Is it really so bad to know SEE (Sign Exact English?)

Jiro said:
you should already know that SEE is just simply awful and tedious. I don't really enjoy conversing with a person signing in SEE. It's exactly like listening to a person talking in extremely verbose English when it can be simply done quickly with right slangs and conversational style.
Click to expand...

I know that is the common reaction among our long time ASL users. But we are continually getting new members and we should consider that it may well be new to them!

What about PSL? If I ever get a chance to have anyone to sign with . . . and thus relearn what little I got to know years ago and add to it I have a feeling that having just used English (up until now at 72) I would naturally fall back into English word order.
 
In my ITP (interpreter training program), we had to learn and become fluent in ASL prior to learning how to transliterate in SEE.

ASL is a language, and it should be learned first. Then, SEE, which is not a language in itself but is a tool for English instruction, can be learned as needed.
 
Reba said:
In my ITP (interpreter training program), we had to learn and become fluent in ASL prior to learning how to transliterate in SEE.

ASL is a language, and it should be learned first. Then, SEE, which is not a language in itself but is a tool for English instruction, can be learned as needed.
Click to expand...

Glad you got the right ITP. I am shocked to learn that some people learn SEE first then ASL. It is going to be harder on them, and they may struggle for the rest of their life.
 
Jane B. said:
I know that is the common reaction among our long time ASL users. But we are continually getting new members and we should consider that it may well be new to them!
Click to expand...
why repeat in a thread that now has over 200 posts? it was even repeated just several posts ago.

Jane B. said:
What about PSL? If I ever get a chance to have anyone to sign with . . . and thus relearn what little I got to know years ago and add to it I have a feeling that having just used English (up until now at 72) I would naturally fall back into English word order.
Click to expand...
I do sign in PSL but leaning toward ASL. It's a typical transition for late signer or SEE signer. Some people just never made a transition and stick with what they know. I do not sign on daily basis so that makes my transition slower. I meet up with my deaf friends mostly on weekends.

I've been to RIT many times and many newcomers (freshmen-soph) sign in very strong SEE. It makes me *groannnnnnnnnnnn*. But later on after deep immersion in deaf culture and interacting with deafies from Gally... they do make transition to PSL/ASL.... much better! much easier to communicate with.
 
sonocativo said:
As an example, you speak...
I want an Apple, BUT...
in ASL you sign....
Apple, I want.

The Object is first, so we know what you are refering to.... It is a lot different than english, but follow Yoda from Star wars. ASL it is, after all !
Click to expand...

True, but what about a specific apple? You would finger spell the name.

If you're late deafened or deaf(but grew up orally) SEE would be more natural.

EDIT: To be more specific: It would be more natural in short conversation. In my group, nobody signs unless someone has an issue which warrents it. We all use ASL, but nobody is fluent. Because of this, SEE might be better in those cases where the signed conversation is ONLY used sparingly.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
True, but what about a specific apple? You would finger spell the name.
Click to expand...
so? for hearing people - you'd have to pronounce a name of specific apple anyway. how does SEE help you better for that part?

VacationGuy234 said:
If you're late deafened or deaf(but grew up orally) SEE would be more natural.

EDIT: To be more specific: It would be more natural in short conversation.
Click to expand...
more natural? huh? ASL is more natural.... no wait - it's a natural language because it's a language! and SEE is not a language. that's equivalent to saying... if you're American or moved to Mexico... speaking Spanglish would be more natural.... when in fact it's not even a language.

VacationGuy234 said:
In my group, nobody signs unless someone has an issue which warrents it. We all use ASL, but nobody is fluent. Because of this, SEE might be better in those cases where the signed conversation is ONLY used sparingly.
Click to expand...
so use PSE then
 
Just tried signing in SEE...impossible. Too much unnatural work in my brain. lol
 
SEE II is taught in schools. Because of this, the majority of younger deaf will know it. Does anyone know if PSE is taught in school?

The problem is the relearning process. People are not going to learn a new language when there is no one with whom to communicate. The fact is deaf meet far more deaf than Deaf so ASL is not a priority.

The problem to be solved is immediate communication.

In the end, cell phone transcription is probably the best solution. Signing would make it easier, but both sides need to understand the language.

People always take the easiest route first, it's human nature.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
SEE II is taught in schools. Because of this, the majority of younger deaf will know it. Does anyone know if PSE is taught in school?

The problem is the relearning process. People are not going to learn a new language when there is no one with whom to communicate. The fact is deaf meet far more deaf than Deaf so ASL is not a priority.

The problem to be solved is immediate communication.

In the end, cell phone transcription is probably the best solution. Signing would make it easier, but both sides need to understand the language.

People always take the easiest route first, it's human nature.
Click to expand...

It was popular in 1970s' and again it came back, in 2014.
SEE is full of crap.. Just saying
 
VacationGuy234 said:
The problem to be solved is immediate communication.
Click to expand...

Yes. So how do you propose a teacher work with a student who cannot understand the teacher? ASL would provide the pathway between student and teacher by way of interpreter (which would be accounted for in an IEP.) A cell phone transcription is not realistic in this case.
 
AlleyCat said:
Yes. So how do you propose a teacher work with a student who cannot understand the teacher? ASL would provide the pathway between student and teacher by way of interpreter (which would be accounted for in an IEP.) A cell phone transcription is not realistic in this case.
Click to expand...

You are assuming that the student knows ASL.
 
Oh yes power of visual communication.


I met many Deaf foreigners who dont know english. They pick up ASL pretty very well.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
SEE II is taught in schools. Because of this, the majority of younger deaf will know it. Does anyone know if PSE is taught in school?
Click to expand...
What schools are still using SEE II as a primary mode of instruction other than for English subject classes? In South Carolina, we've been mandated to use ASL for years.

I've never heard of PSE being taught in schools since it isn't a defined language. PSE is a wide spectrum connecting SEE and ASL. One person's PSE might be almost full signed English, and another person's PSE might be almost full ASL with just some extra initialization mixed in. It's too vague to define.

The problem is the relearning process. People are not going to learn a new language when there is no one with whom to communicate. The fact is deaf meet far more deaf than Deaf so ASL is not a priority.
Click to expand...
If the schools and the early intervention services for pre-schoolers are consistent with teaching ASL, then that shouldn't be a problem.

Now, if you mean adults, that might be different.

As you stated, relearning is a problem. That's why I recommend learning ASL in the first place so "relearning" from SEE to ASL won't be necessary.

The problem to be solved is immediate communication.
Click to expand...
That's why the earlier the better for learning ASL.

In the end, cell phone transcription is probably the best solution. Signing would make it easier, but both sides need to understand the language.
Click to expand...
I guess you're referring to adults, not school kids in a classroom.

People always take the easiest route first, it's human nature.
Click to expand...
Maybe but it's not always the best route in the long run.
 
Frisky Feline said:
It was popular in 1970s' and again it came back, in 2014.
SEE is full of crap.. Just saying
Click to expand...
The promotion of SEE when it first came out was strictly aggressive marketing by the developers. It wasn't based on any needs or wants of the Deaf community.

Once SEE became entrenched in the educational system, no one wanted to admit that it failed, or that the states wasted so much money.
 
AlleyCat said:
You're right, I am. However, even if it is only SEE as this thread is about, cell phone transcription is NOT reasonable.
Click to expand...

I don't remember how far back the post is that mentions cell phone transcription but I do remember getting the impression that it was in regard to a conversation outside the classroom. Also, that it was probably among adults that do not converse with each other that often and differ in what they usually use.
 
Jane B. said:
I don't remember how far back the post is that mentions cell phone transcription but I do remember getting the impression that it was in regard to a conversation outside the classroom. Also, that it was probably among adults that do not converse with each other that often and differ in what they usually use.
Click to expand...


It's on this very page. Same page where he's talking about SEE in schools and cell phone transcription.
 
Jiro said:
you should already know that SEE is just simply awful and tedious. I don't really enjoy conversing with a person signing in SEE. It's exactly like listening to a person talking in extremely verbose English when it can be simply conveyed quickly with right slangs and conversational style.
Click to expand...

Bingo!! I use ASL and PSE to converse with other Deaf people. I don't use SEE language.
 
Back
Top