Breaking the Code
- Thread starter loml
- Start date
jillio
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 60,232
- Reaction score
- 19
Statistic, please, on the spelling skills.
Jillio may be biased against CS, and she may not realize that CS' phonemic (rather than conceptual) basis is not a strike against the language, but I think this statement is over the top, not least because there is a need (and I suspect a greater demand than supply) for CS transliterators.
I would tentatively agree with you that some of the people who are strongly against cueing are against it in part because they have so much invested in ASL; but to suggest that they - or Jillio in particular - work as interpreters in order to have power over their clients is insulting and inaccurate. At best, it is a serious exaggeration; at worst, it is nothing more than an ad hominem attack.
A lot of the resentment against cueing - and I've seen some of it first hand, in my attempts to find people to practice my cueing with - comes from historical mistrust of oralism. Whether that link is true or not, it doesn't do much good to foster distrust by making inflammatory statements. Even if the target of those statements is not going to agree with you anyway, it doesn't present a good image to bystanders.
Indeed my approach has been harsh, that is the reality of the deaf education debate.
My over the top statement is what it is. Many people in the field of deaf education/support services etc. will not/cannot look at what they are doing.
These same people cannot let go of the past, but profess to be working in the "best interest of the child and family". I have seen the results of this approach and it has tragic impact on the futures of many children.
There is no logic to a debate with people who refuse to see the truth.
The research is never good enough for them, even when it is world wide.
The spoon feeding is over.
My over the top statement is what it is. Many people in the field of deaf education/support services etc. will not/cannot look at what they are doing.
These same people cannot let go of the past, but profess to be working in the "best interest of the child and family". I have seen the results of this approach and it has tragic impact on the futures of many children.
There is no logic to a debate with people who refuse to see the truth.
The research is never good enough for them, even when it is world wide.
The spoon feeding is over.
jillio
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 60,232
- Reaction score
- 19
Yes, I do have a dedication to ASL because language acquisition involves, to the largest degree, acquisition of conceptual information. Discrimination of phonemes does not necessarily correlate with increased literacy. Positive correlation exists only in ability to discriminate phonetic markers. Discrimination of these markers does not increase the conceptual understanding. Knowing that "peach" and "beach" sound different because of beginning phonemes, and adding visual cues to make these differences visable does nothing to illustrate the conceptual difference between a beach and a peach. For that, a language that provides conceptual information is necessary.
It is the same as one who increases vocabulary through memorization of numerous word lists, but has no idea of the meaning construed through the use of the word memorized and consistently uses the word out of context. Has this individual truly increased his vocabulary, or has he simply given his long term memory some exercise? Concept must naturally come before discrimination. It is concept that gives that which is perceived meaning.
It is the same as one who increases vocabulary through memorization of numerous word lists, but has no idea of the meaning construed through the use of the word memorized and consistently uses the word out of context. Has this individual truly increased his vocabulary, or has he simply given his long term memory some exercise? Concept must naturally come before discrimination. It is concept that gives that which is perceived meaning.
A missed point
It seems that a major benefit of Cued English has been missed in this discussion. The situation which I refer to occurs when a deaf child is part of a hearing family. If this child's primary language is ASL, he or she often has no real language model in the home. Too frequently hearing parents do not become proficient at ASL in a rapid enough manner to keep up with the language needs of a growing child. A hearing parent who chooses Cued English (or Cued Spanish or any other Cued Language) as a communication modality does not need to first learn English (or Spanish or whatever their native language is). It is already the language of the home. They only need to learn how to visually represent the sounds so that their child will be included in the conversations around him or her. While so many people talk of Deaf Culture, they make no mention of the fact that this may not be the culture of the home. A child should grow up in the culture of their home. When the culture of the home is Deaf Culture then it is their culture, but if the culture of the home relies on spoken English, then the child needs to understand, and be fluent in, the same English as his or her parents. They should understand the same colloquialisms, the same jokes, the same expressions. I don't mean to imply that there's no place for multi-culturalism, in fact the more one learns of another culture, the more understanding and compassion is generated. Learning multiple languages is one component that enhances such understanding. But it is important for a growing child to have a proficient 1st language model within the home, no matter what that language might be.
I could go on and profess the improvements in literacy rates which have been researched and published. (LaSasso and Metzger 1998 Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education), (LaSasso, Crain, & Leybaert, 2003 Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Eduation), (Leybaert, 1993 Psychological perspectives on deafness), but the publications do speak for themselves.
It seems that a major benefit of Cued English has been missed in this discussion. The situation which I refer to occurs when a deaf child is part of a hearing family. If this child's primary language is ASL, he or she often has no real language model in the home. Too frequently hearing parents do not become proficient at ASL in a rapid enough manner to keep up with the language needs of a growing child. A hearing parent who chooses Cued English (or Cued Spanish or any other Cued Language) as a communication modality does not need to first learn English (or Spanish or whatever their native language is). It is already the language of the home. They only need to learn how to visually represent the sounds so that their child will be included in the conversations around him or her. While so many people talk of Deaf Culture, they make no mention of the fact that this may not be the culture of the home. A child should grow up in the culture of their home. When the culture of the home is Deaf Culture then it is their culture, but if the culture of the home relies on spoken English, then the child needs to understand, and be fluent in, the same English as his or her parents. They should understand the same colloquialisms, the same jokes, the same expressions. I don't mean to imply that there's no place for multi-culturalism, in fact the more one learns of another culture, the more understanding and compassion is generated. Learning multiple languages is one component that enhances such understanding. But it is important for a growing child to have a proficient 1st language model within the home, no matter what that language might be.
I could go on and profess the improvements in literacy rates which have been researched and published. (LaSasso and Metzger 1998 Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education), (LaSasso, Crain, & Leybaert, 2003 Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Eduation), (Leybaert, 1993 Psychological perspectives on deafness), but the publications do speak for themselves.
Cousin Vinny
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2005
- Messages
- 725
- Reaction score
- 1
Came across this funny video clip; I don't know if the actor is actually using Cued English or just making it up as he went along. As far as I know, there was never a Cued Club at Gallaudet, either.
Now, the News at Gallaudet
And yes, the actor also did a similiar skit using the Rochester Method, so it appears no manually-coded English Sign Language model is safe from skewering!
Now, the News at Gallaudet
And yes, the actor also did a similiar skit using the Rochester Method, so it appears no manually-coded English Sign Language model is safe from skewering!
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 45,079
- Reaction score
- 322
Have u ever tried lipreading English without any hearing at all? Try it and u can understand how your deaf child would feel trying to understand what everyone is saying. It is very tough..trust me cuz I was in the same shoes as that deaf child in a hearing family who wont learn ASL. Learning some ASL is better than nothing...
I have, and the difficulty of reading lips is *exactly* why cued speech was developed.
Yeah, that's not cueing. Given all the complaints I've seen about hearing people mocking ASL, I'm surprised to see a Deaf person mocking another individual's choice of language like that. Actually, I guess it's not surprising - just unfortunate.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 45,079
- Reaction score
- 322
Ok what if the child doesnt have a strong grasp of the English language? From my understanding, the child must have a strong understanding of English for CS to make sense.
The idea behind CS is this: it's possible for a hearing family to learn it quickly enough that their child will learn English (with cues) by modeling, just like a hearing child learns English or a DoD child learns ASL. Cued English uses three parts - hand shape, hand placement, and lip shape (or rather, all the parts of lip reading) to convey the phonemes that make up spoken English.
Obviously, the merits of CS are debatable. But children raised with CS speak English as their first language.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 45,079
- Reaction score
- 322
Any research proving that it is successful in the long run?
That argument's been done here, so I won't revisit it.
My point is just that a family that uses cued speech is not necessarily any more exclusive of its deaf members than a family that uses ASL, because cued speech provides a visual interface that spoken English (as in your example) doesn't have, lip reading notwithstanding.
jillio
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 60,232
- Reaction score
- 19
Absolutely, shel. If the child does not have a large English vocabulary, then the cuing offers only meaningless clues to phonemes. If you were to speak English, and encounter someone who, for instance, spoke Hungariean, you would be able to hear the differrent phonemes, but the sounds would be meaningless, because you are unable to grasp the concept. Likewise with a HH or deaf child that is trying to grasp conceptual meaning from English sounds that are cued. They may know that "peach" and "beach" employ different phonemes, but if they do not have the conceptual knowledge of what a peach and a beach are, the phoneme discrimination is useless.
This is true, as far as it goes; a family that randomly starts cueing around a deaf child is not that far different from a family that suddenly starts speaking Hungarian (to use your example) around a hearing child who doesn't speak English.
But how, then, does a hearing child gain the conceptual knowledge of what a beach and a peach are? They don't have any inherent advantage w.r.t. conceptual knowledge over a deaf child; their only advantage is that they have a tool (namely, the ability to recognize phonemes) that a deaf child does not. So, given a deaf child in the language acquisition phase, cued speech provides that tool.
Again, whether or not cued speech is the best language choice is debatable. But there is no inherent conceptual linkage - even for a hearing child - between the sound "beach" and the concept beach, or the sound "peach" and the concept peach. Language consists of a set of socialized representations of ideas, and a conceptual linkage is not required - look at all the false cognates in the world, for instance (English 'gift' versus the German 'Gift'), or the existence of constructed languages.
jillio
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 60,232
- Reaction score
- 19
Oh, but there is a conceptual link, and this is a main reason for my support of sign from an early age. Hearing children, because of their particular cognitions, link the symbol (spoken word) to the concept as it is applied in context. Because they can hear the words spoken that imply context, and can grasp the nuances, they are able to make the link between concept and symbol. Deaf/hh kids when exposed to sign, make the same sort of natural link between symbol (sign) and concept. They naturally rely on their visual sense to make sense of their world the same way a hearing child naturally relies on their auditory sense to make sense of their world. They don't have to taught to do this, it is inherent from birth.
However, to get a deaf/hh child to make that same natural progression form symbol to concept, they must first be taught that what they perceive visually, is related to movements of the mouth, and that movements of themouth are just another symbol for the concept. It adds another step into the process of linking symbol to concept. Moreover, it is an artificial step for them, as they do not perceive auditorily. This is the reason that so many deaf/hh kids in oral programs are so severely language dealyed, and the reason many more have vocabulary deficits.
You can think of it this way: when a hearing child starts school, they have already learned that a chair, and the sound that they hear (chair) are representative of the same thing. Then, they must learn that when they see the printed word "chair" it is simply a different symbol for the same thing (concept.) At the age of 5 or 6 they are developmentally ready to make that progression to understanding that there may be several different symbols that represent the same concept. However, a child of 1 year, 2 years, or even 3 years is not developmentally ready to process such a complicated concept. Even though the information may be presented to them, they are simply not ready to absorb it.
However, to get a deaf/hh child to make that same natural progression form symbol to concept, they must first be taught that what they perceive visually, is related to movements of the mouth, and that movements of themouth are just another symbol for the concept. It adds another step into the process of linking symbol to concept. Moreover, it is an artificial step for them, as they do not perceive auditorily. This is the reason that so many deaf/hh kids in oral programs are so severely language dealyed, and the reason many more have vocabulary deficits.
You can think of it this way: when a hearing child starts school, they have already learned that a chair, and the sound that they hear (chair) are representative of the same thing. Then, they must learn that when they see the printed word "chair" it is simply a different symbol for the same thing (concept.) At the age of 5 or 6 they are developmentally ready to make that progression to understanding that there may be several different symbols that represent the same concept. However, a child of 1 year, 2 years, or even 3 years is not developmentally ready to process such a complicated concept. Even though the information may be presented to them, they are simply not ready to absorb it.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 45,079
- Reaction score
- 322
Yea, it makes sense cuz I teach first grade and my student's ASL development are that of a 3 to 4 year old and I have to teach them English in print in which they are not ready to make that transition but by law, I have to follow the 1st grade curriculm. I do make several modification to meet their language needs but the state and the laws dont recongize the need for a specialized curriculm. Most of my students came to my school at the age of 3 to 4 with no language. I asked the speech specialist at my school about cued speech and they said the students' L1 languages is not strong enough for cued speech.
Last edited:
Hear Again
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2005
- Messages
- 20,114
- Reaction score
- 5
Southern,
You can learn more about Cued Speech here:
Cued Speech Discovery--What Is Cued Speech?
What Is Cued Speech?What is Cued Speech?
Cued Speech is a visual communication system — mouth movements of speech combine with “cues” to make all the sounds (phonemes) of spoken language look different.
What are the “cues”?
When cueing English, eight handshapes distinguish consonant phonemes and four locations near the mouth distinguish vowel phonemes. A handshape and a location together cue a syllable.
Can I use Cued Speech with other communication systems?
Yes! Cued Speech complements all the various auditory and signed language approaches. The typical deaf cuer is flexible, able to communicate with speech, speechreading, Cued Speech, and signed language.
Why should I use Cued Speech?
Literacy is the original and primary goal of Cued Speech, by providing the appropriate phonemic language base for learning to read. Cued Speech also supports the development of lipreading, auditory discrimination, and speech
.
Can I use Cued Speech with other languages?
Cued Speech has been adapted to more than 55 languages and dialects! Cued Speech associations and centers are located around the world.
Who uses Cued Speech?
Persons who are concerned for those with speech, hearing, language, and literacy needs: Family members, friends, educators, speech-language pathologists, transliterators, audiologists, babysitters,…
Children and adults with communication, language and literacy needs
Whether an individual is able to hear or is unable to process auditory information effectively, Cued Speech presents spoken sounds visually, integrating the senses, to avoid confusion and frustration.
Cued Speech can accelerate learning the phonics of any language, articulation therapy and remediation of learning disabilities.
For individuals unable to speak, Nu-Vue-Cue adapts Cued Speech into a grid.
Children who are deaf or hard of hearing
With Cued Speech, deaf children see and absorb the same phonemic language that hearing children hear.
For children whose parents are deaf and whose native language is a signed language, Cued Speech can be used with other cuers and at school to facilitate the child’s acquisition of a second language, such as English.
Adults who are deaf or hard-of-hearing
Adults with progressive or sudden hearing loss find that Cued Speech helps
- overcome the frustration of lip-reading, and
- maintain functional speech.
What do research and experience tell us about Cued Speech?
Hearing
Cued Speech assists in processing auditory information by breaking through the confusion of incomplete and distorted sound. Continued use of Cued Speech can lead to significant improvement in speech discrimination. Cochlear implants and Cued Speech are powerful partners.
For many, Cued Speech accelerates the recognition of sounds received via the implant. Implant users of all ages appreciate the use of Cued Speech in difficult listening situations.
Speech
If development of speech is desired, Cued Speech can support speech and articulation skills by:
focusing attention on the mouth
reinforcing the pattern of phonemes within a word or phrase
identifying the speech sound(s) and syllables being targeted
being a motoric reminder and trigger of speech production
integrating sound, sight, and motor aspects to make learning more fun!
Speechreading
Cued Speech clarifies speechreading in cued situations and often improves speechreading in non-cued situations.
Language
Without additional disabilities, deaf children with four or more years of consistent use of Cued Speech master the syntax and grammar of spoken language.
Deaf students reach their full language and literacy potential if their family members and educators continue to communicate consistently with Cued Speech.
Deaf cuers often learn two or more languages.
Reading
Having access to and understanding the phonemic base of spoken languages is key to learning to read for ALL children. Cued Speech:
cues every phoneme
focuses attention on the sequence of sounds (phonemes) and syllables of language
provides visual access to rhyming
enables the child to develop a complete phonemic model of language
With consistent, effective use, deaf children who communicate with Cued Speech develop the language base that enables them to read at the same level and use similar reading strategies as if they were hearing. Cued Speech use can solve the literacy problem for most deaf children.
National Cued Speech Association (NCSA):
National Cued Speech Association