RilianSharp

Cued speech is manually coded sound, not english.

Deafness

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

jillio

If the system is used to cue English, then it is indeed English. English is comprised of sound. Cuing represents the phonemes that are combined to make morphemes, that are responsible for the sound in a spoken language. Therefore, cuing the phonemes to represnet the morphemes that make up the spoken words of English make cuing a mode of the English language. The same would apply if it were used to cue Spanish or French. It is a mode of the spoken language being cued, and the spoken language being cued is made up of sounds and combinations of sounds specific to that language.

RilianSharp

I could use the cueing for random sounds that aren't words.
That's the difference.
If it were a manually coded language, as opposed to sounds, one could not use it to convey gibberish.

Cloggy

Very true..
I read about someone cuing the sound of something hitting the floor..

Gives a new perspective on sound..

__________________

jillio

And I can use random sounds that don't mean anything, too. Or random gestures that don't mean anything. But that kind of defeats the purpose of communication, now, doesn't it? Cueing was developed to represent the meaningful units of language, i.e. phonemes being the smallest unit of sound that has meaning in the language being cued, and morphemes which are combinations of phonemes that represent meaning as a symbol.

Why would one want to convey gibberish? It has no meaning, and the purpose of making a language visable is to convery meaning via sight. I can speak gibberish, as well, but it doesn't do much to faccillitate dyadic communication. Since the system was designed to remove the ambiguity from speech reading in attempt to increase literacy rates, your cueing of gibberish is a distortion of the system. You are attempting to make a point simply to make a point. It has no logic or thought behind it, and quite frankly, borders on being no more than silly.

BBBBBBB, ddddd, AEAEAEAEAEAE, ssssss, strststr. Is that communication? Does it have any meaning at all? Of course not.

jillio

And ambient noise is conveyed through sign and in written form as well. Terps always interpret ambient noise if they are doing their job properly. Case in point.....cueing music. You cannot cue the sounds of the notes. However, you can cue the spoken phonemes that join together to create morphemes, which in turn become symbols that are the words used in the lyrics. However, you cannot cue the sound of an individual note, or even of a melody line.

So stating that cueing is visual sound is just plain silly.

loml

RalianSharp - It is always great to see new cuers, at the end of a weekend workshop, cue Julie Andrews' famous:

"Supercalafragalisticexpialadoshus"

__________________
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet

loml

Cloggy, this is my understanding of what occurred.

There was post secondary student, (a cuer with a CLT), attending a lecture. The CLT was cueing the sound "bang", several times during the lecture (with her non-dominant hand). This student, looked around to "see" where the sound was coming from. Sure enough someone was dropping their text repeatedly on the floor. Looking at who was doing this the student stated: "Would you please stop doing that, that sound is driving me nuts!"

Equal access to the sounds around you!

__________________
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet

jillio

Much preferable to concentrate on equal access to language rather than simply to sound. But of course, from the ethnocentric perspective taken, sound would be more important than language. Audists!

jillio

Better yet, fingerspell it.

RilianSharp

I didn't say it was/did.

My little brother likes to leave the consonants out of his words. It's not gibberish when he says it, but he could use cued speech to indicate his rendition of words, too. And one can also indicate, with cued speech, the difference between different pronunciations of the same word within the same language.

Cloggy

And that's the difference the positive view of somebody who uses / used it and sees the benefit of CS compared to the negative view of someone who never used it and thinks knows what it is... but really does not...

Cheri

__________________

loml

RilianSharp- Indeed! Cueing would let your brother "see" the sound that he is leaving out.

May I ask, how old is your brother?

__________________
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet

jillio

No, what you said was cuing could be used for sounds that are not words. I provided you with an example to show you exactly how silly your reasoning is.

Your littler brother, if he is hearing, no doubt will be able to correct his speech difficulties as his development progresses. If he is deaf, he may never correct for absent produced sounds in his speech, and there is a very logical and easily understood reason for this. If he is hearing, he may not automatically correct until he is taught to do so, but this is provided that a neurological connection between what he hears, processes, and then reproduces is weak. This situation is best addressed through speech therapy, not CS.

His use of CS to render the correct pronunciation of word would be effective if, and only if, the receptive party in the exchange was also a cuer.

Different pronunciations of the same word do not alter the symbolic meaning of the thing which the word as symbol represents. The important feature of language is concept. Words are but a symbol to represent that which is referred to. Without concept attached they are meaninless sound. Phonemes in and of themself have no meaning. They are not symbols used to represent concept. They are the smallest spoken unit of a language that can be combined with each other to form morphemes. Morphemes in an of themselves do not convey meaning. It is only when phonemes and morphemes are joined together to construct a symbol that is culturally agreed upon as representation of a thing or an abstract concept that they have meaning.

Therefore, being able to use a handshape to indicate pronunciation does not address the foundations of language acquisition or usage.

jillio

No, its the difference between someone who has an advanced grasp of language, systems, and the psychological and developmental issues involved vs. someone who has no understanding of such, and based on naivte, accepts less than plausible explanations for that which cannot be substantiated.

BTW, you don't cue.

jillio

See above post. What happened to your claims that you tried cuing, but that it didn't work for you? Or that you find the handshapes being placed so close tothe mouth interfered with your ability to speech read?

Cheri

It has nothing to do with it, I experienced cued speech, You didn't, so it doesn't make you an expert on cued speech, that's what I'm agreeing with Cloggy about.

__________________

Boult

INDEED!

__________________
Boult I.T.M.F.A.
I am a CI Borg, Proud to be and loving it!
MYTHS AND LIES ABOUT CI / New Chat Rooms Social / Internet Explorer Users: Switch to Safari / Get a Mac

jillio

Having experienced it hardly confers expert status on you. Especially when the understanding of liguistic and psychologicl issue that determine success of failure if a system is negligible. And, since you found it to be ineffective, and in fact, distracting, it could be wondered why you are so quick to defend it.

jillio

And it is superficial comrehension such as this that allows the NCSA to attempt revival of a 40 year old system that has not been shown to be effective in an attempt to prey on the unsuspecting and garner a profit for the organization.

If you were truly concerned regarding communication/educational/literacy issues for deaf children, you would inform yourself completely and then propose that which seeks to increase their capabilities, not that which has already been shown to be ineffecive. There is a reason that CS fell into disuse many years ago.

rockdrummer

I didn't see where she claimed to be an expert.

Cheri

You forgetting one thing Jillio, There are pros and cons to everything! There will be some success stories there will also be unsuccess stories. It doesn't mean cued speech is a failure for the deaf.

__________________

jillio

Absolutely there will be some successes and some failures with anything. But when evaluating a system, and promoting it for widespread use, however, one looks at overall success and failure rates, and the benefit to the population as a whole. When that has been done with CS inthe past as well as currently, it is determined that it does not provide benefit in increasing literacy for the majority of the population. That is not to say that it can't be used selectively as a supplement for an individual. That is simply to say, that as a widespread and recommeded primary communication tool or as a widespread educational methodology, it is not effective. Some people can beat their children througout their childhood and still manage to end up with a well adjusted and high functioning kid. Does that mean that we should promote this particualr parenting technique for all parents? I think not.

jillio

She stated that not having experienced CS equates to not having expertise, which in turn applies the intent of the statement tha having experience with CS as a system, even without additional knowledge required to comprehend the system and why it has not been successful for so many, implies some form of expertise. Please re-read the statement made.

In actuality, the inference of expert status originated with Cloggy's post, a poster who does not use CS, and only became aware of it in the very recent past.