ASL, SEE, PSE, etc. - Page 4

restless_heart · 01-01-2008, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

So basically Berry, You're blaming me for what you "ASLers" went through just because I've learned SEE sign language? There is no "universal sign language" Sign languages develop specific to their communities and is not universal, It's the same as there isn't a universal spoken language if you think ASL is the universal sign language, then you are wrong, When you meet a Deaf person from another country their signs will not be ASL either, their signs would matched up what community they're in. Even though ASL is the most commonly used of sign language in the USA by the deaf culture, it doesn't mean we all uses ASL, It's the same as what method we grew up in, we don't all go to deaf schools, share the same program. There's many and many communication tools for the deaf, parents choose one tool for us or maybe just maybe they'll chosen them all.

We are all deaf, does it matter what signs we uses? Why can't we just all get along and learned from each others signs.

I was going to say the same thing. There is a girl I work with, she speak Spanish and I am deaf...we got along good because we have found ways to communicate by using hand motions (Not SEE, ASL or PSE-maybe a new language for us

). We accepted the way we are and the way we were taught. It is interesting to learn other language and share it, not to mock each other to say who is better one here.

Kaitin · 01-01-2008, 01:10 PM

I hope I didn't seem to attack SEE or people using SEE. SEE and PSE in conversation sometimes just confuse me, but I have no problem with people using SEE or PSE. Most time communication is hard (I think), so if SEE or PSE or something else works, then great.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

We are all deaf, does it matter what signs we uses? Why can't we just all get along and learned from each others signs.

I hope we can, Cheri.

Berry · 01-02-2008, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

So basically Berry, You're blaming me for what you "ASLers" went through just because I've learned SEE sign language?

That question is so layered you have to be very good at English in order to present it. It also has a couple of presuppositions that are not correct. Please slow down. Relax, no one here is against Cheri, even those who are the most radically anti SEE.

You are not the language you speak.

Also every language, including ASL and English, has some incongruities in it that make both native speakers and foriegners sit back and blink.

You are certainly not to blame for something you were not even alive to experience. It is only part of my personal experience because I am old and first learned to sign when sign language was socially castrated. But I learned it and used it any way because it was one of the most fun things I had ever done and my best friend's parents were deaf. We signed everywhere all the time, and enjoyed the consternation we caused, but my friends parents would not allow us to sign openly in public when they were around unless we absolutely had too -- Because it caused undo attention. Back then some hearing people thought that deaf people "talking with their hands" was an urban myth. Only those who had close contact with deaf people were even aware of it let alone use it.

You are not to blame for that.

On the other hand if you sign, and if you are American: Then this is part of YOUR history whether you are deaf or not -- Regardless what kind of sign language you use.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

There is no "universal sign language" Sign languages develop specific to their communities and is not universal, It's the same as there isn't a universal spoken language if you think ASL is the universal sign language, then you are wrong, When you meet a Deaf person from another country their signs will not be ASL either, their signs would matched up what community they're in. Even though ASL is the most commonly used of sign language in the USA by the deaf culture, it doesn't mean we all uses ASL, It's the same as what method we grew up in, we don't all go to deaf schools, share the same program. There's many and many communication tools for the deaf, parents choose one tool for us or maybe just maybe they'll chosen them all.

This is true. In fact there are areas in Canada that are really insane; my friend told me in Quebic she ran into signers of ASL, BSL, and FSL (American, Brittish, and French). I'm surprized they don't come up with their own QSL.

The problem with SEE, from an ASL, BSL, or Auslan (Australian sign language) point of view is that it is not a "language" in the same sense. SEE; like the words you see printed here; is manually coded English: Which in and of itself is not a bad idea. SEE used ASL signs: Which is actually a very good idea; it should allow most deaf American signers easy access to it.

But then the inventors of SEE took a bad turn. They were hearing people "doing something for the deaf" and their innate egotistical belief in the superiority of English caused them to mutilate ASL at any and every point where compromise between the two languages was possible. Suddenly an excellent idea that should have given ASL signers easier access to English and give hearing people easier access to ASL became just one more problem to over come.

Please note I am disparaging those who created SEE, not those who use it.

Of course as a native SEE signer you don't have these problems until you confuse an ASLer by using a familier sign in a manner that appears nonsensical to them. (Such as a nose that runs on legs like a person or an animal rather than flows like a liquid, which by the way is just as stupid in English as it is in sign, but is used so commonly no one thinks about it).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

We are all deaf, does it matter what signs we uses? Why can't we just all get along and learned from each others signs.

Well that places me firmly as an outsider who has no right to speak about deaf issues. I'm not only hearing but my signing ability has fallen unused for so long it is pathetic. The signers in my family (all hearing) seem to all be busy nowadays and the hoh peeps I've met in the past few years reject sign language in toto.

But I see myself as part of the signing community and all deaf sign language issues as issues that concern the entire signing community. I want the right to sit in a restuarant and sign with my family just as much as you do. I want the right to go to the principal's office of my grand daughter's school and sign to her without being told "We don't allow that here" just as much as you do. The fact that my family and grand daughter are hearing is not the issue.

The right to sign and be proud of it is.

I would like to end on this note: Can't we have differing points of view on the merits the language we are discussing without disrespecting the person who uses the language?

Some Mexicans have told me that Germans sound like horses and Americans sound like geese.

Should I be mad at them?

I don't think so: They love me and we laugh at each other.

jillio · 01-02-2008, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry

That question is so layered you have to be very good at English in order to present it. It also has a couple of presuppositions that are not correct. Please slow down. Relax, no one here is against Cheri, even those who are the most radically anti SEE.

You are not the language you speak.

Also every language, including ASL and English, has some incongruities in it that make both native speakers and foriegners sit back and blink.

You are certainly not to blame for something you were not even alive to experience. It is only part of my personal experience because I am old and first learned to sign when sign language was socially castrated. But I learned it and used it any way because it was one of the most fun things I had ever done and my best friend's parents were deaf. We signed everywhere all the time, and enjoyed the consternation we caused, but my friends parents would not allow us to sign openly in public when they were around unless we absolutely had too -- Because it caused undo attention. Back then some hearing people thought that deaf people "talking with their hands" was an urban myth. Only those who had close contact with deaf people were even aware of it let alone use it.

You are not to blame for that.

On the other hand if you sign, and if you are American: Then this is part of YOUR history whether you are deaf or not -- Regardless what kind of sign language you use.

This is true. In fact there are areas in Canada that are really insane; my friend told me in Quebic she ran into signers of ASL, BSL, and FSL (American, Brittish, and French). I'm surprized they don't come up with their own QSL.

The problem with SEE, from an ASL, BSL, or Auslan (Australian sign language) point of view is that it is not a "language" in the same sense. SEE; like the words you see printed here; is manually coded English: Which in and of itself is not a bad idea. SEE used ASL signs: Which is actually a very good idea; it should allow most deaf American signers easy access to it.

But then the inventors of SEE took a bad turn. They were hearing people "doing something for the deaf" and their innate egotistical belief in the superiority of English caused them to mutilate ASL at any and every point where compromise between the two languages was possible. Suddenly an excellent idea that should have given ASL signers easier access to English and give hearing people easier access to ASL became just one more problem to over come.

Please note I am disparaging those who created SEE, not those who use it.

Of course as a native SEE signer you don't have these problems until you confuse an ASLer by using a familier sign in a manner that appears nonsensical to them. (Such as a nose that runs on legs like a person or an animal rather than flows like a liquid, which by the way is just as stupid in English as it is in sign, but is used so commonly no one thinks about it).

Well that places me firmly as an outsider who has no right to speak about deaf issues. I'm not only hearing but my signing ability has fallen unused for so long it is pathetic. The signers in my family (all hearing) seem to all be busy nowadays and the hoh peeps I've met in the past few years reject sign language in toto.

But I see myself as part of the signing community and all deaf sign language issues as issues that concern the entire signing community. I want the right to sit in a restuarant and sign with my family just as much as you do. I want the right to go to the principal's office of my grand daughter's school and sign to her without being told "We don't allow that here" just as much as you do. The fact that my family and grand daughter are hearing is not the issue.

The right to sign and be proud of it is.

I would like to end on this note: Can't we have differing points of view on the merits the language we are discussing without disrespecting the person who uses the language?

Some Mexicans have told me that Germans sound like horses and Americans sound like geese.

Should I be mad at them?

I don't think so: They love me and we laugh at each other.

**shel90** · 01-02-2008, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry

That question is so layered you have to be very good at English in order to present it. It also has a couple of presuppositions that are not correct. Please slow down. Relax, no one here is against Cheri, even those who are the most radically anti SEE.

You are not the language you speak.

Also every language, including ASL and English, has some incongruities in it that make both native speakers and foriegners sit back and blink.

You are certainly not to blame for something you were not even alive to experience. It is only part of my personal experience because I am old and first learned to sign when sign language was socially castrated. But I learned it and used it any way because it was one of the most fun things I had ever done and my best friend's parents were deaf. We signed everywhere all the time, and enjoyed the consternation we caused, but my friends parents would not allow us to sign openly in public when they were around unless we absolutely had too -- Because it caused undo attention. Back then some hearing people thought that deaf people "talking with their hands" was an urban myth. Only those who had close contact with deaf people were even aware of it let alone use it.

You are not to blame for that.

On the other hand if you sign, and if you are American: Then this is part of YOUR history whether you are deaf or not -- Regardless what kind of sign language you use.

This is true. In fact there are areas in Canada that are really insane; my friend told me in Quebic she ran into signers of ASL, BSL, and FSL (American, Brittish, and French). I'm surprized they don't come up with their own QSL.

The problem with SEE, from an ASL, BSL, or Auslan (Australian sign language) point of view is that it is not a "language" in the same sense. SEE; like the words you see printed here; is manually coded English: Which in and of itself is not a bad idea. SEE used ASL signs: Which is actually a very good idea; it should allow most deaf American signers easy access to it.

But then the inventors of SEE took a bad turn. They were hearing people "doing something for the deaf" and their innate egotistical belief in the superiority of English caused them to mutilate ASL at any and every point where compromise between the two languages was possible. Suddenly an excellent idea that should have given ASL signers easier access to English and give hearing people easier access to ASL became just one more problem to over come.

Please note I am disparaging those who created SEE, not those who use it.

Of course as a native SEE signer you don't have these problems until you confuse an ASLer by using a familier sign in a manner that appears nonsensical to them. (Such as a nose that runs on legs like a person or an animal rather than flows like a liquid, which by the way is just as stupid in English as it is in sign, but is used so commonly no one thinks about it).

Well that places me firmly as an outsider who has no right to speak about deaf issues. I'm not only hearing but my signing ability has fallen unused for so long it is pathetic. The signers in my family (all hearing) seem to all be busy nowadays and the hoh peeps I've met in the past few years reject sign language in toto.

But I see myself as part of the signing community and all deaf sign language issues as issues that concern the entire signing community. I want the right to sit in a restuarant and sign with my family just as much as you do. I want the right to go to the principal's office of my grand daughter's school and sign to her without being told "We don't allow that here" just as much as you do. The fact that my family and grand daughter are hearing is not the issue.

The right to sign and be proud of it is.

I would like to end on this note: Can't we have differing points of view on the merits the language we are discussing without disrespecting the person who uses the language?

Some Mexicans have told me that Germans sound like horses and Americans sound like geese.

Should I be mad at them?

I don't think so: They love me and we laugh at each other.

**Cheri** · 01-02-2008, 07:50 PM

I understand what you're saying berry. But, ASL doesn't follow the grammar of written English, ASL certainly isn't good English but it's a good language for deaf people. So, they set out to improve sign language, to make it conform more closely to English. Today, we have Signed English and PSE. I know you don't like that idea, but I think that they just want to do what's best for deaf people, even if we don't agree with how they do it. I've known that some deaf people's right to sign were restricted all because of Alexander Graham Bell. The oralists won many battles and for a long time the use of sign was not allowed to be use by many deaf. Many of us who grew up oralism had no concept of what sign language was, because we did not know it was out there for us. That's one reason why I don't like the Alexander Graham Bell organization, because they took away sign language from deaf children, and we only had to be taught speech. I don't agree with how we all have to stick with one tool instead of learning them all, I love each sign languages that each deaf person uses, even if it's in ASL, or PSE, or SEE. no sign is better than the other, and this is what I believe.

**shel90** · 01-02-2008, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

I understand what you're saying berry. But, ASL doesn't follow the grammar of written English, ASL certainly isn't good English but it's a good language for deaf people. So, they set out to improve sign language, to make it conform more closely to English. Today, we have Signed English and PSE. I know you don't like that idea, but I think that they just want to do what's best for deaf people, even if we don't agree with how they do it. I've known that some deaf people's right to sign were restricted all because of Alexander Graham Bell. The oralists won many battles and for a long time the use of sign was not allowed to be use by many deaf. Many of us who grew up oralism had no concept of what sign language was, because we did not know it was out there for us. That's one reason why I don't like the Alexander Graham Bell organization, because they took away sign language from deaf children, and we only had to be taught speech. I don't agree with how we all have to stick with one tool instead of learning them all, I love each sign languages that each deaf person uses, even if it's in ASL, or PSE, or SEE. no sign is better than the other, and this is what I believe.

From a person who has studied language acquistion and linguistics, it would be like saying ok to change spoken English to follow ASL grammar. That would mean having people talk in ASL or use ASL-speak. Now, hearing people wouldnt accept English being changed to match Deaf people's language, wouldnt they? That was what happened when SEE was invented. That's in essence to what Berry is trying to explain. Hope that makes sense?

No offense but from a linguistic's standpoint, that was what happened when SEE was invented. For children who dont have a strong language foundation, SEE can be confusing to them and hasnt helped with literacy skills historically.

RDC_girl · 01-02-2008, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry

This is true. In fact there are areas in Canada that are really insane; my friend told me in Quebic she ran into signers of ASL, BSL, and FSL (American, Brittish, and French). I'm surprized they don't come up with their own QSL.

It is funny you say that Berry... Quebec does have their own Sign language, LSQ

Quebec Sign Language, known in French as Langue des signes québécoise (LSQ),

Here is the link if you want to read about it.
Quebec Sign Language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Berry · 01-03-2008, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

I understand what you're saying berry. But, ASL doesn't follow the grammar of written English, ASL certainly isn't good English but it's a good language for deaf people. So, they set out to improve sign language, to make it conform more closely to English. Today, we have Signed English and PSE. I know you don't like that idea, but I think that they just want to do what's best for deaf people, even if we don't agree with how they do it. I've known that some deaf people's right to sign were restricted all because of Alexander Graham Bell. The oralists won many battles and for a long time the use of sign was not allowed to be use by many deaf. Many of us who grew up oralism had no concept of what sign language was, because we did not know it was out there for us. That's one reason why I don't like the Alexander Graham Bell organization, because they took away sign language from deaf children, and we only had to be taught speech. I don't agree with how we all have to stick with one tool instead of learning them all, I love each sign languages that each deaf person uses, even if it's in ASL, or PSE, or SEE. no sign is better than the other, and this is what I believe.

I actually agree with everything you say. No one language is better than another, but some languages seem better suited to one purpose than another. People say French is the language of diplomats, English the language of science, and Spanish the language of love. There are things I can express with ease in Spanish or ASL, which are second languages to me, that I have great difficulty in expressing in my native tongue, English.

I am actually against anyone doing anything for someone else "for their own good".

At least one hard line user of ASL drives me up the wall. She is a relative of mine. I am older. Some of the signs I use naturally are older. When I learned sign language the signs for "and", "because", "that", "for", and "for - for" were normal signs. They were around long before SEE and when I learned them SEE had not been invented yet. But whenever I use one of those she tells me "Don't use that sign. It is not ASL it is SEE."

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

From a person who has studied language acquistion and linguistics,

I love linguistics: have never studied language acquisition ( Don't have the time right now either) -- But please can you give me a couple of things to read that would give me a solid handle on this subject?

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

From a person who has studied language acquistion and linguistics, it would be like saying ok to change spoken English to follow ASL grammar. That would mean having people talk in ASL or use ASL-speak. Now, hearing people wouldnt accept English being changed to match Deaf people's language, wouldnt they?

No, they wouldn't, but in an aside, English could do with a solid dose of influence from ASL. One of the barriers to teaching ASL to hearing people is to get them to realize how many words we use in every sentence that have no real valid reason for their existence.

Learning a second language enables us to look at our native language in a new, fresh light.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

For children who dont have a strong language foundation, SEE can be confusing to them and hasnt helped with literacy skills historically.

That is sad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RDC_girl

It is funny you say that Berry... Quebec does have their own Sign language, LSQ

Quebec Sign Language, known in French as Langue des signes québécoise (LSQ),

Here is the link if you want to read about it.
Quebec Sign Language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is what I think happens naturally when two or more languages mix freely.

What really blows me away is that boys and girls sign differently.

**Reba** · 01-03-2008, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

...ASL doesn't follow the grammar of written English

It's not supposed to. ASL is a language separate from American English. It's like saying "German doesn't follow the grammar of written English." It's not supposed to because it's a separate language. People who are native speakers of German have to learn the grammar for English if they want to become fluent in English as a second language. That's what ASL users do. They learn English grammar as a second language.

Quote:

ASL certainly isn't good English

It's not supposed to be. German isn't good English either. That's the same concept. German is good German but it's not good English.

Quote:

...So, they set out to improve sign language, to make it conform more closely to English.

That's one of the major sticking points of SEE. Who are "they" and what right to do "they" have to tamper with someone's language? I don't think American English speakers would quietly accept some "experts" from Mexico trying to "improve" our language to make it conform more closely to Spanish. That's not improving; that's tampering.

Quote:

Today, we have Signed English and PSE. I know you don't like that idea, but I think that they just want to do what's best for deaf people, even if we don't agree with how they do it.

Again, who are "they" and who gave them the right to change someone else's language? Doing "what's best for deaf people" is a paternalistic 19th Century viewpoint that many people resent. Suppose someone suggested "doing what's best for black people" whether or not they liked it? There would be rioting in the streets.

Quote:

... I don't like the Alexander Graham Bell organization, because they took away sign language from deaf children, and we only had to be taught speech.

That's how some ASL Deaf feel about SEE. They feel that ASL was taken away from deaf children, and were taught only SEE for many years. That's why it's such a sensitive subject.

Quote:

I don't agree with how we all have to stick with one tool instead of learning them all, I love each sign languages that each deaf person uses, even if it's in ASL, or PSE, or SEE. no sign is better than the other, and this is what I believe.

I also believe that no one should criticize another for the signs that they use.

The differences just need to be clearly understood so people can make educated choices. ASL is the native language of American Deaf, SEE is an invented manual mode of English, and PSE is an adaptation of ASL on a long continuum used to bridge two language groups (ASL signers and English speakers). (Those are just summary definitions.)

**Reba** · 01-03-2008, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry

...What really blows me away is that boys and girls sign differently.

Just like spoken languages.

Boys and girls sign/verbalize differently, as do men and women, old and young, black and white, northern and southern, rural and urban, etc.

jillio · 01-03-2008, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Just like spoken languages.

Boys and girls sign/verbalize differently, as do men and women, old and young, black and white, northern and southern, rural and urban, etc.

You beat me to it by about 10 minutes, LOL!

jillio · 01-03-2008, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry

I actually agree with everything you say. No one language is better than another, but some languages seem better suited to one purpose than another. People say French is the language of diplomats, English the language of science, and Spanish the language of love. There are things I can express with ease in Spanish or ASL, which are second languages to me, that I have great difficulty in expressing in my native tongue, English.

I am actually against anyone doing anything for someone else "for their own good".

At least one hard line user of ASL drives me up the wall. She is a relative of mine. I am older. Some of the signs I use naturally are older. When I learned sign language the signs for "and", "because", "that", "for", and "for - for" were normal signs. They were around long before SEE and when I learned them SEE had not been invented yet. But whenever I use one of those she tells me "Don't use that sign. It is not ASL it is SEE."

I love linguistics: have never studied language acquisition ( Don't have the time right now either) -- But please can you give me a couple of things to read that would give me a solid handle on this subject?

No, they wouldn't, but in an aside, English could do with a solid dose of influence from ASL. One of the barriers to teaching ASL to hearing people is to get them to realize how many words we use in every sentence that have no real valid reason for their existence.

Learning a second language enables us to look at our native language in a new, fresh light.

That is sad.

This is what I think happens naturally when two or more languages mix freely.

What really blows me away is that boys and girls sign differently.

I'm sure that shel90 can provide you with some excellent resources, as well, but thought I would offer you a couple of my own:

Language, Cognition, and the Brain: Insights from Sign Language Research by Karen Emmorey (Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. 2002), and Individual Differences & Unviversals in Language Learning Aptitude, edited by Karl Diller (Newbury House, 1981).

The second one is an older book, but is still very valid and informative.

**shel90** · 01-03-2008, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

It's not supposed to. ASL is a language separate from American English. It's like saying "German doesn't follow the grammar of written English." It's not supposed to because it's a separate language. People who are native speakers of German have to learn the grammar for English if they want to become fluent in English as a second language. That's what ASL users do. They learn English grammar as a second language.

It's not supposed to be. German isn't good English either. That's the same concept. German is good German but it's not good English.

That's one of the major sticking points of SEE. Who are "they" and what right to do "they" have to tamper with someone's language? I don't think American English speakers would quietly accept some "experts" from Mexico trying to "improve" our language to make it conform more closely to Spanish. That's not improving; that's tampering.

Again, who are "they" and who gave them the right to change someone else's language? Doing "what's best for deaf people" is a paternalistic 19th Century viewpoint that many people resent. Suppose someone suggested "doing what's best for black people" whether or not they liked it? There would be rioting in the streets.

That's how some ASL Deaf feel about SEE. They feel that ASL was taken away from deaf children, and were taught only SEE for many years. That's why it's such a sensitive subject.

I also believe that no one should criticize another for the signs that they use.

The differences just need to be clearly understood so people can make educated choices. ASL is the native language of American Deaf, SEE is an invented manual mode of English, and PSE is an adaptation of ASL on a long continuum used to bridge two language groups (ASL signers and English speakers). (Those are just summary definitions.)

U explained it better than I did but good posting, Reba.

**Reba** · 01-03-2008, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

U explained it better than I did but good posting, Reba.

Not better; just differently.

**Cheri** · 01-03-2008, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

It's not supposed to. ASL is a language separate from American English. It's like saying "German doesn't follow the grammar of written English." It's not supposed to because it's a separate language. People who are native speakers of German have to learn the grammar for English if they want to become fluent in English as a second language. That's what ASL users do. They learn English grammar as a second language.

I know that Reba, I'm just stating the fact nothing more nothing less.

Quote:

That's one of the major sticking points of SEE. Who are "they" and what right to do "they" have to tamper with someone's language?.

tampering?? What's wrong with having another manual communication? I don't understand what's the big deal for adding another manual communication?

I'm not going to go back and forth with this anymore, this is just getting too ridiculous.

**shel90** · 01-03-2008, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Not better; just differently.

That works for me.

**Reba** · 01-03-2008, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

tampering?? What's wrong with having another manual communication? I don't understand what's the big deal for adding another manual communication?

It's tampering because it takes an existing language (ASL) and makes artificial changes to it. ASL is not just a "manual communication"; it is a language. Therefore, SEE is not "another" manual communication. SEE is another mode of an existing language (English) that has incorporated the alphabet and some signs of a second existing language (ASL) to create a hybrid system. If the creators of SEE wanted people to use English they could have used the already existing Rochester method, or they could have created their own gestures the way cueing designers did.

"What's wrong with having another manual communication?"
I think we can all easily see the biggest "wrong" right here in the forum. Since the creation of SEE, the Deaf community now has yet another source of division. One of the reasons that the Deaf "community" doesn't have as much political clout as other groups is its disunity. Oral vs. manual, CI vs. non-CI, ASL vs. SEE, cueing vs. non-cueing, etc. The creation of SEE didn't bring the Deaf community together; it created yet another division.

But all that being said, I still firmly believe that no one has the right to criticize the signs (and/or voicing) that another individual uses. We each have our own preferences but that doesn't mean we look down our noses at others.

Berry · 01-04-2008, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

"What's wrong with having another manual communication?"

I think we can all easily see the biggest "wrong" right here in the forum. Since the creation of SEE, the Deaf community now has yet another source of division. One of the reasons that the Deaf "community" doesn't have as much political clout as other groups is its disunity. Oral vs. manual, CI vs. non-CI, ASL vs. SEE, cueing vs. non-cueing, etc. The creation of SEE didn't bring the Deaf community together; it created yet another division.

This is a very important point. In a world where there are basically two types of power, money and numbers, having a cohesive group with an agreed upon agenda is paramount.

It falls back upon two of my favorite ad hocs:

"One man with money makes a majority" and "United we stand, divided we fall".

**shel90** · 01-04-2008, 09:08 AM

[QUOTE=Reba;891995]

"What's wrong with having another manual communication?"
I think we can all easily see the biggest "wrong" right here in the forum. Since the creation of SEE, the Deaf community now has yet another source of division. One of the reasons that the Deaf "community" doesn't have as much political clout as other groups is its disunity. Oral vs. manual, CI vs. non-CI, ASL vs. SEE, cueing vs. non-cueing, etc. The creation of SEE didn't bring the Deaf community together; it created yet another division.

QUOTE]

How much more can a culture get divided? It is really unfortunate that all these hearing "experts" keep coming up with all these different language modes.

DeafCapricorn · 01-04-2008, 07:19 PM

I know I'm jumping in on this thread a little too late, but... here's my view.

I personally find SEE annoying... hard on signer and receiver. I personally use PSE, that's just how I was taught with my upbringing in the hearing world.

As for ASL, I wouldn't mind learning more... it is quicker, ya know...

**shel90** · 01-04-2008, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEAFdotDORK

I know I'm jumping in on this thread a little too late, but... here's my view.

I personally find SEE annoying... hard on signer and receiver. I personally use PSE, that's just how I was taught with my upbringing in the hearing world.

As for ASL, I wouldn't mind learning more... it is quicker, ya know...

That's how I feel with SEE..it is hard on me to make sense of the message being conveyed and I have to work hard to keep ASL from taking over when someone is signing in SEE ...otherwise I would never understand them. I have to constantly think in English for me to understand SEE and that is just as much work as lipreading is for me. I dont have to do a lot of mental work with ASL.

jillio · 01-04-2008, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry

This is a very important point. In a world where there are basically two types of power, money and numbers, having a cohesive group with an agreed upon agenda is paramount.

It falls back upon two of my favorite ad hocs:

"One man with money makes a majority" and "United we stand, divided we fall".

Excellent synopsis of conflict theory!

jillio · 01-04-2008, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

That's how I feel with SEE..it is hard on me to make sense of the message being conveyed and I have to work hard to keep ASL from taking over when someone is signing in SEE ...otherwise I would never understand them. I have to constantly think in English for me to understand SEE and that is just as much work as lipreading is for me. I dont have to do a lot of mental work with ASL.

And its a division created, as have all divisions within the deaf community, by the hearing, as it is the hearing who tampered with ASL and came up with the articficial system known as SEE.

Berry · 01-05-2008, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I'm sure that shel90 can provide you with some excellent resources, as well, but thought I would offer you a couple of my own:

Language, Cognition, and the Brain: Insights from Sign Language Research by Karen Emmorey (Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. 2002), and Individual Differences & Unviversals in Language Learning Aptitude, edited by Karl Diller (Newbury House, 1981).

The second one is an older book, but is still very valid and informative.

Thank you.

**shel90** · 01-05-2008, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

And its a division created, as have all divisions within the deaf community, by the hearing, as it is the hearing who tampered with ASL and came up with the articficial system known as SEE.

I think it is time for hearing people to stop tampering with ASL and Deaf education.

**shel90** · 01-05-2008, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I'm sure that shel90 can provide you with some excellent resources, as well, but thought I would offer you a couple of my own:

Language, Cognition, and the Brain: Insights from Sign Language Research by Karen Emmorey (Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. 2002), and Individual Differences & Unviversals in Language Learning Aptitude, edited by Karl Diller (Newbury House, 1981).

The second one is an older book, but is still very valid and informative.

Hey Berry, I will have to go thru my boxes in the basement to find those resources. I will try to make time at my work too.

jillio · 01-05-2008, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry

Thank you.

You're quite welcome.

jillio · 01-05-2008, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

I think it is time for hearing people to stop tampering with ASL and Deaf education.

**nodding agreement**

**Cheri** · 01-05-2008, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEAFdotDORK

I personally find SEE annoying.

Well, I personally finds some Deaf people (referred to as "big D Deaf") annoying their behaviors and attitudes. (a particular group of deaf people who share a language American Sign Language (ASL) and It's own culture) those kind of people do not like other deaf people who uses speech, wears cochlear implants and so on. The point is that they are not very accepting people, the fact is we are one big family because we are all deaf, even if we don't share the same common ancestry since the majority of us come from hearing families.

01-02-2008, 07:50 PM	#96 (permalink)
Cheri Prayers for my dad. Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Ohio Posts: 22,819	I understand what you're saying berry. But, ASL doesn't follow the grammar of written English, ASL certainly isn't good English but it's a good language for deaf people. So, they set out to improve sign language, to make it conform more closely to English. Today, we have Signed English and PSE. I know you don't like that idea, but I think that they just want to do what's best for deaf people, even if we don't agree with how they do it. I've known that some deaf people's right to sign were restricted all because of Alexander Graham Bell. The oralists won many battles and for a long time the use of sign was not allowed to be use by many deaf. Many of us who grew up oralism had no concept of what sign language was, because we did not know it was out there for us. That's one reason why I don't like the Alexander Graham Bell organization, because they took away sign language from deaf children, and we only had to be taught speech. I don't agree with how we all have to stick with one tool instead of learning them all, I love each sign languages that each deaf person uses, even if it's in ASL, or PSE, or SEE. no sign is better than the other, and this is what I believe. __________________ Avoid being a victim of a stroke, a stroke can happen to anyone at anytime. You will never know how devastating this could be until you had live through it. It affects everybody. So Support Stroke Awareness to find a cure and hope.

01-04-2008, 09:08 AM	#110 (permalink)
shel90 Let It Snow!!!! Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: A place where crabs are popular Posts: 40,290 Blog Entries: 3	[QUOTE=Reba;891995] "What's wrong with having another manual communication?" I think we can all easily see the biggest "wrong" right here in the forum. Since the creation of SEE, the Deaf community now has yet another source of division. One of the reasons that the Deaf "community" doesn't have as much political clout as other groups is its disunity. Oral vs. manual, CI vs. non-CI, ASL vs. SEE, cueing vs. non-cueing, etc. The creation of SEE didn't bring the Deaf community together; it created yet another division. QUOTE] How much more can a culture get divided? It is really unfortunate that all these hearing "experts" keep coming up with all these different language modes. __________________ "Wine improves with age. The older I get, the better I like it." --- Anonymous

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

01-04-2008, 07:19 PM	#111 (permalink)
DeafCapricorn Registered User Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 84	I know I'm jumping in on this thread a little too late, but... here's my view. I personally find SEE annoying... hard on signer and receiver. I personally use PSE, that's just how I was taught with my upbringing in the hearing world. As for ASL, I wouldn't mind learning more... it is quicker, ya know...