SEE is a language... It's English...

Status
Not open for further replies.
CSign

CSign

New Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
3,279
Reaction score
1
I've read on here many times that SEE is not a language. That comment is misleading, as it is a language.... English.
I don't view ASL or SEE as one being superior to another. They are equally valid and both serve a purpose.
Many different factors play into what mode of communication will be used with a DHH child. If the child comes from a family of two Deaf parents, it makes sense that the Childs first language is ASL whether they are hearing or not. If the child comes from a family of two hearing parents, it makes sense to use SEE in the beginning. Many things come into play when determining a mode of communication, including long term goals.
I wanted to be able to effectively communicate with my son, which is why we have signed with him from the very beginning. I also didn't want him to be a statistic, graduating with a 3rd grade reading level.
Now don't everyone jump down my throat... I know that not all ASL users graduate with a 3rd grade reading level, just as not all SEE users are always masters of English...
With that being said, we know it is a challenge for DHH individuals to master English as hearing people do because they do not access it the same way. Has nothing to do with intelligence, everything to do with access. I have made a point to give my 6 year old complete and ongoing access to speech and language by using TC and SEE. I realize many of you don't agree with thus approach. I will say that it has been a very effective mode of communication for him. His language skills are wonderful and he is reading at a 2nd grade level, while he is only in first grade. He has already mastered the 2nd grade sight words and I partially attribute that to the use of fingerspelling as well.
So while we may not agree on the approach, the end result will be the same. He understands ASL and will ultimately be proficient in ASL and have a mastery of the English language, which was our goal. If a person commits to using a mode of communication everyday, their skills will continue to improve. I am able to provide my son with visual language supporting the spoken language around him.
So let's try to be understanding of different roads that can be taken to get to the same place. No one road is better, they all take you to the land of language and communication.
To be clear, I place high value on ASL but SEE is not some evil thing that was created to take away from DHH individuals. It was created to help those who wanted it obtain a mastery of the English language...
 
English is a language.

ASL is a language.

SEE is an MCE> manually coded English. SEE is not a language.
 
Try using the Morse Code when reading to a child. :P
 
SEE is a MCL (manually coded language) representing the spoken language of English. SEE itself is not a language, it's to visualize the spoken language.
 
here we go again.............

But I'll say this much - Please show me where in any linguistics document that clearly states SEE is a language. Please show me where they accept it as a foreign language credit in higher ed.
 
Beowulf said:
Try using the Morse Code when reading to a child. :P
Click to expand...

Imagine a kid listening to one of the Harry Potter novels in morse code. That'll be one long read.
 
CSign said:
I've read on here many times that SEE is not a language. That comment is misleading, as it is a language.... English.
I don't view ASL or SEE as one being superior to another. They are equally valid and both serve a purpose.
Many different factors play into what mode of communication will be used with a DHH child. If the child comes from a family of two Deaf parents, it makes sense that the Childs first language is ASL whether they are hearing or not. If the child comes from a family of two hearing parents, it makes sense to use SEE in the beginning. Many things come into play when determining a mode of communication, including long term goals.
I wanted to be able to effectively communicate with my son, which is why we have signed with him from the very beginning. I also didn't want him to be a statistic, graduating with a 3rd grade reading level.
Now don't everyone jump down my throat... I know that not all ASL users graduate with a 3rd grade reading level, just as not all SEE users are always masters of English...
With that being said, we know it is a challenge for DHH individuals to master English as hearing people do because they do not access it the same way. Has nothing to do with intelligence, everything to do with access. I have made a point to give my 6 year old complete and ongoing access to speech and language by using TC and SEE. I realize many of you don't agree with thus approach. I will say that it has been a very effective mode of communication for him. His language skills are wonderful and he is reading at a 2nd grade level, while he is only in first grade. He has already mastered the 2nd grade sight words and I partially attribute that to the use of fingerspelling as well.
So while we may not agree on the approach, the end result will be the same. He understands ASL and will ultimately be proficient in ASL and have a mastery of the English language, which was our goal. If a person commits to using a mode of communication everyday, their skills will continue to improve. I am able to provide my son with visual language supporting the spoken language around him.
So let's try to be understanding of different roads that can be taken to get to the same place. No one road is better, they all take you to the land of language and communication.
To be clear, I place high value on ASL but SEE is not some evil thing that was created to take away from DHH individuals. It was created to help those who wanted it obtain a mastery of the English language...
Click to expand...

I'd attribute it more to his strong visual sense and what appears to be an innate ability to weed out conflicting linguistic input.
 
Banjo said:
Imagine a kid listening to one of the Harry Potter novels in morse code. That'll be one long read.
Click to expand...

You'll be lucky to retain the kid's attention for very long if you use Morse code. :giggle:
 
And let's get this correct once and for all...SEE is not a language. It is a mode of English. English is the language, SEE is the mode. That is why it falls into the category of Manually Coded English.

ASL on the other hand, is a complete language in and of itself that fulfills all of the linguistic requirements of a language. It is unrelated to English, it is not a way to make English visable, nor is it a code for English.
 
Okay, I guess it comes down to semantics. I am not an uneducated person... I understand that SEE is Manually Coded English. English = a language.
I find the comment about morse code amusing, as my child attends to what is being presented to him. SEE maintains all of the visual components of ASL. Many people are under the impression that it is dry and boring. It would seem that you haven't been exposed to a person fluent in SEE. If you had, you would see (haha, no pun intended) that it can be just as beautiful as ASL if the person knows what they are doing.
I think many of you just responded to the title of this thread, rather than seeing the point of it. I'm simply trying to express there are different ways of achieving the same result. No one way is superior to another. I know that SEE can be an effective way of teaching a DHH child English if they have an appropriate language model. ;-)
 
I am well aware of the fact that ASL has nothing to do with English... As I stated, my goal was clear and effective communication with my child. I have achieved that through the use of TC and SEE. People can bash it all they want, I have experienced the reality of it's effectiveness. It is kind of sad though, that some will bash it without ever having real experience with it beyond what they've read about. That's not to say that all people who use SEE are great, I've seen poor examples of SEE as well as ASL. It comes down to the persons ability.
 
Again, SEE is a MCL. It represents a spoken language which is English.

SEE itself is not a language. English is.
 
CSign said:
Okay, I guess it comes down to semantics. I am not an uneducated person... I understand that SEE is Manually Coded English. English = a language.
I find the comment about morse code amusing, as my child attends to what is being presented to him. SEE maintains all of the visual components of ASL. Many people are under the impression that it is dry and boring. It would seem that you haven't been exposed to a person fluent in SEE. If you had, you would see (haha, no pun intended) that it can be just as beautiful as ASL if the person knows what they are doing.
I think many of you just responded to the title of this thread, rather than seeing the point of it. I'm simply trying to express there are different ways of achieving the same result. No one way is superior to another. I know that SEE can be an effective way of teaching a DHH child English if they have an appropriate language model. ;-)
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't come down to semantics. It comes down to linguistic criteria of what constitutes a language.

SEE does not maintain all of the visual components of ASL. It does not maintain the syntax of a language intended to be processed visually. It does not maintain the integrity of concept or of symbolic sign.

SEE does not achieve the same result as ASL. In fact, it has been shown through much research that it acutually provides a confusing linguistic environment. And of course there are ways that are superior for accomplishing a specific goal. That holds true for everything.

It is acceptable as a tool in teaching a child English. However, that does not make it a language. That makes it a tool for teaching a specific language, the same as writing is a tool for teaching a specific language. Neither one are languages. They are modes of a specific language.

ASL is intended for communication purposes, and it fulfills all the requirements for communication unassisted by any other language. SEE is intended for teaching and instructing, not for communication.
 
Just as Morse Code is a mode of English and other languages.
 
deafskeptic said:
Just as Morse Code is a mode of English and other languages.
Click to expand...

Exactly! If you want a visual mode for teaching English, there is one that has been available for centuries. It is called "writing." The MCEs are nothing more than oralist attempts to incorporate something visual in the failure of deaf ed to address the needs of deaf students in an oral environment.
 
You cannot teach SEE without teaching someone English first or concurrently.

ASL can be taught without English, though it does rely on English for fingerspelling. But the purer ASL you get, the less fingerspelling you'll see.
 
If you choose not to be open to different options, then that is your loss. No big deal ;-) I just wanted to share my experience, which has been effective and positive for my son. I think it is sad for people to shut down something that can be an effective tool for teaching English, if the goal is for the child to be proficient in English. That's all ;-) as you may or may not have noticed, I didn't say other ways are wrong or bad. It's funny to me that one would comment that one is superior to another. I wouldn't go so far as to insult someone who has found an effective way of communicating and teaching their child just because it is different from my experience ;-)
 
CSign said:
If you choose not to be open to different options, then that is your loss. No big deal ;-) I just wanted to share my experience, which has been effective and positive for my son. I think it is sad for people to shut down something that can be an effective tool for teaching English, if the goal is for the child to be proficient in English. That's all ;-) as you may or may not have noticed, I didn't say other ways are wrong or bad. It's funny to me that one would comment that one is superior to another. I wouldn't go so far as to insult someone who has found an effective way of communicating and teaching their child just because it is different from my experience ;-)
Click to expand...

Who said superior? I thought we just defined.
 
No need to get defensive with us.

Besides, I am fluent in SEE. I still prefer ASL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top