SignWriting List Forum| Message 1641 | Previous | Next [ Up Thread ] | Message Index |
|
SignWriting List Forum |
|||
|
|
From:
Darline Clark Gunsauls Date: Sun Aug 8, 1999 4:22 am Subject: Re: proper names | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi Judy and all, Thanks so much for saying to leave to Deaf communities to make decision with the proper names. It is Deaf's languages that we need to make our own decisions So, for America....American Sign Language (ASL) is a true language. Thanks, Darline At 01:13 PM 7/10/70 -0500, you wrote: >This is a quickie and I haven't read all but here is the deal with Nicaragua >on the acronym front. Please, they use the term Idioma de Seņas de >Nicaragua. When I speak of it in translation I use the term "Nicaraguan >Sign Language" but I NEVER use the acronym NSL. If an acronym were to be >used I would use ISN, but I prefer to avoid that. Why? If you look at the >Signed languages of the world most of them have had their SIGN supplanted by >a signed acronym from the dominant language label for the language. I find >this disturbing and certaining an issue to be left in the hands of the >individual Deaf communities. In Central America, acromnyms are usually >"pronounceable" thus even ISN is not a typical label. Please let the Deaf >community there label the language as they choose. It takes a little more >effort to spell out the name, but I do it out of respect. Even ASL has lost >its name to an English-based acronym. > >--Judy Kegl >Linguistics Program >University of Southern Maine >96 Falmouth Street >Portland, ME 04104-9300 > >Phone: 207-780-4531 >Fax: 207-780-5561 >e-mail: , > > >---------- >>From: "Angus B. Grieve-Smith" >>To: SignWriting List >>Subject: Re: proper names >>Date: Fri, Aug 6, 1999, 1:13 PM >> > >> On Thu, 5 Aug 1999, Joe Martin wrote: >> >>> Seems to me... >>> We should all be careful about this "correct names" business. The >>> correct name for anything is whatever the users of the language stick >>> with-- ---and ain't nobody yet figgered out how to affect the process! >> >> That's not entirely true, Joe. Various issues of authority can >> influence those users to stick with one name or another. The relationship >> between the Flemings and the Walloons is pretty sticky, and I'd imagine >> the Flemings wouldn't be too happy to have a language that they don't >> speak referred to as "Belgian Sign Language." >> >> In actuality, though, the language we're talking about is English, >> and it's hearing Americans like you and me who are the users of this >> language. So what we stick with goes. >> >> The point I'm trying to make is that we should get away from this >> one-to-one mapping between spoken and signed languages. Why do the >> initials for a signed language used in Brazil have to be in Portuguese, >> and those for a signed language used in Belgium have to be in French, or >> Flemish? Roman-based sign writing systems have the advantage that you can >> have initials in the signed language, not in some spoken language. >> >> -- >> -Angus B. Grieve-Smith >> Linguistics Department >> The University of New Mexico >> >> > > | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
|