SignWriting List Forum| Message 5867 | Previous | Next [ Up Thread ] | Message Index |
|
SignWriting List Forum |
|||
|
|
From:
Stuart Thiessen Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:44 pm Subject: Is SignWriting Necessary? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I had several conversations recently with deaf leaders and influencers on the subject of SignWriting. Several had linguistic backgrounds and made some statements which I wasn't sure about. I wanted to share them with the list in hopes of getting some feedback and other perspectives on this subject. (By the way, for those of you not in the US, just substitute your SL and your spoken language for ASL and English. What do you think of this from your perspective? Is it any different in your countries?) >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------\ --------------< >-------- These statements do not represent my point of view but that of those whom ----------< >-------- I was talking with recently. ----------< >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------\ --------------< One of the current trends in the US is a philosophy of "visual ASL, written English." In other words, [ as I understand it anyway ] when a deaf student wishes to communicate "verbally", he/she should use proper ASL. However, when the student wishes to write something, it should be proper English. So English is taught via writing and ASL of course via signing. Adding SignWriting to this mix will ... a) Add more confusion as it is one more thing for the deaf student to learn. b) Decrease the student's ability to learn English as they get "sidetracked" by learning SignWriting. c) Waste valuable time creating SignWriting materials when video or written English materials would be much more valuable. Further, because of the growing use of technology in the US, it is thought that it makes the need for SignWriting obsolete. With DVD and other options, American deaf people will be able to use video technology to store books and other information rather than resorting to print. Why waste resources trying to develop printed materials when we should be investing those resources into developing better video technology, etc. While ASL is supported as a real and viable language, the language that the deaf must master is English because a good knowledge of ASL including the ability to read and write ASL will not help in the real world. >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------\ --------------< >-------- Now back to me .... ----------< >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------\ --------------< With the understanding that I do not have much professional linguistic expertise and that I am not as fully aware as I would like to be of present research in this field, these are my assumptions or understandings in favor of SignWriting: - ASL literacy is valuable because it develops a concrete bridge by which the deaf person can master both languages and excel in both. When both languages can be immobilized by print, they are better able to understand how both languages work. I would expect that deaf who master ASL literacy are better equipped to master English literacy. (This conclusion is the result of what I have heard and observed about SIL linguists who have worked with many minority spoken language groups in other countries. Such has been their experience, or so I understand.) - I tend to equate ASL videotapes and DVD with English audiotapes and videotapes. They are nice and certainly more interesting in terms of catching the speaker's/signer's inflections and body language. However, for certain purposes, information presented can be more easily absorbed when it is in print and can be reviewed. - While technology is certainly viewable by nearly anyone who can afford a VCR or DVD player, it is not quite so easily produced by the average person. Technology to produce quality VCR material or DVD material is easily $50,000 or more. Duplication of these materials is also expensive. Not everyone is able to spend that kind of money to produce materials that they would like. However, written material is very inexpensive and more easily mass-produced. - As we have already found via this List, SignWriting can be integrated into today's technology (though we are still looking forward to it becoming more easily integrated). My humorous way of saying this is to say "If videotapes and computers make written ASL unnecessary, then why do we still have written English on computers and VCRs?" SignWriting can be a valuable interface for deaf people to make computers more deaf-friendly and in our language(s). These are my thoughts. Any flaws in my logic? Are there more relevant points involved that I missed? What other arguments have you heard? Who all is doing research in these areas to prove or disprove these kind of assertions? Where can we find that research? What kind of research is still needed to prove the value of SignWriting so that people will see evidence of its value in everyday life? What other angles are needed to research and verify the need and value of SignWriting? Thanks, Stuart Stuart Thiessen - 4616 Hickman - Des Moines, IA 50310 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
