SignWriting List
May 27, 2001
Chip -
Your explanation below is excellent. I would like to place your
answer on the web, under our "Frequently-Asked Questions" section:
Questions & Answers About SignWriting
https://www.SignWriting.org/about/questions/questions.html
Do I have your permission to do that?....I can keep it anonymous if
you wish..It is rich with detail and well written...Thanks for that.
Val ;-)
------------------------------------
On May 27, 2001, Regarding this question:
>What is the purpose of translating the relatively universal standard of
using written letters, words, and sentences to communicate an idea or
thought, into a completely new format / language.<
William J. "Chip" McGruder wrote:
To me, this is the key for why SignWriting came into existence.
First, the so-called universal standard of using written letters does not use
the same written letters. There are various alphabets with no relationship
to each other; some alphabets are in reality syllabaries; some languages use
ideograms; and others use letters which don't represent the sounds of the
language at all well.
Second, it is possible to use a translation of what the Sign Language
sentence is; however, as in all translations, this is nowhere near perfect.
One will always lose something in the translation. On the other hand, if one
grows up using SignWriting to record on paper his or her native Sign
Language, then he or she will have a record which can be read with no loss of
understanding.
Third, SignWriting makes it possible to compare different Sign Languages.
Consider for a moment your assertion about "universal standard of using
written letters." If one were to record a sentence originally formed in
American Sign Language, one would then, presumably, record that in written
English. The next step, if you were to have this read by someone in, say,
Oman, would be to translate the English sentence into Arabic. Then finally,
the Omani Signer would have to read that Arabic sentence and consider what he
or she believed the translation - provided on the spot - would be in Arabic
(or Omani) Sign Language. Thus you have three translations, all involving
some loss of meaning due to the nature of translation. Using SignWriting,
which records the actual movements made by the original Signer, the
individual at the Omani end of the above sequence would know what movements
the original Signer had made.
This leads to my fourth point. One could very well have a parallel
dictionary showing, say, American Sign Language on one side and the accepted
translations into Arabic Sign Language on the other. Thus, a competent
translator would only have to parse one, not three, translations to convey
the message.
Fifth, this sequence can also assist the Deaf in learning the local written
language. Since the local written languages are those used to record the
spoken language, this does not convey accurately the knowledge needed at the
outset of learning to write. There is just no comparison between thbe
written word and the language known by the Deaf equivalent to the comparison
of the written word to the language known by the hearing individual. It's
just not possible to "sound out" the word in English if one is not able to
hear English.
Sixth, for those of us who do hear (I'm not Deaf), I supplement my notecards
for when I have to give training, with SignWriting showing what I should do
with my hands to make a consistent point. This way I don't have to use two
cards for the same instant in the speech.
Lastly, I want to reiterate Valerie's point about respect for a language.
Sequoyah of the Cherokee Tribe in the United States recognized that, in the
modern world (over a 100 years ago), a language had to have a written form.
He considere that the Europeans' power was manifest in their writing.
Sequoyah then invented one for his people. Since he didn't know how to read
or write English, his syllabary uses some of the Roman letters but for
different sounds, and some symbols he just made up. The Sequoyah Syllabary
was accepted by the Cherokee and is still in use today to record that
language. Many hearing people have said that a language with no written form
isn't a language. Of course that's patently false, but it does point to the
perception held by many that Sign Language isn't really a language.
Having its own written form, Sign Languages around the world can come out of
the dark, so to speak, and be studied in the same manner that other languages
are. In my opinion, the written form of SignWriting itself may even entice
some people into learning the local Sign Language and thus enhance acceptance
of both the Sign Language and those who use it.
William J. "Chip" McGruder
Marina, California, USA
|
SignWriting List Forum