Gee, I thought that lipreading was a "crutch"!

The baby in order to imitate you has to figure out how to shape their lips to make that particular sound they're hearing," explains developmental psychologist David Lewkowicz of Florida Atlantic University, who led the study being published Monday. "It's an incredibly complex process."

No it isn't.
Mimicking the movements do not give them an understanding of what is being said. ASL, on the other hand, requires comprehension.
 
Beowulf said:
The baby in order to imitate you has to figure out how to shape their lips to make that particular sound they're hearing," explains developmental psychologist David Lewkowicz of Florida Atlantic University, who led the study being published Monday. "It's an incredibly complex process."

No it isn't.
Mimicking the movements do not give them an understanding of what is being said. ASL, on the other hand, requires comprehension.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is about mimicking to understand 'what' is being said, it is about how they try and make that sound themselves ("...imitate you...").
 
Journey said:
I don't think it is about mimicking to understand 'what' is being said, it is about how they try and make that sound themselves ("...imitate you...").
Click to expand...

Do you think the babies know what they are saying? With ASL they do. Big difference.
 
Beowulf said:
Do you think the babies know what they are saying? With ASL they do. Big difference.
Click to expand...

Not a first, no. Just as ASL babies learn, through experience, that a repeatedly squeezed hand represents "milk", hearing babies learn that a particular sound represents "milk". They also both learn, through imitation, how to successfully express the concept themselves - one with their hand, the other with their mouth. But again, if I read it correctly, lipreading helps babies learn to makes the sounds themselves, it is only one step in the process of verbal communication.
 
Journey said:
Not a first, no. Just as ASL babies learn, through experience, that a repeatedly squeezed hand represents "milk", hearing babies learn that a particular sound represents "milk". They also both learn, through imitation, how to successfully express the concept themselves - one with their hand, the other with their mouth. But again, if I read it correctly, lipreading helps babies learn to makes the sounds themselves, it is only one step in the process of verbal communication.
Click to expand...

I see. That is interesting and you have a good point. I am no expert at this, anyhow.
 
Beowulf said:
I see. That is interesting and you have a good point. I am no expert at this, anyhow.
Click to expand...

I have some background but am certainly not an "expert" either - that's why it's great that there are places like this where we can share thoughts on things :).
 
Then again you guys are missing something. Auditory-Verbal considers lipreading a crutch. Remember faire joure? She was claiming that SHE didn't lipread at all.......hmmmmm makes you think. Maybe this might mean that auditory verbal will be unearthed as the junk science it is.
 
deafdyke said:
Then again you guys are missing something. Auditory-Verbal considers lipreading a crutch. Remember faire joure? She was claiming that SHE didn't lipread at all.......hmmmmm makes you think. Maybe this might mean that auditory verbal will be unearthed as the junk science it is.
Click to expand...

I haven't missed it dd, I have been thinking on it ;-). However, I think I am missing a connection between this article and auditory-verbal therapy. This article points to a very specific time period during 'babyhood', whereas AVT covers a much more expansive and/or varied length of time. I don't see how this theory on lipreading is in direct opposition to ATV. Can you help me out here?
 
All hearing people lipread! The world is not a soundooth for us, too. We uncounsciously do that all the time, helps with comprehension, especially in noisy environment.
And like deaf people, some of us are good at that and some are not. I'm NOT good at lipreading, while my husband is really good, that's why he understand deaf people very well, because even if they are voice off or have an accent, they still can help him understanding by shaping their lips (which all the deaf people I met are VERY good at). So signing and lipreading, he understands a lot, while I'm usually lost.

I think AVT is not the best way to help children learn to talk. The fact is, as far as I know, that they have children look at lips and mimich when they're learning how to produce a sound, but NOT lipreading when they're learning to understand what a sound is. They're two different moments. The problem is, sometimes children learn how to produce the sound before understanding its meaning. That's why some kids just seem to repeat words without understanding them, and they do so good with common phrases but do sooo bad when they have to express their own concepts.

Just my opinion though, we don't do AVT so I have no direct experience at all.
 
Journey said:
I haven't missed it dd, I have been thinking on it ;-). However, I think I am missing a connection between this article and auditory-verbal therapy. This article points to a very specific time period during 'babyhood', whereas AVT covers a much more expansive and/or varied length of time. I don't see how this theory on lipreading is in direct opposition to ATV. Can you help me out here?
Click to expand...

Nope. Auditory-Verbal therapy's theory is that lipreading "distracts" from learning language... yet you learn language as a baby/toddler......so you're still speech/lipreading even after babyhood.
 
deafdyke said:
Nope. Auditory-Verbal therapy's theory is that lipreading "distracts" from learning language... yet you learn language as a baby/toddler......so you're still speech/lipreading even after babyhood.
Click to expand...

Is that a "nope" you can't help me? I am beyond help? :giggle: I understand what you are saying but, here's where I am hung-up ... From my understanding, AVT works to lessen one's dependence on visual cues (lipreading) in order to 'tune in better' to the meaning of sounds. Lipreading in infants is not an effort to understand what sounds mean but more of an effort to learn how to mimic those sounds. Both work at certain developmental stages, in opposite ways based on opposite needs, to achieve a fully rounded result in the end (to recognize sounds as well as produce them). Am I totally off the rails here?
 
Journey said:
Is that a "nope" you can't help me? I am beyond help? :giggle: I understand what you are saying but, here's where I am hung-up ... From my understanding, AVT works to lessen one's dependence on visual cues (lipreading) in order to 'tune in better' to the meaning of sounds. Lipreading in infants is not an effort to understand what sounds mean but more of an effort to learn how to mimic those sounds. Both work at certain developmental stages, in opposite ways based on opposite needs, to achieve a fully rounded result in the end (to recognize sounds as well as produce them). Am I totally off the rails here?
Click to expand...

Yes. Deaf babies who are undiagnosed learn the meaning of things like milk, play, all kinds of things that interest them by lipreading, and often it makes it hard for the parent to believe they are actually deaf.

Jillio talked about that extensively.
 
Bottesini said:
Yes. Deaf babies who are undiagnosed learn the meaning of things like milk, play, all kinds of things that interest them by lipreading, and often it makes it hard for the parent to believe they are actually deaf.

Jillio talked about that extensively.
Click to expand...

I didn't know that this has been discussed extensively before. I will try to search it out and see if it can fill in some of the missing pieces for me. Thank you.
 
Bottesini said:
Yes. Deaf babies who are undiagnosed learn the meaning of things like milk, play, all kinds of things that interest them by lipreading, and often it makes it hard for the parent to believe they are actually deaf.
.
Click to expand...

When we adopted our daughter who has mental retardation, she was almost 6. When we asked her to touch her hair,ears, mouth, nose and chin, and eyes, some days she could do all of them, some days she mixed up hair, ears, and eyes.
One day she was standing and watching me at the window while I was in the backyard planting flowers. I waved at her, and then for some reason, I have no idea why), I mouthed "Touch your hair," and she did. I mouthed all the 'touch your...' phrases she should know, and she did them all. I lip synced a few more things, she understand them and responded the same as she did when I talked to her.

I made an appt with the doctor. To make a long story short, we dug up her old records (adopted kids often don't have them), he looked at her ears and we realized she'd had asymptomatic ear infections almost all her life. Sometimes they cleared up enough for her to hear, sometimes they didn't. She had a tonsiladenoidectomy, and the ear infections went away, and she could hear afterward (they said a slight hearing loss in one ear, just enough so we shouldn't whisper to her on that side).

If a profoundly retarded child with severe ear infections interfering with her hearing could teach herself to lipread a few words, it makes sense that a deaf child with 'normal' intelligence could do that even better. She also read body language surprisingly well- when asked a question she could usually tell by our body language whether to answer yes or no. We learned this when started lip syncing things to her instead of speaking to see what other things she understood through some other method than speech.
 
Beowulf said:

Mimicking the movements do not give them an understanding of what is being said. ASL, on the other hand, requires comprehension.
Click to expand...


Babies who are signed to 'babble' in hand shapes. Deaf babies do it more, but both of my youngest hearing grandbabies see me and start waving their hands around, trying to make different hand movements (because I am the one signs most consistently with them).
Did you see the link I posted in the family section about the Chinese boys who were adopted by a family with one deaf and one hearing parent? She has a video on her blog of the boys doing this sign language babbling, and she explains hwo this helps them learn speech.

Lipreading helps hearing babies pick up the mechanics of speech and it's the same thing deaf babies do when they watch their parents sign, then make seemingly random hand movements for awhile before making signs that can be understood. In both cases, it helps them pick up the mechanics of sign. It's the same developmental step, hearing or deaf.
 
The AVT therapist don't allow deaf babies look at their lips when speaking to them because the purpose is to force them to use whatever little hearing they have. To me, it is just beyond cruel.
 
shel90 said:
The AVT therapist don't allow deaf babies look at their lips when speaking to them because the purpose is to force them to use whatever little hearing they have. To me, it is just beyond cruel.
Click to expand...

Oh, Shel. Cruel, and ignorant. Dense. Stupid. And creepy. How do they stop the babies from looking at their lips? A mask? How terrifying for the little mites.
 
Grayma said:
Oh, Shel. Cruel, and ignorant. Dense. Stupid. And creepy. How do they stop the babies from looking at their lips? A mask? How terrifying for the little mites.
Click to expand...

They cover their mouths when talking to the..these poor babies are striving for as much language input as they can only to get some of it taken away for the sake of learning to "hear." Incredibly audist of them
 
Back
Top