Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Please show me evidence of that.

Originally Posted by jillio

Show me evidence of the opposite.

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

I allready have but here it is again.
ASL - American Sign Language
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/R...istoryASL.html
History of ASL
American Sign Language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
American Sign Language History
History of ASL
American Sign Language (ASL)

It's my understanding that Gallaudet was a the major player in the evolution of ASL from OFSL. To my knowledge, Gallaudet was hearing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Originally Posted by jillio

Well, the way I understand it is that American sign language was already being used with the same syntax, grammar, and pragmatics. Where Gaulledat came in wa with the educational methods used to teach deaf children using their native sign language. American Sign Language did not really evolve per se, from OFSL. The one handed alphabet was adopted from OFSL, but a language structure was already in place. Gaulladet used the educational methods based on the natural language of sign. He did not originate it, nor did he cause it to evolve. He simply figured out how to use it in ways that allow educational contact across cultures.

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Never did I say that terps were brought to you by the hearing. You are the one that brought up terps. I just provided some information that I found on the history.

Please re-read what I said. ASL was evolved by hearing people but the basis was derived from the deaf communities. I am agreeing with you on the roots of ASL but not on the evolution of it. I hope that is clear. If not then please research the history of ASL and draw your conclusion from that. If the sources I provided are not accurate please porvide me with sources that have differing information. I'm not really a hard guy to convince if you provide me with the information and sources that contradict what I have found. As far as various forms of sign... if you say I am confused then what would you call the things that I listed?
Just as there is no evidence that it is true that NAD lurked. At least I have not come across it yet. Lack of a fact doesn't make it true and maybe is only specutlation. Show me sources that contradict what I provided and I will be more than happy to entertain them.


That statement shows me that you didn't even read through those links. If you had you would know that the hearing aid was not invented by a deaf scientist as you claim. You would find that they are not even sure exactly who invented the hearing aid. They started as horn shaped objects fashioned from wood most likely by a HOH person. Not a deaf scientist as you claim. Read through the information and if you don't agree with it, that's ok. Show me proof including sources that contradict what I have found and I am more than happy to check into it. Just stating what you belive to be true without evidence to back it up is not what I would consider a reliable source. Please don't take that personally. I always need sources to back up claims such as what you have made. I read your claims, investigated them and found sources that contradict them. Thus my response. I am open to reviewing any sources you may have that back up what you claim.

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

The way I read it was that Clerc and Gallaudet combined Old signed French (based on OFSL) and English grammar to form Old signed English also known as methodical signs. The combinations of the old methodical signs with the indigenous signs used in CT at that time are what formed ASL. There is no evidence that indigenous signs were common in different regions of America. MVSL while indigenous played a relatively minor role in the development of ASL. I suppose that technically one could argue that ASL would not exist if it weren’t for what Gallaudet brought and the local sign language of CT at the time. It’s the formation of ASL which brought a common sign language to the deaf population of America. I would suggest that Gallaudet played a major roll in that evolution.

Originally Posted by flip

We will never agree on those matters as this is wordpicking and twistings of definitions. For example, I totally agree with you that the HOH man invented the horn. I could claim, that in the past, they was old folks with deaf ears. Today they are called aged civil engineers that have lost some hearings. There is no problem twisting facts to your statements, or mine.

If you look at the timeline of NAD at their website, CC is mentioned as milestones, with examples of contact with the goverment, while CI not is. There are only concerns about CI in that timeline. But I am sure you will find this speculative, too? You do not need to reply on this one, I just want to use this as an example on obvious statements that you are asking for evidence about.

You should of feel free to use the term "various forms of sign" if you like it, but you sometimes seems to add ASL into that basked, like you did with evolution of sign language. Another label could be "various forms of visual english". But, then, I would not be surprised if we could find out if a person are a pro-oral/pro-CI or pro-ASL/anti-CI by asking if he prefers the label "various forms of sign", or "various forms of visual english"

If you really are a guy that not is hard to convince, could I ask you about examples on where you have changed positions in the area of deafness, and why you changed that position and on what evidences?

Originally Posted by Capmeister

One of your own links said this:

"In 1817, Gallaudet founded the nation's first school for the deaf. It was called American Asylum and was located in Hartford, Connecticut. Clerc was the first sign language teacher in America. Though the students used Gallaudet's form of sign language, him and Clerc also noticed that they used another form of sign language outside of the classroom. Gallaudet realized that this was their 'natural language,' and it was free of all grammar and shortened sentences down to key phrases. This 'natural language' later became known as American Sign Language.

Originally Posted by Capmeister

"We may never know..." might be the key here. Honestly, I'm not even sure what difference it makes.

Originally Posted by Capmeister

One of your own links said this:

"In 1817, Gallaudet founded the nation's first school for the deaf. It was called American Asylum and was located in Hartford, Connecticut. Clerc was the first sign language teacher in America. Though the students used Gallaudet's form of sign language, him and Clerc also noticed that they used another form of sign language outside of the classroom. Gallaudet realized that this was their 'natural language,' and it was free of all grammar and shortened sentences down to key phrases. This 'natural language' later became known as American Sign Language.

Originally Posted by flip

Rockdrummer, the word is peace!

Thank you for explaining what you mean with "convince", and your present position, I appreciate that.

While you are searching for hard facts and evidence about evolution of ASL, I can tell you that those of us who went to a deaf school in the old days, with teachers that sucked at something that barely looked like SEE, remember how kids learnt sign language from older students, and the older students learnt from adult deafs. Even with threats and physical violence, this process went on, and those kids learned sign language to the next generation when they got adults.

With this perspective, I think it is like a X-files episode, when someone claims that ASL evolved from hearing people.

For sources, I can recommend books from Gallaudet Press. They got everything, even books favoring speech. "Deaf Heritage" for example have some fascinating stories, maybe not so political, but entertaining.

Good luck in your search for the truth.

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

It was based on a comment that I said in which I beleived (based on what I have read) that hearing (Gallaudet in particular) played a roll in the evolution of ASL. Tha'ts what sparked the conversation. It's ok and hopefully a learning process for all involved including myself.

Originally Posted by Boult

rockdrummer,
not sure if you had this one;
http://www.alldeaf.com/sign-language...story-asl.html

Originally Posted by Capmeister

Ah, okay. Somewhere I missed that. (I admit I sometimes skim or am distracted while reading.)

I think NO one man could have played a huge role in the evolution of any langauge. Language lives in the people who use it. It evolves out of necessity and brevity and hopefully out of some amount of astheics.

Here in Michigan the sign most used for store is a modified sign for "Indian." Why? Because of the wooden Indian statues that used to stand outside most stores in Michigan's early history. My brother's sign for Sunday (which I use and forget to use the more wide spread sign with others) is an open hand where the thumb rubs away from the side of the chin twice. It's from his deaf school in North Carolina, if I remember right, and he uses it so I learned it. We use a T at the forehead (like an M for moron) to sign "twerp." This is just the common way language evolves.

I don't spend a lot of time with deaf kids, but my brother tells me that signing "Ha ha ha" has been replaced with fingerspelling LOL among many kids.

Makes sense... I will fingerspell BRB for "be right back."

Unless more hearing people have been using ASL than deaf people, ASL's past and present changes are owed overwhelmingly to the deaf.

I tried like the devil to get my brother to except the sign for "all" with a Y handshape for "y'all." He refuses. Silly deafling.