A Native Deaf Signer Learns to Cue!

[shel90]

Good grief!!!!

 

[jillio]

Good grief!!!!

I know, lol! Guess the answer tothe question is "No,"

 

[loml]

It’s my hope that with support, a dual approach of Cued Speech and ASL wil enable our children to have the language skills and well rounded talents to succeed in this competitive world.

It is wonderful to see some of the younger adults of the deaf finding the time and the energy to experience the system of Cued Speech.

As the ole saying goes: "Cued Speech and ASL go hand in hand" ( no pun intended).

 

[jillio]

It is wonderful to see some of the younger adults of the deaf finding the time and the energy to experience the system of Cued Speech.

As the ole saying goes: "Cued Speech and ASL go hand in hand" ( no pun intended).

While CS may perhaps be useful in teaching English (but it has yet to be supported through a proponderance of the research, (qualitative, quanititative, and ethnographic) it can hardly be said that ASL and CS go hand in hand. They are two separate languages based on two different modes of processing information. They can be used in the same program of instruction, but as separate tools unrelated to each other. Simply because they both contain a manual element does not imply equality in expressive or receptive categories.

 

[Cloggy]

While CS may perhaps be useful in teaching English (but it has yet to be supported through a proponderance of the research, (qualitative, quanititative, and ethnographic) it can hardly be said that ASL and CS go hand in hand. They are two separate languages based on two different modes of processing information. They can be used in the same program of instruction, but as separate tools unrelated to each other. Simply because they both contain a manual element does not imply equality in expressive or receptive categories.

Just like speech and ASL can't go hand in hand...???
How on earth do all those people do it ??

Anyway...
Knowing speech and and the prospect of being able to cue all words in a short time, or the prospect of being able to sign words after 1 year... not even having started at sentences in ASL....
Mmmm

 

[jillio]

Just like speech and ASL can't go hand in hand...???
How on earth do all those people do it ??

Anyway...
Knowing speech and and the prospect of being able to cue all words in a short time, or the prospect of being able to sign words after 1 year... not even having started at sentences in ASL....
Mmmm

Where exactly do you get your information that it takes an entire year to be able to sign words, and longer than that to develop sentence structure?

And yes, ASL and speech can both be used by the same individual, but not at the same time. They are separate languages with differing syntax. If one is using sim-com, one is using one of the MCE's for signing. MCE's are based on oral syntax and do not address the differences cognitively between visual processing and auditory processing. Simply making that which is orally based visual does not address the processing needs of the two modes. Hence, the difference in evolved syntax between ASL and the evolved syntax of spoken language.

 

[loml]

While CS may perhaps be useful in teaching English (but it has yet to be supported through a proponderance of the research, (qualitative, quanititative, and ethnographic) it can hardly be said that ASL and CS go hand in hand. They are two separate languages based on two different modes of processing information. They can be used in the same program of instruction, but as separate tools unrelated to each other. Simply because they both contain a manual element does not imply equality in expressive or receptive categories.

jillio - Yes it can be said CS and ASL go hand in hand, as in a bilingual/bicultural program. I did not say simultaneously.

There are numerous research papers regarding CS, you have been provided such on several occassions. I am not about to debate with you the ethnographics of CS, but I do know that some native cuers would likely disagree with you. Which of course these indviduals, being cuers, would know who they are.

Back to the original post please, of Camp Cheerio and learning to cue.

 

[jillio]

jillio - Yes it can be said CS and ASL go hand in hand, as in a bilingual/bicultural program. I did not say simultaneously.

There are numerous research papers regarding CS, you have been provided such on several occassions. I am not about to debate with you the ethnographics of CS, but I do know that some native cuers would likely disagree with you. Which of course these indviduals, being cuers, would know who they are.

Back to the original post please, of Camp Cheerio and learning to cue.

There are some research papers regarding CS. However, the population using CS is so miniscule, copmpared to the rest of the deaf/communication disordered population, that there are virtually no results demonstrating any form of generalizability or efficacy over time. The studies cannot be replicated, as the mjority are based on case study, not scietific methodolgy. Therefore, the preponderance of the evidence does not support CS.

What are you talking about, "the ethnographics of CS?" Please go back and reread my post. I was referring to a type of study used in anthroplogical and sociological research...an expanded case study, if you will.

 

[DragonYoga]

Imol,

I took Foundations of Education for the Deaf and the Hard of Hearing last semester (yes that's a course) and we studied modalities of communcations other than ASL and oralism. One of the modalities we studied was CS, and my group did research and presented to the class on CS. Unfortunately, Jillio is right. It is a mode of communication, but it is not a language. English is a language with its own incriate syntax, slang, idioms, everything that a language has, as well as ASL.

However, CS was developed as a visual way to help deaf children learn English. Not only the language, but also how to speak it. That's it. It cannot, under the rules and definitions of language, be called a language. It's fine as a language support, but it cannot be taught alone; it must be taught with English. There are ASL users who also use CS, but they use it only for support in learning English. And CS cannot be learned so quickly as the article implies - it takes four 8 hour courses to learn the proper hand movements and to practice. Then, it takes at least a year before one is able to fluently use CS.

Even the national CS website points out that CS is not a language. Check the FAQ section, where they explain the myths of CS.

 

[jillio]

Imol,

I took Foundations of Education for the Deaf and the Hard of Hearing last semester (yes that's a course) and we studied modalities of communcations other than ASL and oralism. One of the modalities we studied was CS, and my group did research and presented to the class on CS. Unfortunately, Jillio is right. It is a mode of communication, but it is not a language. English is a language with its own incriate syntax, slang, idioms, everything that a language has, as well as ASL.

However, CS was developed as a visual way to help deaf children learn English. Not only the language, but also how to speak it. That's it. It cannot, under the rules and definitions of language, be called a language. It's fine as a language support, but it cannot be taught alone; it must be taught with English. There are ASL users who also use CS, but they use it only for support in learning English. And CS cannot be learned so quickly as the article implies - it takes four 8 hour courses to learn the proper hand movements and to practice. Then, it takes at least a year before one is able to fluently use CS.

Even the national CS website points out that CS is not a language. Check the FAQ section, where they explain the myths of CS.

Thank you! Nice to see another person who actually understands the implications and restrictions.

Actually, loml is a member of NCSA, hence the numerous posts in support of CS as some sort of a panacea for the deaf......claiming that it will allow for natural oral language acquisition, will correct problems with literacy, will remediate and prevent language delays, and numerous other claims than cannot be supported through empirical evidence in the 40 years since Dr. Cornett invented the system.

 

[owen06]

DragonYoga,

loml has not said that CS itself is a language, they have said that it is a mode of teaching English to deaf people and as such could be used in a bi-bi program as a method to teach English (which is a language).

It takes time for anyone to become fluent in anything, ASL included. However, since CS conveys English, the person learning it does not need to learn another language (as would be the case with ASL) and can become fluent much quicker than one would with for example, ASL.

 

[Cloggy]

DragonYoga,

loml has not said that CS itself is a language, they have said that it is a mode of teaching English to deaf people and as such could be used in a bi-bi program as a method to teach English (which is a language).

It takes time for anyone to become fluent in anything, ASL included. However, since CS conveys English, the person learning it does not need to learn another language (as would be the case with ASL) and can become fluent much quicker than one would with for example, ASL.

Everyone agrees it's not a language... It's just that Jillio keeps pointing that out, as if someone is spreading information that it is a language.
Great way to prove yourself right all the time ... if you're into that kind of stuff...

 

[Cloggy]

Thank you! Nice to see another person who actually understands the implications and restrictions.

Actually, loml is a member of NCSA, hence the numerous posts in support of CS as some sort of a panacea for the deaf......claiming that it will allow for natural oral language acquisition, will correct problems with literacy, will remediate and prevent language delays, and numerous other claims than cannot be supported through empirical evidence in the 40 years since Dr. Cornett invented the system.

And she has the users that use it and used it to back it up.
Great thing with CS is that for many it possibly served it's purpose and is not used any more.
This does not mean it is not useful. On the contrary, it shows it's highly effective !! It served it's purpose.!

Always interesting to see how personal experiences of people using CS are ridiculed by Jillio because there are not enough papers, not enough users etc....
Sad

 

[loml]

Imol,

I took Foundations of Education for the Deaf and the Hard of Hearing last semester (yes that's a course) and we studied modalities of communcations other than ASL and oralism. One of the modalities we studied was CS, and my group did research and presented to the class on CS. Unfortunately, Jillio is right. It is a mode of communication, but it is not a language. English is a language with its own incriate syntax, slang, idioms, everything that a language has, as well as ASL.

However, CS was developed as a visual way to help deaf children learn English. Not only the language, but also how to speak it. That's it. It cannot, under the rules and definitions of language, be called a language. It's fine as a language support, but it cannot be taught alone; it must be taught with English. There are ASL users who also use CS, but they use it only for support in learning English. And CS cannot be learned so quickly as the article implies - it takes four 8 hour courses to learn the proper hand movements and to practice. Then, it takes at least a year before one is able to fluently use CS.

Even the national CS website points out that CS is not a language. Check the FAQ section, where they explain the myths of CS.

I never said CS was a language. I am quite familiar with what the system is, what it does, and how to learn it for deaf and hearing alike, young or old.

CS, the system, can/is used to teach 60 dialects(languages) that the system is used with.

Your class should of mentioned to you that CS in and of itself is not a speech tool. It does not teach you how to speak, nor does it correct articulation itself.

This article was this individual experience. Unless you were there with her, you really cannot comment with any accuracy, how long it took her to learn.

I do not wish to discuss all of the points of your post here in this topic. I invite you to start another topic regarding CS. We can go from there.

Thanks

 

[loml]

Actually, loml is a member of NCSA, hence the numerous posts in support of CS as some sort of a panacea for the deaf......claiming that it will allow for natural oral language acquisition, will correct problems with literacy, will remediate and prevent language delays, and numerous other claims than cannot be supported through empirical evidence in the 40 years since Dr. Cornett invented the system.

jillio - Me being a memember of the NCSA, has nothing to do with this topic. Please stick to the topic. Also refrain from claiming you understand my position on cueing, as I can see from your post that you do not.

Thank you.

 

[shel90]

Imol,

I took Foundations of Education for the Deaf and the Hard of Hearing last semester (yes that's a course) and we studied modalities of communcations other than ASL and oralism. One of the modalities we studied was CS, and my group did research and presented to the class on CS. Unfortunately, Jillio is right. It is a mode of communication, but it is not a language. English is a language with its own incriate syntax, slang, idioms, everything that a language has, as well as ASL.

However, CS was developed as a visual way to help deaf children learn English. Not only the language, but also how to speak it. That's it. It cannot, under the rules and definitions of language, be called a language. It's fine as a language support, but it cannot be taught alone; it must be taught with English. There are ASL users who also use CS, but they use it only for support in learning English. And CS cannot be learned so quickly as the article implies - it takes four 8 hour courses to learn the proper hand movements and to practice. Then, it takes at least a year before one is able to fluently use CS.

Even the national CS website points out that CS is not a language. Check the FAQ section, where they explain the myths of CS.

I learned the exact same thing in my linguistics and language acquisitiion classes but I dont even bother trying to explain here cuz some people just disregard what I have to say. Anyways, glad that u posted this cuz this stupid argument has been going on waaayyy tooo long here on AD.

 

[deafskeptic]

I learned the exact same thing in my linguistics and language acquisitiion classes but I dont even bother trying to explain here cuz some people just disregard what I have to say. Anyways, glad that u posted this cuz this stupid argument has been going on waaayyy tooo long here on AD.

Yeah. I rarely post in threads like this cuz people are going to disregard stuff like that.

 

[jillio]

DragonYoga,

loml has not said that CS itself is a language, they have said that it is a mode of teaching English to deaf people and as such could be used in a bi-bi program as a method to teach English (which is a language).

It takes time for anyone to become fluent in anything, ASL included. However, since CS conveys English, the person learning it does not need to learn another language (as would be the case with ASL) and can become fluent much quicker than one would with for example, ASL.

And as such, it does not address the differences in visual and auditory processing. This is precisely the point.

 

[jillio]

Everyone agrees it's not a language... It's just that Jillio keeps pointing that out, as if someone is spreading information that it is a language.
Great way to prove yourself right all the time ... if you're into that kind of stuff...

You need to go back and read the posts. I believe it was DragonYoda who pointed that out, not me. Of course, your need to satisfy some personal vendetta has once again clouded your objectivity.

 

[jillio]

jillio - Me being a memember of the NCSA, has nothing to do with this topic. Please stick to the topic. Also refrain from claiming you understand my position on cueing, as I can see from your post that you do not.

Thank you.

It has quite a bit to do with it, given your propensity for spamming and advertising for the NCSA on this website. It also servbes to point out your lack of objectivity where the subject is concerned.