James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org (James Womack) (03/15/91)
Index Number: 13930
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
SEE 1 and SEE 2 are both normally dropped by deafies once they begin
assciating withtheir own kind. The inherit artificialness of the language
and its resulting sense of incompleteness when compared with ASL as
a smooth communication medium contributes to its simply being dropped
in favor of ASL. You and I are just two examples of many people who
went thru this process and may others will follow.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!14!James.Womack
Internet: James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.orgJames.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org (James Womack) (03/23/91)
Index Number: 14141
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Thanks for the reminder, Tim. I sure needed it. Ok, now let me see,
heheheheheh. Ok, urk, it has been a long time since I bothered with
SEE, so if anybody out there sees that I am not quite right in my details,
kindly feel welcome to correct me.
Tim, there were two SEE sign systems. One was Signing Essential English.
If I recall right, this system retained the basic ASL sign motions
but added specific handshapes to better conform to the "English" concept
of the word. This system also added word endings and prefixes. You
said "prearranged" by signing "before" with a "p" handshape and then
signed "plan." Syntax or word order was also adhered to
The other SEE was Signing Exact English. Here was where you signed
an exact word order and you signed sentences in exact English. The
difference was that for a deafie, this horse manure of the lowest order.
For example, "My nose is running." You signed withthe handshape of
the first letter of each word. Use "M" to make "my" etc etc. However,
the sign for running was the same sign you used to prescribe to normal
running. You got the idea that the nose had somehow jumped off your
face and headed down the road full steam.
The sheer awkwardness of both systems resulted in themajority of deaf
people simply dumping the systems. The Culturally Deaf makes fun of
the systems to this day. It was even down on national tv once inthe
prgram The Deaf Prospective. Sometimes you got signs that would be
unbelieveable insulting to deaf people were they used in normal day
to day conversation. It was just one for example of hearies and "think
hearing" deaf people who utterly ignored the cultural dignity of Deaf
people and sought to impose their own hearing based cultural communication
norm on us. It got soundly rejected just like any people with a cultural
would reject such blantant intrusions by another people.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!14!James.Womack
Internet: James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.orgTim.Smith@f429.n275.z1.fidonet.org (Tim Smith) (03/28/91)
Index Number: 14520
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Thanks! You made it very clear what the two SEE's are.. I learned
Signing Extact English as a child... Now, I toss that ridiclous sign
language out the window. For it proves to be nothing but a extreme pain
in the rear. Signing Exact English is such a useless language for
conversation, I HATE it to tell the truth. I just HATE it.
PSE is perfect for the educational setting and ASL is perfect for
conversations. But there is NO PLACE for SEE ANYWHERE, by my book at
least.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!275!429!Tim.Smith
Internet: Tim.Smith@f429.n275.z1.fidonet.orgRobin.Chronister@f429.n275.z1.fidonet.org (Robin Chronister) (03/28/91)
Index Number: 14527
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
> conversations. But there is NO PLACE for SEE ANYWHERE, by my book at
I have to disagree with you there. I don't think SEE belongs in
conversation or interpreting, but I do think it helps with reading (how
are children going to learn to read all the little words, and recognize
the word endings if there is no way to sign it?) and in English
instruction. We find it functional in our classroom for those purposes,
and the kids understand the English because it is explained in ASL.
Robin
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!275!429!Robin.Chronister
Internet: Robin.Chronister@f429.n275.z1.fidonet.orgRobin.Chronister@f429.n275.z1.fidonet.org (Robin Chronister) (03/28/91)
Index Number: 14543
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
James,
I was referring to SEEII, which we use in order to be able to talk
about word endings, verb tenses, synonyms, homonyms, etc. I understand
that there is a great deal of controversy concerning the use of Signed
English, but all I can say is that in our classroom, it works.
Language, reading, and spelling lessons are explained in ASL, but the
specific words and sentences we are working on are signed in SEE. The
kids get the concepts through the ASL, and are able to use the English
in their written work.
Robin
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!275!429!Robin.Chronister
Internet: Robin.Chronister@f429.n275.z1.fidonet.orgJames.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org (James Womack) (04/04/91)
Index Number: 14618
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
I think I see what you are SEE-ing, Robin. You are using ASL as ateaching
tool then pairing it with an MCE to encourage acquisition and use of
English. Strangely enough, deaf people have for years been trying toget
somethinglike that to happen but TC people and MCE people and oralist
people have been too against ASL as if it was sin personified. If it
is used the way you say, I would actually expect it to work.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!14!James.Womack
Internet: James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.orgTim.Smith@f429.n275.z1.fidonet.org (Tim Smith) (05/03/91)
Index Number: 15326
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
RC>I have to disagree with you there. I don't think SEE belongs in
RC> conversation or interpreting, but I do think it helps with reading
RC>(how are children going to learn to read all the little words,
RC>and recognize the word endings if there is no way to sign it?)
RC>and in English instruction. We find it functional in our classroom
RC>for those purposes, and the kids understand the English because
RC>it is explained in ASL.
RC>
I'm not so sure about that... I havve seen far too many kids that have
been raised with SEE and have NO language they can call their own. They
do NOT have English, NOR do they have ASL.
Personally, I think ASL is the best medium for learning AND
conversations...
SEE is a VERY awkward and difficult language to learn. Best to use ASL
to teach the children about English.
It is a FACT that deaf children with deaf parents who sign pure ASL, the
child ALSO signs ASL...
They have much better english skills than another child that ONLY knows
SEE!
Tim
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!275!429!Tim.Smith
Internet: Tim.Smith@f429.n275.z1.fidonet.org