ASL, SEE Sign, & Signed English

[sculleywr]

I know what you mean. It also occurs in junior high as well.

One example: When I was in the 7th grade, we had a home economics class (this was a public school with DHH program). In this case, all of the students in my home ecomonics class were all deaf/hoh. The teacher that was supposed to teach our class was out due to some major surgery and wouldn't be back for the entire semester. Instead of getting a different home economics teacher to teach the class (there were plenty), the interpeters (2 of them) took it upon themselves to actually teach the class. That is not their place.

Yeah. In Georgia, according to one of my friends, an interpreter is to have two priorities. First priority is to interpret, and the second priority, in the case of a test or quiz, act as liaison between the deaf and the teacher. They are not allowed to be teacher's aide for anyone but the deaf. If the teacher can't make it, either a substitute fills in or the period is a free period. I think its the same way in Tennessee.

 

[Reba]

... If the teacher can't make it, either a substitute fills in or the period is a free period....

Right. If that's what the other classes who don't have interpreters have to do, then the classes with interpreters need to to do the same thing.

 

[Demise]

SEE is a very Englishy signing system. It is very tiring to sign for more than a couple of minutes because of all the word endings, the need to sign every single word, etc. I prefer ASL because it's cleaner, more expressive (the words/signs aren't everything--body posture, facial expression, eyes, etc. all go into it).

In SEE, you would sign "HI, WHAT IS YOUR NAME?"
In ASL, it would go more like "HI! NAME WHAT YOU look interested"
In PSE, you use ASL signs in an English word order, like this: "HI! WHAT YOUR NAME ??

Well if you're interpreting for students in school... you're supposed to use English because you are in education class. All hearing learn English, so should all deafies or hearing impaired. Cultures stay at home. Me and everybody should go to school to learn. You know, as a mainstream student, I prefer ENGLISH like every rest of other hearing students'. I want to be able to write English without having any problems.

For instance -- on a review test, a teacher's giving away his/her specific questions will be on exam. It is not fair that rest of other hearing students heard a specific questions and I see it differently through ASL interpreter.

 

[SxyPorkie]

IMHO, the best way in achieving a high degree in English literacy is to read more. Yes, as funny as it sounds, in order to have a high degree in English ability, you need to be an excellent reader.

This should happen during elementary instruction. The DHH teacher should emphasize reading over auditory/verbal training, cursive writing, singing songs, and whatnot. Reading promotes vocabulary building, how to spot new words and derive definitions, to assimilate idioms and much more. High expectations and parential participation are essential ingredients from which a highly literate DHH person can spring forth.

Funny thing is, whenever I meet old friends from my FSD days, they always invariably remark how much time I've spent in the library, and now wished they did the same. And I would invariably wish I've spent more time participating in sports & activities, being more 'social', etc.! And we would laugh about it and move on.

You are right... read more books help deafies improving english...
SxyPorkie

 

[gnulinuxman]

Well if you're interpreting for students in school... you're supposed to use English because you are in education class. All hearing learn English, so should all deafies or hearing impaired. Cultures stay at home. Me and everybody should go to school to learn.

WTF??? I totally disagree here. What have you got against signing in ASL? English isn't a sign language.

You know, as a mainstream student, I prefer ENGLISH like every rest of other hearing students'. I want to be able to write English without having any problems.

WTF does that have to do with interpreters?

For instance -- on a review test, a teacher's giving away his/her specific questions will be on exam. It is not fair that rest of other hearing students heard a specific questions and I see it differently through ASL interpreter.

Waa waa waa...It isn't THAT important to get it word-for-word. If you must, then tell the interpreter.

 

[ClearSky]

For instance -- on a review test, a teacher's giving away his/her specific questions will be on exam. It is not fair that rest of other hearing students heard a specific questions and I see it differently through ASL interpreter.

I used to hate it when the interpreter would word the questions differently than I would hear it because I would glance at the teacher and catch what they said lipreading. A lot of times when they reword it, they will reword it in a baby-type sentence--not sentences that children the appropriate age must hear, so that they can come up to par to their hearing peers in English. I see a problem with that, and I used to hate it. I knew that sometimes I would be so doubtful when I had to write things down as other students and the interpreter would tell it to me differently. I used to hate that because I used to care as a student.

 

[Interpretrator]

A lot of times when they reword it, they will reword it in a baby-type sentence--not sentences that children the appropriate age must hear, so that they can come up to par to their hearing peers in English.

It is called "interpreting," not "rewording." That is ASL grammar, not a baby-type sentence. ASL can't be judged by comparison to English as the two have little to do with one another.

What I think you wanted and should have had in school is "transliterating," so that you could still think in English word order, especially if you could hear the English. In high school I think it can be hard for kids to be able to tell the interpreter exactly what they need, so I'm sorry you didn't get interpreters who could or would transliterate into signed English.

I interpreted for a college student who was fluent in ASL and used it to communicate out of class, but in class he would often insist that I voice the EXACT words he was signing in English. This took some getting used to on my part, but I didn't think it was inappropriate for him to want to use the language of the classroom (English) even though ASL was his first language. He was able to use both languages very fluently and appropriately.

 

[ClearSky]

It is called "interpreting," not "rewording." That is ASL grammar, not a baby-type sentence. ASL can't be judged by comparison to English as the two have little to do with one another.

What I think you wanted and should have had in school is "transliterating," so that you could still think in English word order, especially if you could hear the English. In high school I think it can be hard for kids to be able to tell the interpreter exactly what they need, so I'm sorry you didn't get interpreters who could or would transliterate into signed English.

I interpreted for a college student who was fluent in ASL and used it to communicate out of class, but in class he would often insist that I voice the EXACT words he was signing in English. This took some getting used to on my part, but I didn't think it was inappropriate for him to want to use the language of the classroom (English) even though ASL was his first language. He was able to use both languages very fluently and appropriately.

No, what I meant to say is that she changed words in the sentences (she was voicing like a normal person would), but she would change the words most likely because she was used to rephrasing and ASL for those students that didn't have a normal vocabulary like everyone else, which seemed elementary to me. I knew there were certain words that the teacher would have used differently. Two interpreters and a tutor have told me how many words deaf people, whose language is ASL, did not know how to read from their assignments or via TTY. One was so surprised that I could write normal sentences via TTY (she was teaching me to use it). I didn't understand why she was surprised because she knows I don't use ASL. She said it's confusing to read ASL in TTY. Anyway, I believe this is why she exchanged words for another word that was more simple that she thought I would understand better. This was annoying because I wanted to have the same language access as everyone else in my classroom. All of the interpreters know that I did not sign and voiced for myself. They never asked me what I wanted, and I didn't know the different signs available until much later. I didn't know I could say what I wanted. What I did was just read my papers and focus on lipreading which was the most important part of interpreting. Originally, I had asked for an Oral Interpreter, but they sent me one that did not have experience and expressed discomfort in doing oral interpreting all the time, so I let her sign.

I don't think the interpreting world is perfect, and there are some interpreters who, no matter what, will do whatever they want--break ethic rules, be too much in your business, etc. This particular one decided which signs was best for me, I realized. What she didn't seem to know is that what was really important for me was basically lipreading her. I know there are good ones out there who are really professional and care about what you want done. I have had them. Unfortunately, there was a period of time where the boss and tutor had refused to believe anything I said regarding my complaints about her.

Don't feel offended, this is my experience.

 

[gnulinuxman]

It is called "interpreting," not "rewording." That is ASL grammar, not a baby-type sentence. ASL can't be judged by comparison to English as the two have little to do with one another.

What I think you wanted and should have had in school is "transliterating," so that you could still think in English word order, especially if you could hear the English. In high school I think it can be hard for kids to be able to tell the interpreter exactly what they need, so I'm sorry you didn't get interpreters who could or would transliterate into signed English.

She's right. Interpreting is translation, and ASL is different from English. For an English to Spanish translator, for example, would I want the interpreter translating the sentence into crude Spanish that resembled English word order or would I want them translated into real Spanish? No matter what type of languages you're dealing with, this is how it works. Translations are very hard to do correctly while keeping the whole meaning. This is what "suffering in the translation" is. Sign languages are no different--they have their own rules and grammar too. (FWIW, I am trilingual and have to do LOTS of translations among English, Spanish, and ASL. I learned Spanish second and ASL third, and being bilingual already when I started learning ASL helped me get a better grasp on its grammar.)

I interpreted for a college student who was fluent in ASL and used it to communicate out of class, but in class he would often insist that I voice the EXACT words he was signing in English. This took some getting used to on my part, but I didn't think it was inappropriate for him to want to use the language of the classroom (English) even though ASL was his first language. He was able to use both languages very fluently and appropriately.

Interesting. My fiancee uses her interpreters one-way--she has them sign only, and she voices her side.

 

[Cheri]

Well if you're interpreting for students in school... you're supposed to use English because you are in education class. All hearing learn English, so should all deafies or hearing impaired. Cultures stay at home.

Says who? Ever hear of the first amendment? whether the interpreter go with SEE or ASL, It shouldn't matter, it wouldn't effect the students learning development. What I know is that most interpreters uses ASL as the right choice, because it is uses widely by the deaf.

 

[Interpretrator]

No, what I meant to say is that she changed words in the sentences (she was voicing like a normal person would), but she would change the words most likely because she was used to rephrasing and ASL for those students that didn't have a normal vocabulary like everyone else, which seemed elementary to me.

I'm pretty sure I get what you mean, and it still sounds like interpreting vs. transliterating to me.

This particular one decided which signs was best for me, I realized. What she didn't seem to know is that what was really important for me was basically lipreading her. I know there are good ones out there who are really professional and care about what you want done. I have had them. Unfortunately, there was a period of time where the boss and tutor had refused to believe anything I said regarding my complaints about her.

I totally agree that she decided on her own how to sign/voice for you, and that she should have followed your wishes. However, I have a question -- did you ever tell her directly that you wanted English and not ASL? You say she "didn't seem to know" what you wanted but you also mention that the people you complained to didn't believe what you say. If this was her boss, that boss should ABSOLUTELY have told the interpreter that you preferred English to ASL. If she didn't, that's a big failing on her part. But if she didn't even tell the interpreter, how else was the terp to know?

I'm not offended in the least, don't worry, and I hope you aren't offended by my questions as I don't mean to be harassing you, just asking friendly questions! Obviously I'd never argue that the interpreting world is perfect but I would add that everyone needs to do their part to make things work smoothly. (Although in a K-12 situation the burden is usually more on the interpreter side, I think.)

Interesting. My fiancee uses her interpreters one-way--she has them sign only, and she voices her side.

I have experienced that as well, and honestly I prefer it that way when the client wants specific words used in a specific order. MY lipreading skills are okay but not superior, and my transliterating is very good, but transliterating word-for-word? Extremely hard.

However many clients simply choose not to use their voice and of course I respect that. I'm happy to do the word-for-word if they want but I do get frustrated sometimes when they won't work with me, slow down a little, and remain patient if I can't read their lightning-fast signed English and voice it exactly!

 

[ClearSky]

No, I never told her directly because I didn't know that I could. I thought they did what they were supposed to do. I have learned more about the whole situation now that I am older and reading other people's situation. I didn't have an interpreter until I was much older. I really liked having them when I first requested one because I could read lips up close and understand. I didn't know an interpreter's job was more complex than that especially with sign language because I just wanted to have access to reading lips. There's probably not very many who have experience.

Well, the issue with the interpreter was more complex than that. I once complained about her breaking rules, but it ended up being no use fighting anymore. I am just glad it's over. I did have another one who broke every rule and was really naive. I like it when they are professionals and treat you like you're smart not stupid with respect. They are the ones I feel normal with. I wonder what makes them all so different because it's clear form school that they have a rule to follow. Why is it so hard for some to not be so personal with the deaf students? I think space is so important. Yet, there are some fantastic ones.

 

[Interpretrator]

No, I never told her directly because I didn't know that I could.

Yeah, that's what I meant about K-12 interpreters. She should have been more on the ball about finding out what was best for you. Sometimes interpreters are told they need to be "ASL models" for younger students and they don't take into consideration that some of their students don't want or need that.

I wonder what makes them all so different because it's clear form school that they have a rule to follow. Why is it so hard for some to not be so personal with the deaf students?

This is true. But you have to understand that there really isn't "one rule" we all follow. Not everyone belongs to or is even familiar with RID, and even among RID interpreters they may not follow the code of ethics all in the same way. It's written on purpose not to be too specific since there is no way to have one rule for every situation. Take confidentiality, for example -- sometimes we are actually legally required to break that. (Rarely, but sometimes.)

Also, we're all different people with different personalities. And some interpreters just aren't good with separating the personal from the professional. I have worked with interpreters who behave exactly the same way with students both in the classroom and in social situations. I don't think that's especially professional but I see it a lot.

 

[Reba]

...For instance -- on a review test, a teacher's giving away his/her specific questions will be on exam. It is not fair that rest of other hearing students heard a specific questions and I see it differently through ASL interpreter.

You didn't have a note taker?

 

[Reba]

... Originally, I had asked for an Oral Interpreter, but they sent me one that did not have experience and expressed discomfort in doing oral interpreting all the time, so I let her sign.

It sounds like they assigned you an interpreter who tried to do the work of an oral facilitator without really being trained in that skill. If you requested an oral facilitator in your IEP, and you didn't get one, then the staff and administration of your school didn't meet your needs. Also, you should have had a note taker and/or CART, or possibly some other options that weren't even considered.

Using an interpreter is not a "one-size-fits-all" situation.

 

[gnulinuxman]

I have experienced that as well, and honestly I prefer it that way when the client wants specific words used in a specific order. MY lipreading skills are okay but not superior, and my transliterating is very good, but transliterating word-for-word? Extremely hard.

However many clients simply choose not to use their voice and of course I respect that. I'm happy to do the word-for-word if they want but I do get frustrated sometimes when they won't work with me, slow down a little, and remain patient if I can't read their lightning-fast signed English and voice it exactly!

I have a question then. If an interpreter knows a client can use her/his voice, but the client doesn't want to or doesn't feel comfortable, is the interpreter allowed to say "No, you have to use your voice."? The reason I ask is that one interpreter refuses to voice for my fiancee because she knows that my fiancee can use her voice. All other interpreters will do what she wants, but is it against the ADA laws to refuse to voice based on the fact that you know the client can use her/his voice?

 

[sculleywr]

Ok, I may be new at this, but I do know this much about the terps I have seen in my school. I noticed that each terp has his/her own style, based, not on their preferences, but on the deaf student they interpreted for. I also noticed that instead of ASL, they mostly used CASE when interpreting. Our school uses students who have been through the classes to learn the language, and through at least one interpretation class. They are always observed by one of their teachers. I think that if a deaf student has certain legal rights in front of him/her, such as the right to have the interpreter sign in English word order, then he/she should avail him/herself of those rights. Otherwise, they will only impede their own learning. I have seen some rare cases where the terps used ASL, including in my history class in college. However, if the person does not avail himself of his rights, he shouldn't complain. Clearsky, seeing as you requested an oral interpreter, I find that you have availed yourself of your rights and would easily be able to complain about the administration. However, I also find that you did not directly request for special interpretation from the terp yourself, and from reading the posts you have made, it currently stands that you didn't request for a different type of interpreter. Unless I missed something, I believe that you were not complaining about that. As such, I find in favor of the terp, for doing the best she could do according to her knowledge of the situation, limited though it may be. I also find in favor of you in the matter of the conspicuously missing note takers.

On another note, I find it easier to figure out what the teacher is saying if I am watching a terp because I have been borderline on my hearing for a little while now, possibly because of fluid in my ears. I find that they do a great job, and that I am able to fill in the gaps in what I hear by reading the signs is extremely helpful.

 

[Reba]

I have a question then. If an interpreter knows a client can use her/his voice, but the client doesn't want to or doesn't feel comfortable, is the interpreter allowed to say "No, you have to use your voice."? The reason I ask is that one interpreter refuses to voice for my fiancee because she knows that my fiancee can use her voice. All other interpreters will do what she wants, but is it against the ADA laws to refuse to voice based on the fact that you know the client can use her/his voice?

Well, it's not "against the ADA laws" but it's also not very professional.

I wonder if the interpreter is refusing to voice because she is not confident in her voicing skills?

If the problem can't be resolved between the two of them, then your fiancee might want to request a different terp, and give the reason why to the supervisor or scheduler of the terp. (I don't know how her terp is assigned, so I can't be more specific.)

 

[Interpretrator]

Well, it's not "against the ADA laws" but it's also not very professional.

I wonder if the interpreter is refusing to voice because she is not confident in her voicing skills?

If the problem can't be resolved between the two of them, then your fiancee might want to request a different terp, and give the reason why to the supervisor or scheduler of the terp. (I don't know how her terp is assigned, so I can't be more specific.)

I second all of this. Unless there is some logistical reason why the interpreter cannot voice for her, the interpreter ought to try and use the deaf clients' preferred mode of communication -- but it's technically not an ADA violation.

I can't even really think of a logistical reason why this would happen. I can see the other way around, where maybe the deaf person has trouble modulating the volume of her voice and you're in, say, a yoga class where it really HAS to be quiet. In that case I might suggest to the deaf person that it may be better if I whisper for her. I think Reba brings up a very good idea of why the interpreter isn't voicing for your fiancee.

 

[Tousi]

Interpretator said, "This is true. But you have to understand that there really isn't "one rule" we all follow. Not everyone belongs to or is even familiar with RID, and even among RID interpreters they may not follow the code of ethics all in the same way. It's written on purpose not to be too specific since there is no way to have one rule for every situation. Take confidentiality, for example -- sometimes we are actually legally required to break that. (Rarely, but sometimes.)"

I apologize for the otherwise smooth flow of the discussion here; however, I am really curious about ANY circumstance under which an interpreter can be legally required to break confidentiality. Can I have an example or two?