Asl speed limit

[TWA]

alex,

nope it isn't. ASL is faster for the form of commication. ASL rocks.

Audism? Nope. I've done the oral method. It's very cumbersome. I've done the SEE method. It's a good way to get vertigo. I've done/am doing the ASL method- it's much more fluid to use for conversing. This shirt makes perfect sense.

It's not audism if it's true! :fruit:

I'm not denying that ASL is great, and I'm not saying the other modes listed on the shirt are better (this is not about language superiority . . . :roll, but the truth is, (and you should know this DBG, given your linguistic training), is that the language/mode that is superior is the one that the user is most comfortable and proficient in using. How can ASL be "faster" than oralism or even SEE to someone who does not use it? So, this shirt is only "true" to people who are already fluent in ASL. To anyone who is not fluent in ASL, or chooses not to use it--which is that person's right--this shirt is claiming a form of superiority and classification akin to the same thing as when a hearing person claims spoken English is better.

I love most of you, but ya'll should be careful not to appear like hypocrites.

 

[deafbajagal]

Does this mean you don't love me. Wah, wah, wah.

I do know what you're saying. I also have sit in conversations with SEE users and believe me, it takes a lot longer to get stuff across than if they were conversing in ASL.

I personally know...let me count...12 people who were SEE users for a long time...then they switched over to ASL. I'm willing to bet all 12 of them will wear this shirt with pride to contest my "hypocrisy." Reason? ASL is a natural language. SEE is not. Spoken English is a natural language that doesn't come naturally for most deaf people.

I hope your pal Shel90 buys you this shirt for Christmas. Hehehe

 

[posts from hell]

I'm not denying that ASL is great, and I'm not saying the other modes listed on the shirt are better (this is not about language superiority . . . :roll, but the truth is, (and you should know this DBG, given your linguistic training), is that the language/mode that is superior is the one that the user is most comfortable and proficient in using. How can ASL be "faster" than oralism or even SEE to someone who does not use it? So, this shirt is only "true" to people who are already fluent in ASL. To anyone who is not fluent in ASL, or chooses not to use it--which is that person's right--this shirt is claiming a form of superiority and classification akin to the same thing as when a hearing person claims spoken English is better.

I love most of you, but ya'll should be careful not to appear like hypocrites.

OK. Just curious - are you saying any rate of speed of any language is largely dependent on the speaker?

I disagree solely on the fact ASL can convey an image that would take a paragraph or two of English within seconds. It would take the person a while to either write, read, or speak the same paragraph (SEE,Oralism, or written, your pick.)

I don't think it's the 1 person, but the general sense we should be looking at.

 

[TWA]

Does this mean you don't love me. Wah, wah, wah.

Not yet.

I do know what you're saying. I also have sit in conversations with SEE users and believe me, it takes a lot longer to get stuff across than if they were conversing in ASL.

Not if they don't know ASL.

I personally know...let me count...12 people who were SEE users for a long time...then they switched over to ASL. I'm willing to bet all 12 of them will wear this shirt with pride to contest my "hypocrisy." Reason? ASL is a natural language. SEE is not. Spoken English is a natural language that doesn't come naturally for most deaf people.

SEE sucks, duh, but if that's what a person prefers, that's going to be the most efficient form for them because they won't be fluent in any other form. Anyway, SEE is much harder to stack up against ASL in terms of efficiency. Oralism is another animal . . .

On many occasions, I have signed with people raised orally who were still learning ASL. We were able to communicate, but there was no denying that the communication was much slower than if we had just used our voices and read lips/hearing aids. However, we were committed to only signing, and so we did not switch to voice even though it would have been easier than slowly fingerspelling out every word they didn't know.

Tell me how ASL is faster in that situation? What I am trying to say it all depends on context. Also, when I am in a quiet environment with a hearing person, I can have a conversation at the same level as ASL, if not faster, because there is no stumbling. Again, it all depends on context. Stating something like "ASL is the most efficient language" is inherently false because of how linguistics operates.

I hope your pal Shel90 buys you this shirt for Christmas. Hehehe

Well, I'm not sure why you're bringing her up, but if she did give me a shirt like that, I would throw it away or kindly return it. I don't need to wear a shirt to know what language and mode of communicating I prefer.

 

[TWA]

OK. Just curious - are you saying any rate of speed of any language is largely dependent on the speaker?

I disagree solely on the fact ASL can convey an image that would take a paragraph or two of English within seconds. It would take the person a while to either write, read, or speak the same paragraph (SEE,Oralism, or written, your pick.)

I don't think it's the 1 person, but the general sense we should be looking at.

And I know many singular words and terms in English that must be fingerspelled or conveyed through multiple signs. It works both ways.

 

[Banjo]

Why so serious?

 

[Daredevel7]

Looks like we need to add a disclaimer on the back of the shirt that says "Assuming the person(s) is/are completely fluent on those languages/mode."

 

[TWA]

Why so serious?

Why do you contribute nothing to serious threads? Have an opinion? let's hear it.

 

[TWA]

Looks like we need to add a disclaimer on the back of the shirt that says "Assuming the person(s) is/are completely fluent on those languages/mode."

In which case, it would be clearly obvious to any fluent ASL user that ASL is the most efficient language. Which brings me back to my original post.

 

[Banjo]

Why do you contribute nothing to serious threads? Have an opinion? let's hear it.

Not sure what your problem is, but I don't care. However, since you asked me if I had an opinion or not. Here it is. ASL signers are able to carry conversations much quicker than the SEE signers. I should know, I'm fluent in SEE.

 

[TWA]

Not sure what your problem is, but I don't care. However, since you asked me if I had an opinion or not. Here it is. ASL signers are able to carry conversations much quicker than the SEE signers. I should know, I'm fluent in SEE.

See, now that wasn't so hard, was it? (No pun intended.)

I agree: fluent ASL signers converse much faster than fluent SEE signers, and you obviously prefer ASL. I prefer ASL. Most people prefer ASL. For the few who prefer SEE, they would choose SEE.

 

[webexplorer]

If you say that ASL is faster, then why you typed on your texted comment here instead of ASL?

 

[Deafguy25]

Looks like we need to add a disclaimer on the back of the shirt that says "Assuming the person(s) is/are completely fluent on those languages/mode."

If the person is fully fluent in both oral and ASL, they would be able to do both at the same speed (not at the same time of course). The research shows that ASL and speaking take the same amount of time to convey the same message. (I don't know SEE, so I have no opinion on that matter.)

 

[shel90]

I love that shirt and I think it was in reference to the modalities being used in the academic setting for deaf children.

I would buy it and wear it in public.

 

[TWA]

If the person is fully fluent in both oral and ASL, they would be able to do both at the same speed (not at the same time of course). The research shows that ASL and speaking take the same amount of time to convey the same message. (I don't know SEE, so I have no opinion on that matter.)

This is correct.

 

[shel90]

If the person is fully fluent in both oral and ASL, they would be able to do both at the same speed (not at the same time of course). The research shows that ASL and speaking take the same amount of time to convey the same message. (I don't know SEE, so I have no opinion on that matter.)

For me oralism is "huh?" , or "I didnt understand what you just said." or "Can you repeat that?"

Would take much longer than SEE for me to get the message the other person is trying to say.

That is the whole point of this joke.

I think it was meant in good humor.

 

[TWA]

I love that shirt and I think it was in reference to the modalities being used in the academic setting for deaf children.

If that's the case, then I would agree with it. Research shows that ASL is the easiest and quickest mode for children to adapt as their L1. No denying that.

I would buy it and wear it in public.

Fine, but don't get it for me as a Christmas present, because I won't.

 

[shel90]

If that's the case, then I would agree with it. Research shows that ASL is the easiest and quickest mode for children to adapt as their L1. No denying that.



Fine, but don't get it for me as a Christmas present, because I won't.

huh? I would buy it for my hubby so pppttth! You dont need another woman buying you gifts for Christmas!

 

[Banjo]

If the person is fully fluent in both oral and ASL, they would be able to do both at the same speed (not at the same time of course). The research shows that ASL and speaking take the same amount of time to convey the same message. (I don't know SEE, so I have no opinion on that matter.)

Depends on what kind of message is being conveyed, and also what language you are speaking in. There are languages where it takes quite a while to convey a simple message.

 

[Frisky Feline]

Umm. I didn't bring some dramas here but found this deaf humor shirt. But i understand what you mean.