What about signwriting?

rockdrummer · 09-04-2007, 12:59 PM

I came across this site today on SignWriting. What do you guys think about this concept and do you think it has a pratical use?

SignWriting: Write Sign Languages

Thanks

jillio · 09-04-2007, 02:00 PM

ASL is already visual. It doesn't need another mode to make it visable. Plus, it doesn't translate to written form as it is spatially oriented.

rockdrummer · 09-04-2007, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

ASL is already visual It doesn't need another mode to make it visable. Plus, it doesn't translate to written form as it is spatially oriented.

Did you see the site? The way it's accomplished is spatial. It's not writing in words, It's writing in signs and does so in a 3 column format from top to bottom. Have a look at the link and let me know what you think.
Here's some examples
Writing ASL Grammar In SignWriting
Writing ASL Grammar In SignWriting
Writing ASL Grammar In SignWriting
Writing ASL Grammar In SignWriting
Learn To Read ASL Intro p2
Learn To Read ASL p3

rockdrummer · 09-05-2007, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Plus, it doesn't translate to written form as it is spatially oriented.

Quote:

Vertical columns establish "the center of the body", which in turn helps the eye take notice of Spatial Comparisons.

When the hands, the head or the torso are placed "off center", the changes in body shifts are clearly evident

Source: Writing ASL Grammar In SignWriting

jillio · 09-05-2007, 12:18 PM

I went back to the sight, and reviewed it again. I suppose it could be useful in some given situations, especially for the child who has been language deprived, and has not internalized the concept of a symbol representing an actual concept. Like the sign (symbol) for chair represents a chair, and the printed word "chair" is a different symbol, but represents the same thing.

When my son wa a toddler, I ordered a bunch of story books from Gallaudet that were traditional children's books that had the signs below the printed text. As a result of these books, my son learned that the sign and the printed word were both symbols representing the same concept. It wasn't something that had to be explained in detail, he was able to intuit it from the use of the two langauges together that way. When he was very small, I also used flashcards with a picture and a printed word, and then I would show him the flashcard, and make the sign. I'm sure you remember the story I told of the first time he made the connection of language being a series of symbols.

If children ar exposed to a rich linguistic environment, they will intuit this connection between symbol and object. Once they understand that a sign is a symbol for something else, they can easily apply the concept to a printed word being a different symbol for the same concept. You see the same concept in hearing children who are read to from the time they are small. Very early on, they get the idea that the printed word onthe page of a book, and the word that they hear are both symbols for the concept represented.

This is what we are talking about when we speak of the internalization of language. And when deaf children are exposed to an oral only environment, this natural, effortless acquisition is interrupted and they have difficulty making that transition in their understanding of the foundations of language. Kids are really capable of grasping very complicated concepts, provided they are given the environment in which to do so. They understand much more than they are able to articulate. Whether or not they have accomplished this at the proper developmental stage does not bbecome evident until they are older, however, and are unable to apply this incidental learning.

That is why it is so dangerous to assume that a young child is doing well in an oral situation simply because they are able to speak well, or carry on conversation with the family through speach and lipreading. If they have not been able to make the connections of symbol to concept=language, they will have problems in reading comprehension. Those problems don't become evident until they are in perhaps 4th or 5th grade, or even later. Then we are playing the game of catch up, and it is nearly impossible at this point.

Children need to be given the tools from the beginning.

loml · 09-05-2007, 03:00 PM

RD -
For me it looks to overwhelming, too much going on. PEC is clearer and much more child friendly, although I realise it is not sign. Have you ever looked at any of the Signed Exact English material. I find the sign pictures quite different from the ASL dictionary pics.

Here is a website:Select a Category

rockdrummer · 09-05-2007, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loml

RD -
For me it looks to overwhelming, too much going on. PEC is clearer and much more child friendly, although I realise it is not sign. Have you ever looked at any of the Signed Exact English material. I find the sign pictures quite different from the ASL dictionary pics.

Here is a website:Select a Category

I too was a bit confused and it would take some effort to master but I also believe that once proficient it would become much eaiser. The question is how much time will it take for one to become proficient. The neat thing about it is it's close representation to ASL and it's truly the ability to write sign language. PEC is interesting and my son was using it at his last school with good success.

loml · 09-05-2007, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

I too was a bit confused and it would take some effort to master but I also believe that once proficient it would become much eaiser. The question is how much time will it take for one to become proficient. The neat thing about it is it's close representation to ASL and it's truly the ability to write sign language. PEC is interesting and my son was using it at his last school with good success.

RD -
How long to become profecient?

I did not investigate the site to see if there was any information or discussion from users. I am sure there are many variables. Also, depending on what kind of learning you are; just like some people expedite/enhance their learning of Cued Speech via cue script.

shel90 · 09-05-2007, 06:44 PM

I agree with Jillo regarding to the ability to internalize language and making connections with symbols.

I went to a workshop about signwriting or ASL glossing as it was called about 9 years ago when I was just starting to learn ASL. The speakers were saying how it would help bridge the gap between ASL and English via writing.

After 5 years of teaching, I don't really think it would really be as effective as I thought. Too much going on and it would confuse the kids even more. Better keep the wrtten form to the spoken language of whatever country the child is in. My school won't adopt this approach..prefer keep writing to the English language so dhh children can master it faster without adding another system just like all those systems of English have been invented. There's no need..the philosophy is use the real languages during instruction and socializing, not invented systems.

BTW, I don't have access to the links due to having no Internet at home. I am using my pager to posts my posts whenever I can.

jillio · 09-06-2007, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loml

RD -
For me it looks to overwhelming, too much going on. PEC is clearer and much more child friendly, although I realise it is not sign. Have you ever looked at any of the Signed Exact English material. I find the sign pictures quite different from the ASL dictionary pics.

Here is a website:Select a Category

Signing Exact English? Now there' a cumbersome, overwhelming, invented system.

jillio · 09-06-2007, 12:58 AM

[QUOTE=shel90;833061]I agree with Jillo regarding to the ability to internalize language and making connections with symbols.

I went to a workshop about signwriting or ASL glossing as it was called about 9 years ago when I was just starting to learn ASL. The speakers were saying how it would help bridge the gap between ASL and English via writing.

After 5 years of teaching, I don't really think it would really be as effective as I thought. Too much going on and it would confuse the kids even more. Better keep the wrtten form to the spoken language of whatever country the child is in. My school won't adopt this approach..prefer keep writing to the English language so dhh children can master it faster without adding another system just like all those systems of English have been invented. There's no need..the philosophy is use the real languages during instruction and socializing, not invented systems.

Here is the issue.....English is an auditory verbal language....to make it visable, it is written. Written English is just another form of the root language made visable. Therefore, as it is visable in its written form, systems like SEE, CS, and all MCEs are redundant. They are simply making visable what is already made visable through written form.

Signwriting, in the same way is redundant. ASL is already a visable language. It does not need another mode to make it visable.

We have all the modes we need. Inventing other modes to accomplish what can be accomplished by a language in its natural form is a complete waste of time and effort. It is reinventing the wheel.

loml · 09-06-2007, 11:41 AM

Quote:

I agree with Jillo regarding to the ability to internalize language and making connections with symbols.

Cued Speech enables you to internalize the language like an inner sound system.

rockdrummer · 09-06-2007, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Here is the issue.....English is an auditory verbal language....to make it visable, it is written. Written English is just another form of the root language made visable. Therefore, as it is visable in its written form, systems like SEE, CS, and all MCEs are redundant. They are simply making visable what is already made visable through written form.

Signwriting, in the same way is redundant. ASL is already a visable language. It does not need another mode to make it visable.

We have all the modes we need. Inventing other modes to accomplish what can be accomplished by a language in its natural form is a complete waste of time and effort. It is reinventing the wheel.

What about situations where people need to write and would prefer to write in ASL? Also even though written english makes it visual I cant imagine it would always be practicle to write. I have heard many deafies say they would rather sign than write. Example; 2 deafies that don't know ASL but know SEE. Do you think they would rather sign to eachother or write in order to communicate with each other?

Tousi · 09-06-2007, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

What about situations where people need to write and would prefer to write in ASL? Also even though written english makes it visual I cant imagine it would always be practicle to write. I have heard many deafies say they would rather sign than write. Example; 2 deafies that don't know ASL but know SEE. Do you think they would rather sign to eachother or write in order to communicate with each other?

Most ASL'ers, including myself can and do accommodate SEE when they see it.

rockdrummer · 09-06-2007, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tousi

Most ASL'ers, including myself can and do accommodate SEE when they see it.

Thanks Tousi. What about if you only knew SEE and you were in a room with another deafie that only knows SEE. You both also are proficient in written english but neither knows ASL. Would you prefer to communicate in by signing in SEE or would you rather write notes back and forth in english?

shel90 · 09-06-2007, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Thanks Tousi. What about if you only knew SEE and you were in a room with another deafie that only knows SEE. You both also are proficient in written english but neither knows ASL. Would you prefer to communicate in by signing in SEE or would you rather write notes back and forth in english?

Wow..that's a very good question. I asked myself that and I don't have the answer.

More likely to sign in SEE...

ASLGAL · 09-06-2007, 05:07 PM

Here is a kicker (and a little off topic)

When my assignment included school resource officer I was told by an MH teacher to buy a Signing Exact English book for reference.
When I entered ASL I was told - Do not use that book!
You will remember my DH - ran256 HOH - is in ITP and looking forward to a retirement career in same. Well - although he will find out what all he can test out of - he is starting Tranliteration tonight and guess what was on the book
list? thats right - Signing Exact English - wow!

The signwriting site is interesting, I'll have to spend some time exploring there.

jillio · 09-06-2007, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loml

Cued Speech enables you to internalize the language like an inner sound system.

And, how exactly, does it accomplish that?

jillio · 09-06-2007, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

What about situations where people need to write and would prefer to write in ASL? Also even though written english makes it visual I cant imagine it would always be practicle to write. I have heard many deafies say they would rather sign than write. Example; 2 deafies that don't know ASL but know SEE. Do you think they would rather sign to eachother or write in order to communicate with each other?

If we are talking about literacy, then written English is the standard for literacy. I know of no deafies who use SEE on a conversational basis. Even those who have come tosigning late, and are weak on ASL grammar and syntax,will use a more PSE system of signing. SEE is simply too cumbersome for conversational purposes.

And sign writing doesn't use SEE (English) syntax. It uses ASL syntax.

jillio · 09-06-2007, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tousi

Most ASL'ers, including myself can and do accommodate SEE when they see it.

Agreed. I have watched many instances of code switching. But, in a conversational arena, would you agree that it becomes PSE more often?

jillio · 09-06-2007, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Thanks Tousi. What about if you only knew SEE and you were in a room with another deafie that only knows SEE. You both also are proficient in written english but neither knows ASL. Would you prefer to communicate in by signing in SEE or would you rather write notes back and forth in english?

If 2 deafies are in a room conversing and both know SEE, why would there be need to write notes back and forth? They share a communication mode.. They would converse in the shared mode.

BearBeauty · 09-06-2007, 07:15 PM

Ok, everyone knows my history, so i won't rehash it.

I agree SEE is cumbersome for most. But if it's the only signing that a deaf person knows, and can use to communicate, then honestly, let them use it to communicate. Eventually they will conform to a PSE if their arms felt the way mine did after daily communication in SEE.

Sign writing could help children learn sign language, but personally, I see problems with it because you have to learn the various symbols that show how to sign the words. So someone learning sign writing would have to study the style of the writing, and convert it into signs. And I don't know many people who would have the patience to do that.

rockdrummer · 09-06-2007, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

If we are talking about literacy, then written English is the standard for literacy. I know of no deafies who use SEE on a conversational basis. Even those who have come tosigning late, and are weak on ASL grammar and syntax,will use a more PSE system of signing. SEE is simply too cumbersome for conversational purposes.

And sign writing doesn't use SEE (English) syntax. It uses ASL syntax.

Actually I was responding to your quote that said

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

We have all the modes we need. Inventing other modes to accomplish what can be accomplished by a language in its natural form is a complete waste of time and effort. It is reinventing the wheel

If what I hear is true then some of the kids in the mainstream schools may be only learning SEE. I presented that scenereo on the assumption that they may end up using SEE in conversations. I understand it's a cumbersome means of personal communication. If that's not a realistic situation then so be it. I don't recall ever saying that sign writing used SEE syntax. I believe it's a good representation of ASL syntax and grammer in written form. Think about two deafies that only know ASL but don't have means of communicating other than writing letters. Do you think they would like to use this system? Also imagine if you could incorporate this into a font and perhaps be able to construct scentences as easily as typing. Then ASL'ers could even use this on-line. I agree it would have to be easy though. My opinion for what it's worth is that there could be a place for this sort of thing. I don't agree that it's a waste of time.

jillio · 09-06-2007, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BearBeauty

Ok, everyone knows my history, so i won't rehash it.

I agree SEE is cumbersome for most. But if it's the only signing that a deaf person knows, and can use to communicate, then honestly, let them use it to communicate. Eventually they will conform to a PSE if their arms felt the way mine did after daily communication in SEE.

Sign writing could help children learn sign language, but personally, I see problems with it because you have to learn the various symbols that show how to sign the words. So someone learning sign writing would have to study the style of the writing, and convert it into signs. And I don't know many people who would have the patience to do that.

Absolutely, BearBeauty. I didn't mean to imply that those users of SEE should not use it. Just that if two fluent users of SEE are having a conversation, they would do so in SEE, not in writing. Written language would be a method chosen if perhaps there was a SEE signer, and an oral deaf who had no sign skills having a conversation. And that even someone who is skilled in SEE, will in conversational situations,switch to a more PSE form, just as someone who is fluent in spoken English will simplify grammar structure and use slang terms in conversation.

deafskeptic · 09-06-2007, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

If we are talking about literacy, then written English is the standard for literacy. I know of no deafies who use SEE on a conversational basis. Even those who have come tosigning late, and are weak on ASL grammar and syntax,will use a more PSE system of signing. SEE is simply too cumbersome for conversational purposes.

And sign writing doesn't use SEE (English) syntax. It uses ASL syntax.

Oh, I agree. I think SEE is just too awkward. All those ings and is and prefixes and suffixes in sign... oh me! It's just too awkward. I will be first to admit that when I sign it's clear to other deaf that ASL isn't my first language. I sign with a rather strong "accent" for want of a better word. The hearing think I mean i sign with a British accent when I say that. Oh no, that's not what I mean at all.

jillio · 09-06-2007, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafskeptic

Oh, I agree. I think SEE is just too awkward. All those ings and is and prefixes and suffixes in sign... oh me! It's just too awkward. I will be first to admit that when I sign it's clear to other deaf that ASL isn't my first language. I sign with a rather strong "accent" for want of a better word. The hearing think I mean i sign with a British accent when I say that. Oh no, that's not what I mean at all.

I know exactly what you mean....the influence of your first langauge on your ASL syntax. I've been working on my ASL syntax for 20 years, and there are still times that I get corrected by a native signer!

shel90 · 09-06-2007, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I know exactly what you mean....the influence of your first langauge on your ASL syntax. I've been working on my ASL syntax for 20 years, and there are still times that I get corrected by a native signer!

same here..grrrrr! U have been using ASL a lot longer than me.

jillio · 09-06-2007, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

same here..grrrrr! U have been using ASL a lot longer than me.

LOL!

Waxy · 11-03-2009, 03:35 PM

Usually when a see a hearing person or a Deaf deffending (like myself) sing languages (SL) they mix oral language and written language.
Therefore, written english or even written spanish or whatever other local oral language, will never be "Deaf Culture".

I'm thinking for weeks now, how important is to have a writting system.
Do SL needs a writting system?
I can see a proposed system like "signwriting" controversial, but maybe because a symbols-based system is related to not evolved or extint languages (you can check in wiki about "writting" and how is displayed the concept of "evolution/progress" regarding logographies...) but what about assian languages?

Why am i worried about the SL and a writting system?
Deaf culture is relying on the local hearing written system (in case of america and others, english) but those arent signed languages' systems.
Only thing Deaf Culture is relying for passing the culture and values is in friends and family.

Im getting tired of reading everywhere about what's going on with young deaf "not knowing about the Deaf culture" or "knowing just a few" or things like "only older Deafs are keeping the culture safe" "hearings are mixing oral traditions with signing traditions"

I say the deaf comunity NEEDS a writting, graphic support to rely their foundations on.
Im not an expert, so im not sure about the comsecuences... but, can a language last if its not written? can a civilization endure without books... or movies... or ways of expressing arts and cience?

Human ciivilazation rely on documentation. W/out documentation, we wouldnt had know about most things.

Most of you have seen Ryan Comerson's doc regarding "ideology".
The deaf culture needs to start to make movies, to write books, to create poetry. Im not saying about some known deaf that's an artist.
I mean, i know there are deaf making those things... but, we need more.

Do i make any sense? am I overreacting by being "worried"?
Does the Deaf Comunity need a written system?

Looking forward to your opinions of agreement/disagreement...

09-04-2007, 12:59 PM	#1 (permalink)
rockdrummer Weapon of mass percussion Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Chicago area Posts: 4,090	What about signwriting? I came across this site today on SignWriting. What do you guys think about this concept and do you think it has a pratical use? SignWriting: Write Sign Languages Thanks

09-05-2007, 06:44 PM	#9 (permalink)
shel90 In a pink and black world Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: In the land of the free Posts: 24,047 Blog Entries: 3	I agree with Jillo regarding to the ability to internalize language and making connections with symbols. I went to a workshop about signwriting or ASL glossing as it was called about 9 years ago when I was just starting to learn ASL. The speakers were saying how it would help bridge the gap between ASL and English via writing. After 5 years of teaching, I don't really think it would really be as effective as I thought. Too much going on and it would confuse the kids even more. Better keep the wrtten form to the spoken language of whatever country the child is in. My school won't adopt this approach..prefer keep writing to the English language so dhh children can master it faster without adding another system just like all those systems of English have been invented. There's no need..the philosophy is use the real languages during instruction and socializing, not invented systems. BTW, I don't have access to the links due to having no Internet at home. I am using my pager to posts my posts whenever I can. __________________ Shel~ "A child educated only at school is an uneducated child." -George Santayana

09-06-2007, 05:07 PM	#17 (permalink)
ASLGAL Here's Your Sign ;-D Join Date: May 2007 Location: Ohio Posts: 709	Here is a kicker (and a little off topic) When my assignment included school resource officer I was told by an MH teacher to buy a Signing Exact English book for reference. When I entered ASL I was told - Do not use that book! You will remember my DH - ran256 HOH - is in ITP and looking forward to a retirement career in same. Well - although he will find out what all he can test out of - he is starting Tranliteration tonight and guess what was on the book list? thats right - Signing Exact English - wow! The signwriting site is interesting, I'll have to spend some time exploring there. __________________ "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ~ Edmund Burke~ "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser" ~ Socrates ~

11-03-2009, 03:35 PM	#29 (permalink)
Waxy Slacker Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Champs-Élysées Posts: 74	Usually when a see a hearing person or a Deaf deffending (like myself) sing languages (SL) they mix oral language and written language. Therefore, written english or even written spanish or whatever other local oral language, will never be "Deaf Culture". I'm thinking for weeks now, how important is to have a writting system. Do SL needs a writting system? I can see a proposed system like "signwriting" controversial, but maybe because a symbols-based system is related to not evolved or extint languages (you can check in wiki about "writting" and how is displayed the concept of "evolution/progress" regarding logographies...) but what about assian languages? Why am i worried about the SL and a writting system? Deaf culture is relying on the local hearing written system (in case of america and others, english) but those arent signed languages' systems. Only thing Deaf Culture is relying for passing the culture and values is in friends and family. Im getting tired of reading everywhere about what's going on with young deaf "not knowing about the Deaf culture" or "knowing just a few" or things like "only older Deafs are keeping the culture safe" "hearings are mixing oral traditions with signing traditions" I say the deaf comunity NEEDS a writting, graphic support to rely their foundations on. Im not an expert, so im not sure about the comsecuences... but, can a language last if its not written? can a civilization endure without books... or movies... or ways of expressing arts and cience? Human ciivilazation rely on documentation. W/out documentation, we wouldnt had know about most things. Most of you have seen Ryan Comerson's doc regarding "ideology". The deaf culture needs to start to make movies, to write books, to create poetry. Im not saying about some known deaf that's an artist. I mean, i know there are deaf making those things... but, we need more. Do i make any sense? am I overreacting by being "worried"? Does the Deaf Comunity need a written system? Looking forward to your opinions of agreement/disagreement... __________________ Better be hated than forgotten.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

09-04-2007, 02:00 PM	#2 (permalink)
jillio Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 32,396	ASL is already visual. It doesn't need another mode to make it visable. Plus, it doesn't translate to written form as it is spatially oriented.

09-05-2007, 12:18 PM	#5 (permalink)
jillio Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 32,396	I went back to the sight, and reviewed it again. I suppose it could be useful in some given situations, especially for the child who has been language deprived, and has not internalized the concept of a symbol representing an actual concept. Like the sign (symbol) for chair represents a chair, and the printed word "chair" is a different symbol, but represents the same thing. When my son wa a toddler, I ordered a bunch of story books from Gallaudet that were traditional children's books that had the signs below the printed text. As a result of these books, my son learned that the sign and the printed word were both symbols representing the same concept. It wasn't something that had to be explained in detail, he was able to intuit it from the use of the two langauges together that way. When he was very small, I also used flashcards with a picture and a printed word, and then I would show him the flashcard, and make the sign. I'm sure you remember the story I told of the first time he made the connection of language being a series of symbols. If children ar exposed to a rich linguistic environment, they will intuit this connection between symbol and object. Once they understand that a sign is a symbol for something else, they can easily apply the concept to a printed word being a different symbol for the same concept. You see the same concept in hearing children who are read to from the time they are small. Very early on, they get the idea that the printed word onthe page of a book, and the word that they hear are both symbols for the concept represented. This is what we are talking about when we speak of the internalization of language. And when deaf children are exposed to an oral only environment, this natural, effortless acquisition is interrupted and they have difficulty making that transition in their understanding of the foundations of language. Kids are really capable of grasping very complicated concepts, provided they are given the environment in which to do so. They understand much more than they are able to articulate. Whether or not they have accomplished this at the proper developmental stage does not bbecome evident until they are older, however, and are unable to apply this incidental learning. That is why it is so dangerous to assume that a young child is doing well in an oral situation simply because they are able to speak well, or carry on conversation with the family through speach and lipreading. If they have not been able to make the connections of symbol to concept=language, they will have problems in reading comprehension. Those problems don't become evident until they are in perhaps 4th or 5th grade, or even later. Then we are playing the game of catch up, and it is nearly impossible at this point. Children need to be given the tools from the beginning.

09-06-2007, 12:58 AM	#11 (permalink)
jillio Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 32,396	[QUOTE=shel90;833061]I agree with Jillo regarding to the ability to internalize language and making connections with symbols. I went to a workshop about signwriting or ASL glossing as it was called about 9 years ago when I was just starting to learn ASL. The speakers were saying how it would help bridge the gap between ASL and English via writing. After 5 years of teaching, I don't really think it would really be as effective as I thought. Too much going on and it would confuse the kids even more. Better keep the wrtten form to the spoken language of whatever country the child is in. My school won't adopt this approach..prefer keep writing to the English language so dhh children can master it faster without adding another system just like all those systems of English have been invented. There's no need..the philosophy is use the real languages during instruction and socializing, not invented systems. Here is the issue.....English is an auditory verbal language....to make it visable, it is written. Written English is just another form of the root language made visable. Therefore, as it is visable in its written form, systems like SEE, CS, and all MCEs are redundant. They are simply making visable what is already made visable through written form. Signwriting, in the same way is redundant. ASL is already a visable language. It does not need another mode to make it visable. We have all the modes we need. Inventing other modes to accomplish what can be accomplished by a language in its natural form is a complete waste of time and effort. It is reinventing the wheel.

09-06-2007, 07:15 PM	#22 (permalink)
BearBeauty Registered User Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 818	Ok, everyone knows my history, so i won't rehash it. I agree SEE is cumbersome for most. But if it's the only signing that a deaf person knows, and can use to communicate, then honestly, let them use it to communicate. Eventually they will conform to a PSE if their arms felt the way mine did after daily communication in SEE. Sign writing could help children learn sign language, but personally, I see problems with it because you have to learn the various symbols that show how to sign the words. So someone learning sign writing would have to study the style of the writing, and convert it into signs. And I don't know many people who would have the patience to do that.