Re: SignoEscritura and SeñaGrafía.
I will note that this whole issue is political. Basically we are talking about how to refer the a signed language in the dominant spoken language that it coexists with. Now, that once that term is determined (ASL, BSL, LSF, LSB, etc.) usually by hearing people or hearing people influencing Deaf people, the actual indigenous signed language term of the language tends to be lost in favor of the spoken language acronym--an interesting insight into control issues, no? Nicaragua also ping ponged back and fith on the signos/señas issue. The Deaf community finally chose the Spanish term when they published their dictionary. They were satisfied with their choice, but have been getting flack ever since, including from the WFD, telling them to change their name to Lingua de Señas. We won't get into de Nicaragua vs. Nicaragüense issues as well.|
BTW, I have been at international conferences debating such issues only to see folders with Mimicas in the hands of the individual language researchers.. So, who knows.
From: Steve and Dianne Parkhurst <steve-dianne_parkhurst@SIL.ORG>
Subject: RE: SignoEscritura and SeñaGrafía.
Date: Thu, Dec 6, 2001, 3:56 AM
Although the most common way of referring to the sign language in Spain is Lengua de Signos, there has been a recent move to change it to Lengua de Señas. Unfortunately that opened up a big political fight ending in the firing of one Deaf leader and a law suit. Yuck.. So, for now we will stick to Lengua de Signos although you are right that the more appropriate term is probably señas.