The sun and the earth... on cued speech

[fredfam1]

The brain processes receptively and expresssively in the same way with auditory and visual languages. Once does not listen to one's exressive language production in the same way that one listens to another's expressive language production, thus accounting frot the difference in expressive and receptive skills.

But where is the spaitial aspect of the auditory lang?
People who learn ASL from birth or before the age
of 7 process language in the Left Temporal area
AND the Right Temporal area. But Hearing who do
not learn a manual language do not process language
at all in the right area in this way. So there has to
be a difference in processing receptive even if it may be more
"complete" then for hearing people.

 

[jillio]

But where is the spaitial aspect of the auditory lang?
People who learn ASL from birth or before the age
of 7 process language in the Left Temporal area
AND the Right Temporal area. But Hearing who do
not learn a manual language do not process language
at all in the right area in this way. So there has to
be a difference in processing receptive even if it may be more
"complete" then for hearing people.

While this is true about langauge being processed on both temporal lobes for native and early signers, the receptive processing remains the same via perspective. One does not process one's expressive language from the same persepctive as one processes another's expressive language. One requires an internal perspective and one requires an external perspective. This holds true for all communication. It is the difference between internal and external loci that account for differences in expressive and receptive capabilities.

 

[fredfam1]

While this is true about langauge being processed on both temporal lobes for native and early signers, the receptive processing remains the same via perspective. One does not process one's expressive language from the same persepctive as one processes another's expressive language. One requires an internal perspective and one requires an external perspective. This holds true for all communication. It is the difference between internal and external loci that account for differences in expressive and receptive capabilities.

So where can I get some of this loci. I seem to need an extra
helping.

 

[fredfam1]

So where can I get some of this loci. I seem to need an extra
helping.

But wait a minute I believe this is a psycology concept. Internal
and External Locus. What does that have to do with receptive
skills? Please elucidate!

 

[fredfam1]

I can't find anything on how internal or external locus problems
affect receptive skills or expressive skills. Only that they do.
Do you have any links to studies on this? I find this very interesting.
I did some review on developmental receptive and expressive skills.
It appears that while I can sign as well as any 8 or 9 year old could,
my receptive skills are still at about a 2 to 3 year old level.
So if my locus was genetically wired to be internal, but nurture and
environment, (ie rough child hood) trained me to respond as
if my locus were external. But then subsequent education and
therapy and wonderful married environment produced a retraining,

Question: How would this impact my receptive skills?
Why is there such a big discrepency in my RS?
Are you saying that cognitive behavioral therapy
could alter and improve my receptive skills?

 

[jillio]

So where can I get some of this loci. I seem to need an extra
helping.

LOL!

 

[jillio]

But wait a minute I believe this is a psycology concept. Internal
and External Locus. What does that have to do with receptive
skills? Please elucidate!

While internal and external loci are indeed psychological concepts of motivation, they apply in that cognitively, they are given different amounts of attention depending upon the loci. The difference in the amount of attention attributed to the task affects the depth of processing.

 

[jillio]

I can't find anything on how internal or external locus problems
affect receptive skills or expressive skills. Only that they do.
Do you have any links to studies on this? I find this very interesting.
I did some review on developmental receptive and expressive skills.
It appears that while I can sign as well as any 8 or 9 year old could,
my receptive skills are still at about a 2 to 3 year old level.
So if my locus was genetically wired to be internal, but nurture and
environment, (ie rough child hood) trained me to respond as
if my locus were external. But then subsequent education and
therapy and wonderful married environment produced a retraining,

Question: How would this impact my receptive skills?
Why is there such a big discrepency in my RS?
Are you saying that cognitive behavioral therapy
could alter and improve my receptive skills?

I can't provide you with any internet links, but can give you references for testbooks and journal articles, if you will give me time to compile and cite them.

It is possible that cognitive behavioral therapy could change your loci, and thus change perception.

 

[fredfam1]

While internal and external loci are indeed psychological concepts of motivation, they apply in that cognitively, they are given different amounts of attention depending upon the loci. The difference in the amount of attention attributed to the task affects the depth of processing.

So if my locus is internally located the attention my brain
pays to processing received signs would be increased?

So by really working hard to improve my receptive skills
I should conversly be able to improve my locus!
A win win situation. I'm going to watch more Coda Brothers.
There's no way I'm going back into therapy!

 

[jillio]

So if my locus is internally located the attention my brain
pays to processing received signs would be increased?

So by really working hard to improve my receptive skills
I should conversly be able to improve my locus!
A win win situation. I'm going to watch more Coda Brothers.
There's no way I'm going back into therapy!

In theory, yes. Your motivation to receive and process the information would be internally based, and therefore, you would give it higher priority. LOL. You seem to already have a grasp on the concepts. No need to enter therapy to put the cognitive behavioral techniques into practice for yourself. All therapy does is teach you how to do that for yourself.

 

[fredfam1]

In theory, yes. Your motivation to receive and process the information would be internally based, and therefore, you would give it higher priority. LOL. You seem to already have a grasp on the concepts. No need to enter therapy to put the cognitive behavioral techniques into practice for yourself. All therapy does is teach you how to do that for yourself.

I know, but you know I've been looking for some kind of magic bullet to help me
with my receptive skills, when it appears the very hard work that would be required for me to improve my receptive skills would fill some other areas of need. Interesting huh?

 

[jillio]

I know, but you know I've been looking for some kind of magic bullet to help me
with my receptive skills, when it appears the very hard work that would be required for me to improve my receptive skills would fill some other areas of need. Interesting huh?

Absolutely. Anytime we improve one area of cognitive functioning, it spills over into all other areas. And, IMO, there are no magic bullets or short cuts. Everything we seek to acheive requires effort and dedication.

 

[kokonut]

...

 

[WeeBeastie]

I'm not familiar with CS, but it seems familiar to Visual Phonics - hand shapes used to notate language sounds. My daughter was using it in speech therapy until recently.

It was my understanding that VP is only used temporarily until the the skills are learned and then only sporadically as needed for new vocabulary or in poor auditory environments. Is this not the case for CS? It only seems logical that if it is indeed a tool for learning speech, it would be temporary, much like sounding out words phonetically is phased out for hearing children learning to read. Once you know the word, you no longer need the learning tool.

 

[faire_jour]

I'm not familiar with CS, but it seems familiar to Visual Phonics - hand shapes used to notate language sounds. My daughter was using it in speech therapy until recently.

It was my understanding that VP is only used temporarily until the the skills are learned and then only sporadically as needed for new vocabulary or in poor auditory environments. Is this not the case for CS? It only seems logical that if it is indeed a tool for learning speech, it would be temporary, much like sounding out words phonetically is phased out for hearing children learning to read. Once you know the word, you no longer need the learning tool.

I'm no expert, but I don't think so. The families that I know who use it, use it all the time. They cue while they speak. The idea is that they are making English visible so they child can learn English inspite of not being able to hear all the sounds.

 

[flip]

I'm not familiar with CS, but it seems familiar to Visual Phonics - hand shapes used to notate language sounds. My daughter was using it in speech therapy until recently.

It was my understanding that VP is only used temporarily until the the skills are learned and then only sporadically as needed for new vocabulary or in poor auditory environments. Is this not the case for CS? It only seems logical that if it is indeed a tool for learning speech, it would be temporary, much like sounding out words phonetically is phased out for hearing children learning to read. Once you know the word, you no longer need the learning tool.

You are right about your observations. I wouldn't accept or reject cued speech, just because it happens to exist an organization that call themselves National Cued Speech Associaton with their own idea of how cued speech is supposed to be used, who also tell families who choose ASL as a primary language, that their kids will get in trouble. Cued speech, is just a system, that has been promoted by various people with different agendas through 50 years.

Visual phonics is the most up to date system of this kind, and have replaced cued speech at gallaudet. I am sure both systems can have it's uses.

 

[loml]

I'm not familiar with CS, but it seems familiar to Visual Phonics - hand shapes used to notate language sounds. My daughter was using it in speech therapy until recently.

It was my understanding that VP is only used temporarily until the the skills are learned and then only sporadically as needed for new vocabulary or in poor auditory environments. Is this not the case for CS? It only seems logical that if it is indeed a tool for learning speech, it would be temporary, much like sounding out words phonetically is phased out for hearing children learning to read. Once you know the word, you no longer need the learning tool.

WeeBeastie - FJ has the right idea. VP and CS are definitely NOT the same.