cued speech was used for words that "interpreters" didn't know, and SEE for words and phrases they do know. So if they hear a new word that they haven't seen in the dictionary, they will cue it, then look up the proper sign later. Honestly, they should really just fingerspell if they don't know the word. It sends a mixed message when the two systems are integrated. However this stupidity is because the parents wanted their kids raised to be in SEE, and the people in charge of the program wanted cued speech. So you have politics and conflict of interests happening here.

If the two systems were not being debated on which is preferable by educators, and consequently leading to blending I have described, I would not be so bitter about the whole ordeal or about how the upcoming generation are being raised. Granted, cued speech was created for a purpose and was kept separate from ASL and SEE for a LONG time, but now that "mainstreaming deaf kids in hearing classes" is the new trend... and hearing teachers don't know what they are doing... and are "experimenting"... :roll:

I live in Victoria, a tourist-orientated city, but was raised somewhere else since I only moved here in February, so there are a lots and lots of tourists here. but the ones I am talking about are young Americans who are on vacation to go to Alaska or some place in the Pacific.

I don't have a problem with cued speech, I can converse in it since I learned it from a heard-of-hearing in university. Although they are becoming less and less preferable for me because cued speech and SEE are irritating my RSI (repetitive strain injury) and is hard on my wrists; ASL/PSE doesn't do that. Specialising in computer, signing in three different modes, drumming, playing the guitar, being active in hands-on sports like rockclimbing tend to ruin the wrists faster; it is my fault for being so active and not resting my hands. Nowhere I was clearly militant against cued speech, but rather I am against how it is being used by the educators, unless you were reading between the lines?

I apologise that I offended you though. I come across as black-and-white in my approach, and I have gotten into trouble for not making my satires clear in the past. So I hope the above post will clear up any cloudy issues and provide insight in what I am talking about.

 

[shel90]

If the two systems were not being debated on which is preferable by educators, and consequently leading to blending I have described,

The blending of systems is the Total Communication Approach. I feel that it just sends a confusing message to the students.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

The blending of systems is the Total Communication Approach. I feel that it just sends a confusing message to the students.

Thank you. I always got a mixed understanding what Total Communications really means. When I look it up on the Internet, it is what I am describing. However, I always understood it to be synonymous with sim-com in conversations. But the two seem to be completely describing different methods when they are deprived of cultural meanings.

Edit: I really need to sleep more before posting. My English grammar ran itself into the ground after reading the above posts. Yuck.

 

[rockdrummer]

.........I don't consider cued speech to be natural, because it wasn't created by the deaf, but rather imposed on them..

I agree that cued speech did not evolve naturaly but to say it was imposed on the deaf (IMHO) is inaccurate.