Receptive abilities!!

J

JonRobrt

New Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
Hello Everyone,

I had my first ASL test last week and did poorly on the receptive portion:tears: I visited the sign lab right before class and it helped on the 'expressive' part of the test but, hurt on the 'receptive' part!!

After all of this I need to ask everyone on here if they can give me some suggestions on 'where' in Missouri to go to sign with deaf people?? I can memorize signs until the cows come home but, it is not doing me much good on my receptive skills.

Also, I have noticed something on this forum that I find very interesting. First, ASL structure is (as you know) very different from English speech structure. And when I read the posts of deaf individuals on this forum I notice that they seem to type English phrases in ASL structure (some of them, not all) Is this a correct observation or is it incorrect??? Can I sign these posts directly and be using correct ASL structure???


Thanks for the help!!

John
 
JonRobrt said:
Hello Everyone,

I had my first ASL test last week and did poorly on the receptive portion:tears: I visited the sign lab right before class and it helped on the 'expressive' part of the test but, hurt on the 'receptive' part!!

After all of this I need to ask everyone on here if they can give me some suggestions on 'where' in Missouri to go to sign with deaf people?? I can memorize signs until the cows come home but, it is not doing me much good on my receptive skills.

Also, I have noticed something on this forum that I find very interesting. First, ASL structure is (as you know) very different from English speech structure. And when I read the posts of deaf individuals on this forum I notice that they seem to type English phrases in ASL structure (some of them, not all) Is this a correct observation or is it incorrect??? Can I sign these posts directly and be using correct ASL structure???


Thanks for the help!!

John
Click to expand...

Can't answer your question of where to go in Missouri, but can tell you that the receptive skills are the difficult part. Just as a deaf oral child's receptive skills applied to spoken languge are usually less than their expressive skills. The reason is simple. You are attempting to translate the visual into the oral/auditory. You are trying to give every single sign an English word equivilent and then put that into English synatx prior to understanding the message. It gets easier with time and hard work.

We actually only have one poster that writes in true ASL syntax. The syntax differences you are seeing are more of a PSE syntax.
 
jillio said:
Can't answer your question of where to go in Missouri, but can tell you that the receptive skills are the difficult part. Just as a deaf oral child's receptive skills applied to spoken languge are usually less than their expressive skills. The reason is simple. You are attempting to translate the visual into the oral/auditory. You are trying to give every single sign an English word equivilent and then put that into English synatx prior to understanding the message. It gets easier with time and hard work.

We actually only have one poster that writes in true ASL syntax. The syntax differences you are seeing are more of a PSE syntax.
Click to expand...

I totally disagree. First of all deaf try hard to speak english and when they fail at the grammar it's just messed up english not asl or pse. Their minds think in sign not words they don't asl gloss like we can do. Those who are deaf and don't have the english skills mastered, just type wrong english eventhough most of it is understandable. English written and spoken is really messed up compared to other languages like french spanish and japanese so it is hard to master. So kudos to those that do.

Now on receptive skills, I again disagree. If you are constantly exposed to asl whether dvd's or deaf, you're receptive skills will excel far faster than your expressive skills. I can understand deaf just fine and my signing asl is good albeit behind the receptive. Now suppose you learn from a book, and you don't really get to associate with deaf, then 1: you're not signing asl and 2: you will sign better than your receptive. You have to be around the language and use it to learn it and use it. Properly learning asl is like properly learning spanish or french, you will be able to read and understand first before you can correctly express yourself in that language.
 
Yup, I've seen it; almost without exception, the receptive skills are honed last.
 
It is the opposite for me. I can understand any ASL native users but cant sign like them.

My husband's expressive skills in ASL are better than his receptive skills.


I think everyone is different...
 
robbielyn said:
I totally disagree. First of all deaf try hard to speak english and when they fail at the grammar it's just messed up english not asl or pse. Their minds think in sign not words they don't asl gloss like we can do. Those who are deaf and don't have the english skills mastered, just type wrong english eventhough most of it is understandable. English written and spoken is really messed up compared to other languages like french spanish and japanese so it is hard to master. So kudos to those that do.

Now on receptive skills, I again disagree. If you are constantly exposed to asl whether dvd's or deaf, you're receptive skills will excel far faster than your expressive skills. I can understand deaf just fine and my signing asl is good albeit behind the receptive. Now suppose you learn from a book, and you don't really get to associate with deaf, then 1: you're not signing asl and 2: you will sign better than your receptive. You have to be around the language and use it to learn it and use it. Properly learning asl is like properly learning spanish or french, you will be able to read and understand first before you can correctly express yourself in that language.
Click to expand...

Respectfully disagree. Receptive skills are the ones that become fluent last, especially in hearing signers.

And regarding your assumptions ont he grammar and syntax errors, again, I respectfully disagree. The errors that are made are exactly those errors that can be expected to be made when translating froma visual spatial language to an auditory/verbal language. Errors not only in syntax and grammar, but in sequencing, the use of "s" to denote plurals, the use of articles and prefixes and word endings. And if you will look at the structure of
PSE, it mimics this structure, and was devised to reduce the amount of signing necessary to produce an MCE by removing those items that are specific to spoken English.
 
shel90 said:
It is the opposite for me. I can understand any ASL native users but cant sign like them.

My husband's expressive skills in ASL are better than his receptive skills.


I think everyone is different...
Click to expand...

Ahh, the difference most likely is that you are a deaf signer,and even though raised orally, were still very visually oriented. Your husband is a hearing signer so the opposite would be true. When I commented regarding receptive skills, I was referring to hearing signers, as the poster was hearing. Sorry for the confusion.
 
jillio said:
Ahh, the difference most likely is that you are a deaf signer,and even though raised orally, were still very visually oriented. Your husband is a hearing signer so the opposite would be true. When I commented regarding receptive skills, I was referring to hearing signers, as the poster was hearing. Sorry for the confusion.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and I, too, was referring to hearing people.
 
My experience as an interpreter, Interpreter Training Program instructor, and as a 2nd language learner has shown that people who learn ASL as a 2nd language usually don't really understand what they're good at and what they're not good at.

Students don't know ASL well enough to know how poorly the produce it. They memorize handshapes and movements and try to move their hands the way they've been taught, but they don't really know how well they're doing. The KNOW their receptive skills need work because they can't understand when someone signs to them.

Most newer interpreters think they're better at voice-to-sign interpreting than sign-to-voice interpreting. Again, it's because many haven't truly mastered the language enough to self-evaluate how well they're doing.

It is the expectation that interpreters should be more comfortable working from their SECOND language into their FIRST language. So interpreters who learn ASL as a second language (like me) should be better at sign-to-voice than voice-to-sign. This is because they have a greater vocabulary in their native language and they've experienced their native language used in all five registers of language (Frozen, Formal, Neutral, Casual, Intimate). Those of us who learned ASL as a second language rarely see ASL in the Frozen and Intimate registers (VRS is helping to expose interpreters to the Intimate register now more than ever).

So I guess I would say three things to the original poster:

1. You might not be AS good as you think you are at the expressive part. Your teachers are gentle in the first few classes, and you don't have the awareness to evaluate yourself accurately yet. But don't worry. This is completely okay, normal, and expected.

2. Your receptive skills seem worse because you're immediately aware that you can't understand when someone is signing to you. That is okay, too. Get as much exposure to ASL as you can. This is easier than ever with the wide variety of ASL signers on the web. Go to YouTube and search for Deaf. I wouldn't search for ASL because many new signers post videos and they don't sign like deaf people and if you learn from them, you'll be picking up bad habits. I'm not sure where you are in Missouri, but I grew up near St. Louis. I'm sure there are Deaf clubs in the larger cities like St. Louis, Kansas City, Columbia, even Joplin or Springfield. Just get as much exposure to Deaf native users of ASL as possible. Also visit Joey Baer’s ASL Vlog and Ella’s Flashlight. You can see some excellent samples of ASL there.

3. The learning trajectory that you're on seems to be appropriate. It will get easier if you work hard. But that is the key. You HAVE to work hard. Doing the minimum that your teacher requires will not get you there. When I was in college, I gave up a lot of social time with my friends to go to deaf events and befriend the deaf student on campus. I worked to get almost constant exposure and it helped me to develop near-native ASL fluency.

Good luck! Let me know if you have any questions that I can help with.
 
I know that while I was taiking classes my teacher suggested that we practice in front of a mirror. It did help with the receptive part but also let me see how well I really was or wasn't at my expressive as well. I found that at times I needed more work on that. I also went on line and found deaf clubs in the area and went to as many events as possible. The more you practice the more you improve.
 
jillio said:
Can't answer your question of where to go in Missouri, but can tell you that the receptive skills are the difficult part. Just as a deaf oral child's receptive skills applied to spoken languge are usually less than their expressive skills. The reason is simple. You are attempting to translate the visual into the oral/auditory. You are trying to give every single sign an English word equivilent and then put that into English synatx prior to understanding the message. It gets easier with time and hard work.

We actually only have one poster that writes in true ASL syntax. The syntax differences you are seeing are more of a PSE syntax.
Click to expand...

Wow, Jillio... my experience has been just the opposite. My receptive skills are MUCH more developed than my expressive. In trying to analyze why, I came up with this rationalization: as a hearing infant, I was subjected to sound and language on the input level from birth. I might not have understood it, mind you, but I was constantly barraged with auditory (and gestural) input. My own efforts to speak as a child would, at first, be unintelligible babbling. While I don't REMEMBER whether I understood spoken language before I was able to speak, myself... it's been my observation that most infants and toddlers seem to understand more receptively than they're able to articulate expressively. Which is how I've been able to console my ego for having such a disparity between my receptive and expressive skills.

So, please... don't shatter my illusions! :giggle:
 
InTheGenes said:
Wow, Jillio... my experience has been just the opposite. My receptive skills are MUCH more developed than my expressive. In trying to analyze why, I came up with this rationalization: as a hearing infant, I was subjected to sound and language on the input level from birth. I might not have understood it, mind you, but I was constantly barraged with auditory (and gestural) input. My own efforts to speak as a child would, at first, be unintelligible babbling. While I don't REMEMBER whether I understood spoken language before I was able to speak, myself... it's been my observation that most infants and toddlers seem to understand more receptively than they're able to articulate expressively. Which is how I've been able to console my ego for having such a disparity between my receptive and expressive skills.

So, please... don't shatter my illusions! :giggle:
Click to expand...

I won't shatter your delusions, at all, InTheGenes!:giggle: But, I will offer reasoning for your observations. While it is true in childhood that receptive skills often are more advanced than expressive, particularly when considering spoken language, the reasons are developmental. Children quite often understand more than they are able to articulate, but simply because they have not completed the developmental milestones necessary to achieve that level of articulation.
 
@ Chris (CI)

Thanks for the advice!

I should note that after my first test I wanted my teacher to see what I had rehearsed for the test. I signed in ASL a different 'expressive' sign set with the proper structure as demonstrated to me by a third year student. So I put a video of BOTH sets on YouTube and recently removed it (many mistakes). I received an 88 on that portion. AND, you are correct..my deaf teacher admitted he "went easy" on us regarding our scores. I have no delusions regarding my level of abilities, however, I do see how this could happen. It does require a great deal of work and in my case, "searching out" places to interact with proficient signers. I have found that communicating with my classmate is futile (on some level) because we may be signing incorrectly and neither of us is aware enough to know (as you mention). I am disappointed in my grades because I haven't gotten a "C" in 20 + years:-(( I will get over it but, Deaf Studies has presented a bigger challenge than I first expected. Still, this just excites me more. I do believe that there are some innate skills that help some people acquire these skills easier than others...

Thanks for the links in STL. I am going to the Deaf Film Festival at GSLAD on Saturday!!

Thanks again everyone for the insight!!
John
 
Chris: I'm familiar with the other registers, but what makes Frozen distinct from Formal?
 
ismi said:
Chris: I'm familiar with the other registers, but what makes Frozen distinct from Formal?
Click to expand...

Frozen texts are ones that do not change, such as the Lord's Prayer or the Pledge of Allegiance. Formal is usually something like a lecture or a public address, or other one-way presentation.

Religious ceremonies and sobriety meetings are common places for student and beginning interpreters to learn frozen ASL texts as they are often in need of volunteers. (Above a certain skill level of course.)
 
Back
Top