- Joined
- Aug 7, 2008
- Messages
- 4,335
- Reaction score
- 5
I've seen several posts saying that ASL does NOT need fingerspelling. Fingerspelling is only used for names, clarification, or basically "shortcuts" for English words. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I've been trying to wrap my head around this. I am not fluent in ASL, but I do know enough to hold a conversation. So I've been thinking about how this is done. It seems that one would have to know most, if not all, basic signs in order to convey a complex idea/thing.
Signs I keep thinking of are "toilet", "emergency" and "insurance", which involve fingerspelling "t", "e", and "i". (Perhaps it is actually SEE? Again, correct me if I'm wrong). In order to convey those words, would you need multiple signs? Like for emergency, perhaps using signs for sudden, serious, and problem. Or for toilet, using signs for water, bowl, etc. Something like that. Is that how it would go if you want to completely eliminate fingerspelling from your signing?
I've been trying to wrap my head around this. I am not fluent in ASL, but I do know enough to hold a conversation. So I've been thinking about how this is done. It seems that one would have to know most, if not all, basic signs in order to convey a complex idea/thing.
Signs I keep thinking of are "toilet", "emergency" and "insurance", which involve fingerspelling "t", "e", and "i". (Perhaps it is actually SEE? Again, correct me if I'm wrong). In order to convey those words, would you need multiple signs? Like for emergency, perhaps using signs for sudden, serious, and problem. Or for toilet, using signs for water, bowl, etc. Something like that. Is that how it would go if you want to completely eliminate fingerspelling from your signing?