Fran.O'Gorman@p0.f94.n272.z1.fidonet.org (Fran O'Gorman) (11/28/90)
Index Number: 11985 [This is from the Silent Talk Conference] Hi James, I read with interest your msgs to Ann in defense of sign language ASL and I must say that while I was beginning to see Ann's point of view, that speech reading and oralism would be preferred because of it's obvious link with the hearing population and also its inclination towards written and spoken language skills being enhanced (and acquired) whereas ASL being so different, it would make that more difficult, I was now seeing ASL as a different form and how natural it is for the deaf person. Not being deaf myself, only an ASL user for my daughter who is speech impaired, it was from your description of the experience of being deaf, I could see ASL in that light. Ironically, my Mary, who was only being taught bits of sign for many years (because she hears, they were very slow to introduce that and when they did only superficially) actually started to develop the different word order that ASL uses. Her speech therapist was trying to get her to use a word order that more approximated English. It was only when I was taking an Intermediate course in ASL that I discovered that this word order is part of the grammer of ASL (and something BTW I found as a hearing English oriented person very hard to master). So what I'm trying to say is that your point that ASL is a very natural response to being a visual language, and the need to express oneself visually was very well taken. The fact that it is different (very different) from spoken language really should not place it in a sense of being "inferior" as even I was beginning to place it. It's like we, in the US telling the rest of the world they should know English thus be better able to communicate with us, rather than us making the effort to learn the language of other countries. In a recent cover story of U.S. News and World Report which traces the anthropological history of language which now experts feel trace back to a single mother tongue, the author describes language as the "integral cultural glue that binds a society together and signals its presence." How very much so this applies to the deaf and the existence of "deaf culture" and also, isn't this a good thing after all. This is not to say that it isn't good and perhaps even important that wherever possible the deaf person could also (and I say ALSO not instead of) learn spoken English or speech reading so as to interface more easily with the speaking/hearing world much like we Americans should learn the languages of other countries (which most other countries do a better job at) but that ASL really has a very real place in their lives and fulfills a very real need. The HI person is better off (in a pragamatic sense) who has these skills (speaking and speech reading) but is not "better" in the deeper sense of that word. Some more thoughts on this topic which having read your msgs I feel is a deeper one than I originally saw it as. -- Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!272!94.0!Fran.O'Gorman Internet: Fran.O'Gorman@p0.f94.n272.z1.fidonet.org