SEE (Signing Exact English) is the best sign language for a child to start with..

Status
Not open for further replies.

Speedy Hawk

Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
816
Reaction score
1
SEE eh? That's a new one to me. Over here across the pond we call it SSE. Sign Supported English.

UK do have both. SEE is rare, mainly you get to see SSE. So far I only seen SEE in English classes with some SSE added in too.
 

GrendelQ

41°17′00″N 70°04′58″W
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2008
Messages
3,418
Reaction score
7
Please back up your point with research. May I suggest a research where the child is started up with SEE in a deaf family, and the control group being ASL in a deaf family.

:wave:

I could start off a list of pure ASL from birth members that have done great contributions to the world and our society.

I'll start with one, Lon Chaney. :shock:

Sr or Jr? Weren't both hearing?
 

KarissaMann05

Active Member
Premium Member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
6,879
Reaction score
7
You begun with "a bit of SEE" even when it's PSE. Proved my point.

You're not attention enough. I was in public school and it only helped me a bit until I moved to the Deaf school. :roll:

EDIT: And before Deaf school, my level was only 2nd grade. For your info. Now, I graduated at my old school and my level is 6th for writing and 7th or 8th for reading.
 

SilenceGold

Active Member
Joined
May 10, 2003
Messages
3,501
Reaction score
1
Please back up your point with research. May I suggest a research where the child is started up with SEE in a deaf family, and the control group being ASL in a deaf family.

:wave:

I could start off a list of pure ASL from birth members that have done great contributions to the world and our society.

I'll start with one, Lon Chaney. :shock:

Lon Chaney, Sr is not deaf. Irrelevant of this discussion. I do welcome names of any Deaf child that grew up within pro-ASL Deaf family that ended up with excellent English writing skills before the middle ages (25 to 35 average ages) while never being exposed to SEE/PSE (or any other English oriented sign language).

Marlee Matlin started with SEE too. :p
 

posts from hell

New Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
9,374
Reaction score
6
Lon Chaney, Sr is not deaf. Irrelevant of this discussion. I do welcome names of any Deaf child that grew up within pro-ASL Deaf family that ended up with excellent English writing skills before the middle ages (25 to 35 average ages) while never being exposed to SEE/PSE (or any other English oriented sign language).

Marlee Matlin started with SEE too. :p

Wayne Betts Jr would be a modern example.

You're just trying to shoot everything down... I have plenty of ammo.
 

chipmunkis

New Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
Go and see a doctor - move hands in few motions while the interpreter speaks out a lot more words. It is just a picture becoming a thousand words scenario with the interpreter carrying your voice across the bridge. Simple.

Rednecks say "ya'all" instead of "All of you". Got it?

ASL is, to you, "moving hands in a few motions"???? Wow. :roll:
 

BecLak

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
58
SilenceGold, the objective of your thread is to prove your argument that Deaf people who have not used SEE as a child, or are not using SEE , do not have proficiency in English and without proficiency in English they have low intelligence levels. I can easily render your argument invalid as I learned to read and write (and yes, speak) fluently and proficiently in English without any 'helps' such as HAs, CIs, or even access to SEE or sign language!

You are basically saying that anyone who is not proficient in English has low intelligence levels. There are many languages around the world that are not English and there are many more non-English accomplished people. There are many Deaf people who are accomplished with ASL or other full sign languages, such as AUSLAN and BSL, as their first and primary language. In the short time I have been on AD, I have seen mention of accomplished Deaf people in many threads. Many of whom have posted on your thread. Stop insulting us.
 

shel90

Love Makes the World Go Round
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
45,082
Reaction score
316
It's not rebundant...it's understandable. You just prefer the lazy way of communication which drops your intelligence level. Simple.

Try telling that to a pirate or a redneck (with heavy southern accent) that English is better than their "ASL". :p

Yep, my dumb ass brain got me a Master's Degree. :lol:
 

shel90

Love Makes the World Go Round
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
45,082
Reaction score
316
SilenceGold, the objective of your thread is to prove your argument that Deaf people who have not used SEE as a child, or are not using SEE , do not have proficiency in English and without proficiency in English they have low intelligence levels. I can easily render your argument invalid as I learned to read and write (and yes, speak) fluently and proficiently in English without any 'helps' such as HAs, CIs, or even access to SEE or sign language!

You are basically saying that anyone who is not proficient in English has low intelligence levels. There are many languages around the world that are not English and there are many more non-English accomplished people. There are many Deaf people who are accomplished with ASL or other full sign languages, such as AUSLAN and BSL, as their first and primary language. In the short time I have been on AD, I have seen mention of accomplished Deaf people in many threads. Many of whom have posted on your thread. Stop insulting us.

He is a d***head, simple as that.
 

deafskeptic

Active Member
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Messages
14,492
Reaction score
2
SilenceGold, the objective of your thread is to prove your argument that Deaf people who have not used SEE as a child, or are not using SEE , do not have proficiency in English and without proficiency in English they have low intelligence levels. I can easily render your argument invalid as I learned to read and write (and yes, speak) fluently and proficiently in English without any 'helps' such as HAs, CIs, or even access to SEE or sign language!

You are basically saying that anyone who is not proficient in English has low intelligence levels. There are many languages around the world that are not English and there are many more non-English accomplished people. There are many Deaf people who are accomplished with ASL or other full sign languages, such as AUSLAN and BSL, as their first and primary language. In the short time I have been on AD, I have seen mention of accomplished Deaf people in many threads. Many of whom have posted on your thread. Stop insulting us.
:gpost:
 

Speedy Hawk

Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
816
Reaction score
1
I know personally couple of my friends grew up with BSL (it own grammar and rules separte from English just like ASL is) have very good English because they got good language from start and able to learn another language easier like English. Their English is LOT better than any oral deaf I met. Some oral deaf have good enough English but not high standard and most are way below.

It also depends what school they go to, first language they get, support they need and parent involvements.
 

Daredevel7

Adrenaline Junky
Premium Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
4,335
Reaction score
5
I do wonder sometimes....

If you (an ASL user) wanted to make a really good speech to the hearing population, would you trust your voice interpreter enough to use near pure ASL, or would you tend towards SEE?
 

posts from hell

New Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
9,374
Reaction score
6
I do wonder sometimes....

If you (an ASL user) wanted to make a really good speech to the hearing population, would you trust your voice interpreter enough to use near pure ASL, or would you tend towards SEE?

I know my interpreters... And I will trust them more than completely.

Several of my interpreters have Ph.D.'s so yeah.. ;)

The responses ive gotten from them... more than wonderful.
 

jillio

New Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
60,232
Reaction score
18
It's not rebundant...it's understandable. You just prefer the lazy way of communication which drops your intelligence level. Simple.

Try telling that to a pirate or a redneck (with heavy southern accent) that English is better than their "ASL". :p

You really don't have any idea what you are talking about. Right about now, you are looking like an uninformed idiot. Please stop before you look any worse.
 

jillio

New Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
60,232
Reaction score
18
Seriously I find it funny.

If a person reads the English language and it says, "Hot dog" in the book - does that mean that it is an animal that is hot? There are no clues to determine whether if it is an animal or food.

No - you use the rules of English to know whether if it's a canine or food just like everyone else. ASL users have the easy way of looking at which signs were used for those words (with multiple meanings) to know which meaning it is. That means lower intelligence language. :-/

Not just audist, but pure stupidity. Virtually no understanding of language function at all.:roll:
 

jillio

New Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
60,232
Reaction score
18
I am just pointing out the every day occurrences.

Seriously - if I was at a corporate company in a board meeting and there were two choices of which interpreters I would want: ASL or SEE.

I would choose SEE because I would want to pay attention to the board members' choices of vocabularies and knowing what EVERY word is being spoken in order for me to judge upon whether if those individuals are "intelligent". It would give me a better way to sell my sales pitch as a Deaf person.

If I chose using ASL - I am VERY DEPENDENT on the interpreter choices of vocabularies to make me sound SMART to them.

In order to succeed at SEE in a meeting like this - English language is required to be competent in order to be selling something that is very dependent on how I would present whatever I want to sell.

Is this Audism that I chose to use SEE, which I am already qualified to use and understand, over ASL in a situation like this?

I use ASL around other Deaf people with no problems. ASL can be learned later or co-exist with SEE as it happened for me and many other Deaf people I have met over the last several years (who started with SEE).

EDIT: Added below.

I re-read what I said. I was just picking at the LANGUAGE. Not the hearing abilities of someone. So it is not audism that I performed. Maybe signism? :p

Concept communicates more than vocab. Just because someone has a large vocabulary is not indicative of the fact that they have any understanding what so ever of the words they use. You are a perfect example of such.

Conceptually translating from one language to another shows a complete understanding of the message being communicated, simply by virtue of the translation.

And, yes, you are audist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top