SignWriting List Forum| Message 1954 | Previous | Next [ Up Thread ] | Message Index |
|
SignWriting List Forum |
|||
|
|
From:
Joe Martin Date: Sat Oct 16, 1999 9:49 pm Subject: linguistish shtuff. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
***WARNING: Lingusitic techno-babble follows: Normal people delete now! Seriously linguistics-infected types may read on..... Fernando: I'm utterly thrilled with all these references you sent. Thank you Thank you. Spent hours last night reading your posts. (^_^) Curious now....... evidence seems to indicate phonological recoding used as a reading strategy by congenitally deaf persons, even though they have no way to access the aural phonetic content; there seems no way to investigate empirically--until now, using Signwriting. With the phonetic information encoded in pictogens (?) or graphemes being in the visual modality, it seems logical to map visual Phonetic Form onto meaning, without any necesity to involve auditory processing at all. With this established (has it been?) it would seem possible to determine if in fact the congenitally deaf are trying to do something analogous using the graphemes of alphabetic writing--- and since that system is designed around sound, the mapping would leave terrible gaps and it would be hard to learn to read... this seems nearly the same question you are investigating; In reading your message it wasn't always clear if you were separating "ideographic reading" from "non-aural phonological decoding;" if these aphasic readers can match heterographic homophones (I assume that means in an alphabetic script(?) then it's matching pictures of (written) words with pictures of things; they should be able to read signwriting, possibly using only the right hemisphere. the difference between deaf readers and lesioned readers...i get confused. Anyway, I'm wondering about this prediction; Naive readers who know Sign should be able to read signwriting. They shouldn't be able to read an alphabet-based writing system like Stokoe notation. Then after exposure to "grapheme-phoneme correspondence instruction," they should be able to read that too. Because they would see how to map the picture of the word onto the picture of the referent; i.e. pick out the (visual) phonological parameters and map them onto the manually-produced atriculatory movements that these graphemes represent. Again, with no auditory involvement at all. They could read the Signwriting without instruction because it is so highly motivated, (and that may involve phonology, or it might just be drawing pictures of pictures....I dunno.) Sure is hard to be concise when discussing this stuff. What I'd really like to know is if anyone has tested reading in any script designed to represent signed language--thus accessing phonologic structure while bypassing the auditory channel. (so logograms don't count. ;-) That started out to be a simple, brief little question..... I'll go now..... joe PS; Love your tag line ! > Fernando Capovilla, Plain Old Ordinary Scientist > Bottom Right Corner South America :-) > > ____________________________________ Joe Martin, Plain Old Ordinary Student Top Left Corner USA | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|