[misc.handicap] Deaf Folks Speak

Pat.Goltz@f3.n300.z1.fidonet.org (Pat Goltz) (02/22/90)

Index Number: 6896

Hi. We were discussing teaching deaf kids to speak awhile back. You 
said that lots of kids can't talk well no matter how hard they try. 
I admit this is a problem. One guy I know really got turned off by 
people forcing him to try to learn to speak when he was little. 
Unfortunately, he wants to go into aerospace engineering, but that 
industry is heavily built on the idea of doing things by committee, 
and communication is essential. They will probably be real closed to 
anybody who can't talk to them, and not be willing to pay for an 
interpreter. Unless he's unusually persistent, he will get locked out. 
Even with an interpreter, it will be tough sledding. 
  I think an honest effort should be made to teach deaf kids to speak. 
Admittedly, it will take awhile before people really know for sure 
whether a given kid is going to be able to do it, and I think they 
should level with the kid and tell him that they don't really know 
whether it will do any good or not, but that we have to try. At the 
same time, educational efforts aimed at other folks to be willing to 
accept deaf people who can't speak, and to be able to communicate in 
sign somewhat should be undertaken. Someone here recently asked why 
TV programs should have an interpreter instead of captions. I can 
think of two reasons. One is that sign is more natural for many deaf 
folks, and the interpreters are likely to be more accurate than the 
captions. But the other is so that hearies can learn sign! I would 
gladly watch the interpreter intently during a TV program to learn 
all the sign I could. Years ago when I attended a church that had an 
interpreter, I ALWAYS sat among the deaf people so I could learn sign. 
i learned a lot that way. Kids could learn sign this way, and people in 
general could come to accept deaf folks better that way if interpreting 
were part of their world. I think both sides have to make much more of 
an effort than they are doing now. For deaf folks, that means trying to 
learn to speak as long as it isn't shoved down their throats. For the 
hearing, it means trying to learn sign. We're talking about building 
bridges here, and part of the responsibility lies with the person with 
the difficulty, because a person like me can only learn so much, and 
there are an awful lot of different conditions to learn about! 
  Deaf folks can't hear themselves, speak, but they can feel their 
vocal cords vibrate, and they can feel the way their mouths shape 
themselves. You and I agree on one thing: deaf kids should never be 
forced. But a lot of effort should be put into giving them incentive. 
Teachers need to rethink their attitudes, because there are some really 
bad ones floating around. I know that incentive is the ONLY way, because 
you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink! 
  Pat 

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!3!Pat.Goltz
Internet: Pat.Goltz@f3.n300.z1.fidonet.org

Laurie.Wilson@p0.f5.n119.z1.fidonet.org (Laurie Wilson) (02/24/90)

Index Number: 6939

 > to learn to speak when he was little. Unfortunately, he
 > wants to go into aerospace engineering, but that industry
 > is heavily built on the idea of doing things by committee,
 > and communication is essential. They will probably be real
 > closed to anybody who can't talk to them, and not be willing
 > to pay for an interpreter. Unless he's unusually persistent,
 > he will get locked out. Even with an interpreter, it will
 > be tough sledding.
 
Yes, your friend will need to be very persistent to get a job in aerospace. 
There is a civil rights law that will support his rights to have an 
interpreter provided to him when needed, such as in committee.  I 
am sure there are ways where an employer and your friend can discuss 
and meet on an agreeable terms.  Unfortunately, at first, he will 
have to try harder to show them that he can do well despite his hearing 
impairment and lack of speech.  If he can write well, then it shouldn't 
be much of a problem.  A friend of mine once told me of a new device 
(i am not sure of what it is called, but maybe Jack or Ron can tell 
you since they are whiz guys...grin) that it is sort of voice transmitter 
into a printer on a screen.  It is a small size--same as a pager. 
So, it will fit nicely on his hand, and he can read the device while 
someone speaks to him.  I will ask my friend for more details about 
it and get back to you.
 
 > accept deaf people who can't speak, and to be able to communicate
 > in sign somewhat should be undertaken. Someone here recently
 > asked why TV programs should have an interpreter instead
 > of captions. I can think of two reasons. One is that sign
 > is more natural for many deaf folks, and the interpreters
 > are likely to be more accurate than the captions. But the
 > other is so that hearies can learn sign! I would gladly
 > watch the interpreter intently during a TV program to learn
 
Yes, I like to watch interpreters on TV, too. But there are several 
reasons why more people prefer the closed captioned.  For one, there 
are more HI than deaf people who don't know sign language. Secondly, 
the TV screens that most of us have are too small for us to see the 
interpreting and lip movements.  I usually read both lips and signing 
at the same time, so it is difficult for me to read the interpreters 
lips on TV.  That is why I prefer the closed captioned.  Besides, 
some interpreters on TV are not always that clear (or good). What 
I mean by that is some signs from different regions of US have accents 
(similar to dialects of voices).
 
 > all the sign I could. Years ago when I attended a church
 > that had an interpreter, I ALWAYS sat among the deaf people
 > so I could learn sign. i learned a lot that way. Kids could
 > learn sign this way, and people in general could come to
 
Yeah, I wish more people are more like you with such an eagerness 
to learn sign language in any possible way.  Unfortunately, some believe 
that learning to sign is easier than learning other foriegn language, 
when they first enrol in sign language.  It is not so, for it is just 
like any other language and that it takes a lot of motivations and 
hard work to learn it.  In fact, to become a certified interpreter 
requires average 8 years of being fluent in sign language!!  It is 
of the reasons why they charge high rate per hour. And they deserve 
every bit of it for their long years of hard work!

I agree the world would be much better for everyone if we all are 
willing to meet each other halfway!  Even though it is unfair, we 
the disabled have to be the ones who have to make efforts to bring 
more awareness to the abled society.  Otherwise, they would continue 
to hide us from their eyes and take their world and life for granted.
 
 > vocal cords vibrate, and they can feel the way their mouths
 > shape themselves. You and I agree on one thing: deaf kids
 > should never be forced. But a lot of effort should be put
 > into giving them incentive. Teachers need to rethink their
 
yes, we can feel our voice, but we have no idea how we sound to others. 
I am soft spoken. Sometimes, they asked me to speak louder, but I 
would shout not realizing it was too loud. (grin)
 
Well, i gotta go. Nice to hear from you again. Talk to you later.
Laurie

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!119!5.0!Laurie.Wilson
Internet: Laurie.Wilson@p0.f5.n119.z1.fidonet.org

Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe) (02/27/90)

Index Number: 6965

 LW> Yes, I like to watch interpreters on TV, too. But there are
 LW> several reasons why more people prefer the closed captioned.
 LW> For one, there are more HI than deaf people who don't know sign
 LW> language. Secondly, the TV screens that most of us have are too
 LW> small for us to see the interpreting and lip movements.  I
 LW> usually read both lips and signing at the same time, so it is
 LW> difficult for me to read the interpreters lips on TV.

Laurie, I'm no expert when it comes to sign.  But I'm trying to
learn and I have a most difficult time with signers on TV. Even
the same people that I can read fairly well in person are tough
on TV.  Something about that little vignette on the screen kills
all the face expression, and face expression conveys a lot of the
information in signing.  I think the TV camerapeople need to develop
a better way of showing sign.

I really prefer captions, but I'm trying to learn sign .

Jack.

... HI-HoH Silver, Awayyyyy!

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org

Pat.Goltz@f3.n300.z1.fidonet.org (Pat Goltz) (02/27/90)

Index Number: 6973

I'll give you a longer answer later, but I wanted to comment on the ease 
of learning sign language. I see sign language as harder for most hearing 
folks to learn simply because it is very different from learning another 
spoken language. Uses a different part of the brain, too, and totally 
different skills. I am able to master signs fairly easily because I can 
cross-link to the part of my brain that learns spoken and written 
languages, but lots of people can't do that, and lots of people don't 
have the experience with languages I do. I operate at a disadvantage 
because there are virtually no books "written" in sign, and the primary 
way I study a foreign language is to read with a dictionary. All other 
methods require a lot more money, or contact with a warm body who knows 
the language. Both are much harder for me to come by than books. 
Consequently, my knowledge of sign is still very limited.
  Pat

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!3!Pat.Goltz
Internet: Pat.Goltz@f3.n300.z1.fidonet.org

Laurie.Wilson@p0.f5.n119.z1.fidonet.org (Laurie Wilson) (03/02/90)

Index Number: 7023

Jack,
 
 > to
 > learn and I have a most difficult time with signers on
 > TV. Even
 > the same people that I can read fairly well in person are
 > tough
 > on TV.  Something about that little vignette on the screen
 > kills
 > all the face expression, and face expression conveys a
 > lot of the
 > information in signing.  I think the TV camerapeople need
 > to develop
 > a better way of showing sign.
 
Well, I feel that from what I have seen of most interpreters on TV 
their interpreting is not always so clear.  Really, I much prefer 
closed captioned.  I understand that you and others want to learn 
signing as much as possible in any way.  What you said about a lack 
of facial expressions on interpreter's part is so true because I rely 
pretty heavily on the expressions, too.  In my classes, and other 
public places, the interpreters are very good at it.  But on TV, I 
rarely ever see interpreter's facial expressions!!
 
 How about if you ever hear of any public meeting or event where an 

interpreter would be presented, then you can go and watch the signing??
It is too bad that you live too far, for I would be glad to teach 
you the signing myself.  Oh well...
 
Laurie

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!119!5.0!Laurie.Wilson
Internet: Laurie.Wilson@p0.f5.n119.z1.fidonet.org

Laurie.Wilson@p0.f5.n119.z1.fidonet.org (Laurie Wilson) (03/02/90)

Index Number: 7024

 > I'll give you a longer answer later, but I wanted to comment
 > on the ease of learning sign language. I see sign language
 > as harder for most hearing folks to learn simply because
 > it is very different from learning another spoken language.
 
Okay, I'll grant you that sign language is harder to learn than any 
other spoken language is.  If I recall correctly, my point was that 
most hearing people who was taking sign language course "had mistakenly 
assumed" that learning to sign would be easier than other foriegn 
language.  Remember that ASL is now accepted as a foriegn language 
for college credit requirement.  And then after awhile "they" would 
get discouraged upon a such difficult task of learning ASL.
 
 > and lots of people don't have the experience with languages
 > I do. I operate at a disadvantage because there are virtually
 > no books "written" in sign, and the primary way I study
 > a foreign language is to read with a dictionary. All other
 
Yes that is so true.  Now, I think of it and I see what you are saying. 
Most other foriegn language do have dictionaries, and ASL only have 
pictures of signs.
 
 > methods require a lot more money, or contact with a warm
 > body who knows the language. Both are much harder for
 > me to come by than books. Consequently, my knowledge of
 > sign is still very limited.
 
*sigh*  I know... how hard it is to keep practicing with ASL, especially 

all by yourself.  And kinda boring, too.  I think all of us have those 
problems those days too.  You know, I hadn't sign for 13 years, so 
I sort of forgot most of the sign language.  And when I had to relearn 
all over again, like you I came across some similar difficulty.  However, 
I am lucky the last one year, for I have a Deaf roommate.  Thus, I 
have her now to practice signing.
 
Laurie

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!119!5.0!Laurie.Wilson
Internet: Laurie.Wilson@p0.f5.n119.z1.fidonet.org

Lana.Berrington@f34.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Lana Berrington) (03/20/90)

Index Number: 7217

V*>> For me, as a person who began learning sign later in life,
V*>> I say that (for me) learning "signs" and remembering them
V*>> is pretty easy.
V*>>

      Wow...   I'm learning sign language right now and I'm finding 
remembering the signs really difficult.  I find it so much easier just to 
cop out and finger-spell the word when I can't remember it than to look it 
up in the book.    The ones that I have the most difficulty with are the 
ones that look very similar to each other, Ie: Stamp, Letter, Sit, Salt, 
etc.. etc...
      Alas..  I suppose I COULD be practicing right now instead of "playing" 
with the computer <grin>

Take it Easy.

        Lana  
 
 # Origin: Farpoint Station VHST 14.4K * (403)569-0000 Calgary AB (8:7500/55)

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!34!Lana.Berrington
Internet: Lana.Berrington@f34.n129.z1.fidonet.org