The sun and the earth... on cued speech

[loml]

No need for that, I understand your viewpoint, and the one in the article. I am just puzzled that Cloggy post an article with claims going against some of yours, and you two don't dicuss this. But I guess it perhaps is due to Cloggys habit of posting articles that he himself don't understand..

flip - Cloggy can/does post whatever he chooses.

 

[loml]

Yet, it hasnt proved to work for all deaf children according to the thread about CS where ADers shared their experiences with CS. Even the teacher who works with me who used to work in a CS program said that it benefits SOME but not all. That puts us in another position of taking the risk with deaf children's language development if it is not able to work for all just like with the strictly oral-only philosophy.

It is up to people who want to take that risk with their children. If those methods dont work for some of these children, it is the children who have to pay the price for it.

shel90 - CS is not about an oral-only philiosophy it is about literacy. It is NOT a speech tool. If , it is used in this capacity, which the NCSA does not govern or control, and removes ambiguity from speech reading, how is this possibly a negative for the deaf child in and their hearing family/world?

 

[fredfam1]

fredfam- When a hearing parent learns to cue they already know the language, they simply need to learn the system of Cued Speech. This is not the case as you are aware with ASL. Learning a new language is a difficult process for an older person even if it is "just for fun".

But it would not be "Just for fun" The purpose would be to prevent
the 6 month language "window of development" delay. A hearing child is not
just lying there for 6 months, that child is aquiring auditory input and
that 6 months where the brain is most plastic and pliable is critical
to future development! Sure there are some children with hard working
parents who are able to compensate to some degree for that delay,
but as Shel points out there are deaf children who are not successful
with cued speach and I believe that is due in large part to these
purposeful delays. There is no reason a parent cannot memorize the
first 100 most frequently used ASL signs and use them for 6 months.
It would be benificial to all and harmful to none.

 

[shel90]

shel90 - CS is not about an oral-only philiosophy it is about literacy. It is NOT a speech tool. If , it is used in this capacity, which the NCSA does not govern or control, and removes ambiguity from speech reading, how is this possibly a negative for the deaf child in and their hearing family/world?

Now I am confused..u disagreeed with Kaitin when she said CS should come after a child has acquired a language.

Are we talking about language acquirement here or not?

 

[jillio]

deafdyke - No it isn't basically that, it is muti-model, multi-sensory system.

It is a system for producing manually the phonetic representation of spoken English......i.e. hooked on phonics for deaf/hoh.

 

[jillio]

Has CS been proved to be a language by itself? Even u admitted that it is not a language. It was intentionally invented as a TEACHING tool.

No, it is not a language in and of itself. It is a manual mode for phonetic representation of spoken English. I have posted several references in all of the threads that loml has started about CS to support this. Like other MCEs it is a manual representation of English. English is the language, CS is the mode.

 

[fredfam1]

Where does isolation of the child come in.? If the parent learns CS or ASl.... isolation is prevented.
Why should anyone learn ASL if there's a good alternative?

Learning to cue: 20 hours and one can cue any word in the dictionary and cue sentenses. Slow, but any word can be cued
ASL... 20 hours to start something basic words. Forget sentenses.

So, CS would be an addition to already known language. ASL would be starting a new language.
CS would give parents the ability to start communication straight away, without having to learn a new language.

Cloggy, learning to cue and using cue is good. What I see as bad is
depriving the deaf child of ASL as a very early language input. From
birth (for hearing children language aquisition and awareness even
begins as early as six months in utero)to the implantation and activation of
the CI all learning modalities should be activated. ASL would serve
to activate not only the Left hemisphere but the right (for spatial
awareness) which could ONLY provide more chances of success for
whatever technique or method the parent chooses later. Preventing
language input, (this is where the isolation occurs) for six months
is not only unreasonable but damaging.

 

[jillio]

jillio - are you suggesting that knowing CS and removing the ambiguity of speech reading is a uselss skill for deaf/hoh/hearing people to have? Improving the understanding of the spoken word by knowing CS is also a useless skill for deaf/hoh/hearing people to have for you?

No, loml, and another attempt to twist my word isn't going to deflect the issue.

You stated that CS was developed for literacy, and I stated that it hasn't worked, now has it? Additionally, if you are claiming that CS is a useful tool for literacy, and are a proponent of Bi-Bi education, which utilizes ASL as the L1 language, why are you now making statements regarding speech reading and understanding of the spoken word? You have just supported my statements that you have spent the last 2 days trying to refute.

 

[jillio]

You saw the children and parents communicating with each other using only cued speech?

I'm wondering how a 9 month old has the manual dexterity to reproduce the fine movements of the cues? Much less the mouth movements.

 

[jillio]

If a person can bother to go to classes and learn CS to help
their deaf child, why can't they learn enough ASL to get them
through the time of birth until the age when they can be implanted?
It just doesn't make any sense to me to keep an infant in such
isolation for a minimum of six months. It seems that the CI
professionals are training parents to be abusive, by keeping
their deaf infant in isolation for so long. Many other practices
are considered abusive by some doctors, (like not getting
vacinations). What if I decided to place a blind fold over my
newborns eyes because she was to young to get fitted for
glasses? I think I'll ignore her need for visual stimulus until
she's 6 months or so and then get her tested for real glasses.
Boy then I'll have a really accurate diagnoses and proffesionals
to work with me. Does that make any sense?

Excellent points, as always fredfam.

 

[jillio]

Yet, it hasnt proved to work for all deaf children according to the thread about CS where ADers shared their experiences with CS. Even the teacher who works with me who used to work in a CS program said that it benefits SOME but not all. That puts us in another position of taking the risk with deaf children's language development if it is not able to work for all just like with the strictly oral-only philosophy.

It is up to people who want to take that risk with their children. If those methods dont work for some of these children, it is the children who have to pay the price for it.

It is the false beleif of parents that believe spoken language is superior to manual language. The same old bias. So superior, they beleive, that they will go to the trouble to learn a manual system to make their precious spoken language visable before they will take the time to learn ASL.

 

[jillio]

fredfam- When a hearing parent learns to cue they already know the language, they simply need to learn the system of Cued Speech. This is not the case as you are aware with ASL. Learning a new language is a difficult process for an older person even if it is "just for fun".

There it is......that attitude of what is easist for the parent intead of what is best for the child. Kind of blows that "I'm all about literacy and language" claim out of the freakin' water, now doesn't it?

 

[jillio]

shel90 - CS is not about an oral-only philiosophy it is about literacy. It is NOT a speech tool. If , it is used in this capacity, which the NCSA does not govern or control, and removes ambiguity from speech reading, how is this possibly a negative for the deaf child in and their hearing family/world?

Explanation:

The cueing of a traditionally spoken language is the visual counterpart of speaking it. Cueing makes available to the eye(s) the same linguistic building blocks that speaking avails the ear(s). Until the advent of cueing, the term spoken language accurately described what had been the only way of distinctly conveying these building blocks: speaking. In fact, until that time, the sounds of speech and the building blocks were thought of as one and the same.

Nevertheless, speaking is simply a process of manipulating tongue placement, breath stream, and voice to produce a sound code that represents these building blocks. The blocks are assembled by way of the stream of sounds produced by these manipulations. Cueing is a process of manipulating handshapes, hand placements, and non-manual signals to produce a visible code representing the same building blocks. The blocks are assembled by way of the stream of cues produced by these manipulations. Because cueing is the visible counterpart of speaking, cued language is the visible counterpart of spoken language.
CUEDSPEECH.org > Cued Speech > Definition




EDUCATE
• Be a source for information regarding the use of Cued Speech as a mode of communication.
• Disseminate the results of research through peer-reviewed journals and available media.
• Advise parents and professionals about the use of Cued Speech for communication, language, and learning needs.

ADVOCATE
• Support and promote equal access to communication through Cued Speech for individuals with communication needs.
• Champion the increased use of Cued Speech and cued languages by schools and programs for children.
• Promote education policy among local, state and federal authorities that support early identification of children who are deaf or hard of hearing including education of the parents as to modes of communication available, including Cued Speech.
• Promote the inclusion of Cued Speech in the curricula of university and professional training programs.

SERVE
• Provide a support network for families and professionals who choose to cue.
• Support and promote the delivery of quality Cued Speech services for all users.
• Facilitate research regarding the use of Cued Speech.
• Promote and support professional standards for instructors, transliterators, educators and speech-language pathologists regarding the use of Cued Speech.

Spring 2004


Looks to me like their mission and their goals would both condtradict your statements.

 

[jillio]

Now I am confused..u disagreeed with Kaitin when she said CS should come after a child has acquired a language.

Are we talking about language acquirement here or not?

He continually contradicts himself.

 

[neecy]

I'm wondering how a 9 month old has the manual dexterity to reproduce the fine movements of the cues? Much less the mouth movements.

When my nephew was 9 months old he was threading shoe-laces through sneakers...that takes a lot of manual dexterity. And in a situation where a child couldn't REPEAT the cues they could at least learn to understand them visually.

 

[jillio]

When my nephew was 9 months old he was threading shoe-laces through sneakers...that takes a lot of manual dexterity. And in a situation where a child couldn't REPEAT the cues they could at least learn to understand them visually.

Your nephew must be very advanced. But he is also one child.

 

[Cloggy]

I'm wondering how a 9 month old has the manual dexterity to reproduce the fine movements of the cues? Much less the mouth movements.

Is a 9-month old signing perfectly?...
....guessed so!

When my nephew was 9 months old he was threading shoe-laces through sneakers...that takes a lot of manual dexterity. And in a situation where a child couldn't REPEAT the cues they could at least learn to understand them visually.

Your nephew must be very advanced. But he is also one child.

Leave it to JT to ignore an argument....

 

[fredfam1]

Your nephew must be very advanced. But he is also one child.

I considered my 5th child to be very advanced as not only could he
sign milk at 5 1/2 months of age, he was "tracking" individuals far
across rooms in restaurants and other public settings. It was so
pronounced that other patrons would deliberately walk far across
a room from great distances to ask how old my son was. ( He was
propped up in the high chair, yet he was clearly showing intrest in
strangers and following them decidelly as they walked across the
room.) I found this interesting because he was the only one of
my seven children that I had the time to be consistant with my use of
ASL from birth. All the others I had started teaching at about 6
months. On a humerous note: At the age of 2 he had very curly wild
hair and could sign as well as speak so people began to refer to him
as Einstein. So for fun I trained him to shrug his shoulders and say,
"Its all relative" which sounded like "Isall welativ" What a hoot that was.
I still laugh at the reactions I got!

 

[Cloggy]

I considered my 5th child to be very advanced as not only could he
sign milk at 5 1/2 months of age............!

In Jillio's words: "Your son must be very advanced. But he is also one child."

 

[fredfam1]

In Jillio's words: "Your son must be very advanced. But he is also one child."

You and Jillio are correct, one child of 7. The only one who
learned sign from birth, and the most advanced of all his
siblings. All of whom are doing well. There are only two
assumptions available here. Either I was only able to
produce one brilliant child, genetically out of the 7,
(which is highly doubtful as his dad is a brilliant man
so I would have had at least 2.5 of my children, (9
if all had made it) would have been born just as brillant
OR ASL from birth gave Chris that intellectual edge. I
feel certain it was ASL.