SignWriting List Forum| Message 3066 | Previous | Next [ Up Thread ] | Message Index |
|
SignWriting List Forum |
|||
|
|
From:
Fernando Capovilla Date: Tue Mar 14, 2000 1:05 am Subject: (just a brief progress report, and a "PS-question-idea") | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Dear Valerie, This brief message is just to let you know that we have decided to include a new item in our BrSL dictionary (in addition to the already finished glosses-definitions-morphology descriptions in Portuguese, BrSL SW, real-life illustrations of both BrSL sign meaning and BrSL sign morphology): English glosses. The purpose is twofold: 1) helping Brazilian deaf kids to use BrSL not only as a bridge for expanding their Portuguese vocabulary, but also as a bridge for creating their own English vocabulary as well; 2) helping English-reading scholars and researchers who may be interested in BrSL learn something of it, and start doing comparative research on it (thus helping us Brazilian scholars and researchers with their knowledge and expertise). Of course, this decision is going to cost us at least another month's work (and the editor is already about to jump on our necks), but its product will be worthwhile, we are most certain of it. So we're still alive, well, working and almost, almost there. :-) This was just to let you know about it. Once a relatively large SW lexicon in BrSL is established, we may try to join our brilliant colleagues in the SW list, and start doing what they are proposing (and already doing themselves): using SW to write lessons (in our case, lessons written in BrSL) about the grammar of a written-language (in our case Portuguese). It is always nice to read there is a growing international effort towards using SW as a bridge to literacy acquisition by deaf kids. And by the way, experimental outcome research is instrumental in helping to ascertain just how effective that may be. We wonder if the efforts of colleagues who are applying such procedures are being object of outcome research conducted with sound experimental methods by research teams of neighboring universities. That precaution would be very important if we intend to help hard-headed academics (and the official policy-making administrators who listen to them) to finally admit that SW may be a diamond mine for literacy acquisition, and to give us (SW-researchers and SW-instructors) a break (i.e., more class-time, more credits, more funds). That's the nice thing about methodologically sound experimental research comparing outcome data from different methods: little by little it helps replacing rethorical arguments (which only convince those who share the same schools of thought) with compelling evidence (whose cost-effective implications policy-makers and administrators are usually sensitive to). (It seems that, once more, the old principle holds true: In order to communicate we are supposed to use the interlocutor's own terms and language. And remember that terms such as "$", "cost-efficiency", "class time", "school grades" seem to be the central to the lexicon of most administrators. We believe that SW may help us with those also, and that it would be up to us to try to demonstrate that that is the case, or to remain for ever feeling like prophets beyond our time, preaching in the desert to the majority of disbelievers). (Of course we also wonder just how linguistically fascinating would be analyzing relationships holding among sign morphology and syntax, SW shapes, written language morphology and syntax, and comparing those relationships in different language pairs (ASL-English, BrSL-Portuguese, etc).) We know there's a shining rainbow out there, but for now we just have got to go through this cold rain. Raincoat, rainboots, umbrella, boat, anyone? No need to reply to this. That was just another pair of cents. Fernando. PS: I would like to know if the colleagues know of an international scientific periodical on Psychology, Education, Linguistics, Speech-Language Pathology, Literacy, Cognitive Development, Neuropsychology, Special Education, etc., that might accept studies (whether empirical, experimental, or theoretical) on SignWriting. I would appreciate very much receiving some references, should the colleagues be so kind as to help me with that. In addition, we might ask why limit ourselves to eventual articles scattered in periodicals not devoted specifically to SW and deaf education. Why begging for space in generic periodicals? Why not having our very own official SW vehicle? Perhaps some colleagues in the US, Canada, Europe or Australia (perhaps some other country with a strong tradition in publication) might want to start an international periodical specifically devoted to publishing papers on SignWriting (and its relationships with topics such as sign language acquisition, literacy acquisition, cognitive development, deaf culture, sign language impairment in neurological damage, anthropology, speech-language pathology, school performance, etc. to name but a few areas). When such a periodical (preferably in printed paper) is created (pardon my ignorance, should there be already such a periodical), I think we will certainly draw the attention of more and more instructors and scientific researchers, gather research and application funds from scientific and educational agencies, start international cooperative research efforts, reach high and consolidated scientific credibility and status, have our own international biannual meetings sponsored by both government and educational-consulting companies (which might advertise their products for deaf education in the periodical as well - ISAAC is perhaps a good role-model), and thence convince policy-makers to give SW a serious try in the deaf school system. Frequently outstanding achievements have humble but solid beginnings, and I do think our dedicated periodical would be just what we needed to go beyond at this point in time. (Again, I sincerely and humbly apologize for my ignorance. There must be a periodical that already does that even at local levels, and here I am babbling about reinventing the wheel... In that case I apologize again and would appreciate receiving some references.) That was just another cent. Fernando. > | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|