That's what I gave you. A hearing ASL user's perspective. Mine.
Your initial comments brought is intelligence into scope. Your comments about his being one-sided and insensitive also bring intellect into the discussion.
I have ASL conversations several times weekly. That makes me an ASL user. This is my perspective. My perspective is the same for anyone who puts forward the opinions that your co-worker espouses.
That being said, let me state it again. My opinion on ASL grammar is that it is efficient, but not rudimentary. Tense is not missing. Tense is processed differently, but is, none the less, present in a very real, understandable way. Many signs in ASL are overloaded with meaning. Concepts that require short sentences in spoken English can be communicated with a single sign in ASL.
Going beyond ASL, the concept of Total Communication (TC) enhances the efficiency and provides VERY granular contextual meaning. Body posture, facial expression, etc. bring ASL to a level of communication that is at least on par with spoken languages. I get this as a TC-friendly hearie. I can only imagine how much meaning is conveyed when two TC deaf people are communicating.
There is far more to ASL communication than just hand signs replacing spoken words. I firmly believe that this form of communication can't be learned or even really appreciated until it is done so within the context of deaf culture.
My point was not to pointlessly belittle your co-worker. To compare ASL grammar to what 'retards' would use shows a lack of knowledge and understanding of what ASL communication is. It shows the forming of opinions with a significant absence of facts.
brianb
Signing hearie married to non-signing HOH
