Can you learn ASL from a book?

drphil said:
For "most people" studying "language" starts from a book and uses the skills of a teacher/tutor "expanding what the book says." Finally tested with People who actually use that "language" in the real world.
Click to expand...
You're probably correct in saying that this is what "most people" do, which could explain why "most people" are not proficient in more than one language. The very best way to learn any language is through total immersion. The second best way is formal instruction with a native speaker/signer or someone who is otherwise fluent supplemented with written material for study and reference. Learning strictly from a book is near the bottom of the list.
 
drphil said:
The above comments assume that one can "hear" the teacher.Someone in the Profound loss category "usually" has a real problem even with a Hearing aid. Thus it seems the "fallback position" entails much study of the written material. Seems intuitive-to me.
Click to expand...


No, they assume you have systems in place to understand instruction (CART, Cuing, Interpreters etc)- but even in these situations, you learn from interaction, not static written observation.

For those of us (including myself) who've learned language without having access to the sounds of that language, we still rely on the in-person instruction (via CART, Cuing etc) to actually learn the language.

Learning language is a highly interactive experience - as any language teacher, linguist or multilingual person knows (heck ask anyone with a toddler!).

While it's true that those of us who are hoh/deaf DO rely on written form more to learn a language (again: CART, texting, emailing etc) -that is VERY different than saying that you can learn from textbooks (which again are intended to be supplemental material) or even foreign language books.

As someone who's multilingual myself, and who's family and friends speak a combined 15+ languages ... anyone believing they can truly learn a language by studying textbooks is sadly mislead and in for a massive "real life" shock.
 
Last edited:
I have not used "CART/Interpreters/cuing/etc" at anytime in my life-to date. No comment on its stated "utility"

As for texting or emailing- computers not around when I was much younger. As for reading a computer screen does seem "similar" to reading "written material".

To delimit what the OP asks-does "using CART/interpreters et al" seem reasonable/realistic in learning ASL?

Even more interesting-Nina the writer hasn't commented yet.

I acknowledge the #2 comment-like- by Reba!
 
Last edited:
drphil said:
I am have not used "CART/Interpreters/cuing/etc" at anytime in my life-to date. No comment on its stated "utility"

As for texting or emailing- computers not around when I was much younger. As for reading a computer screen does seem "similar" to reading "written material".

To delimit what the OP asks-does "using CART/interpreters et al" seem reasonable/realistic in learning ASL?

Even more interesting-Nina the writer hasn't commented yet.

I acknowledge the comment by Reba!
Click to expand...

What comment by Reba? :confused:
 
drphil said:
I am have not used "CART/Interpreters/cuing/etc" at anytime in my life-to date. No comment on its stated "utility"

As for texting or emailing- computers not around when I was much younger. As for reading a computer screen does seem "similar" to reading "written material".

To delimit what the OP asks-does "using CART/interpreters et al" seem reasonable/realistic in learning ASL?

Even more interesting-Nina the writer hasn't commented yet.

I acknowledge the comment by Reba!
Click to expand...

:dunno: I don't know no idea!
 
drphil said:
I have not used "CART/Interpreters/cuing/etc" at anytime in my life-to date. No comment on its stated "utility"

As for texting or emailing- computers not around when I was much younger. As for reading a computer screen does seem "similar" to reading "written material".

To delimit what the OP asks-does "using CART/interpreters et al" seem reasonable/realistic in learning ASL?

Even more interesting-Nina the writer hasn't commented yet.

I acknowledge the #2 comment-like- by Reba!
Click to expand...

I'm trying to decide if you are serious - or if you're really so ignorant about the mechanics of ASL that what you've said "makes sense" to you.
 
drphil said:
No comment. Not written in "asl syntax sequence"l
Click to expand...

we are numberous trillon many told trice you!! advise.. I think so you don't lose mind! I notice he is confused and burden communication can't . He is have trouble issues fail understand.. he mind level depend on mind!!
 
" We are numberous trillion many told trice you" actual members of Alldeaf.com?
No other comment while I ponder " he mind level depend on mind" Obscure ASL reference?
 
You CANNOT learn ASL from a book. No one has figured out a way to show how signs really look on a two dimensional page. Spoken words, without gesture, expression, or tone, are two dimensional. Signs are three dimensional. Real English cannot be written either. Only the spoken words that comprise the written language can be written. It is the tone of voice, facial expression, and body language that give the words meaning.

You can learn ABOUT ASL from a book. There is a lot to know about ASL that is not contained in the signs directly -- And which do not seem to be understood by some of the "lexicographers" who are "adding" words to the dictionary. For example I recently saw the word "healthy" initialized and signed moving downward. Anyone who understands ASL knows that downward is negative, mysterious, or unknown. In order to mean "healthy", "happy" or "well" the sign MUST move upwards.

You can learn a lot of ASL from DVD's. You can learn vocabulary, correct ways of making the signs, and build your receptive skills.

But: As soon as you are not using your skills with and around Deaf people your communication skills start to deteriorate.

This is from experience.
 
Interesting discussion in theory-what is "real English" spoken or written words when one doesn't utilize "gestures/tone of voice and body language"? I would surmise-not too many people are concerned on resolving.
Could the exception be- some university department-linguistic etc?.

The observation of extended non use of any language as well as ASL one's skill would deteriorate over time-makes sense.

More thoughts for the OP Caitlyn to consider.
 
Last edited:
drphil said:
" We are numberous trillion many told trice you" actual members of Alldeaf.com?
No other comment while I ponder " he mind level depend on mind" Obscure ASL reference?
Click to expand...

Quit trying to stir up trouble, please.
 
Were the "original comment"-"trying to stir up trouble"? Doesn't appear to relate to Caitlyn's query re: Learning ASL from a book?
Misreading?
 
You first post, fine, informative and helpful. Look at what starts around post 20, that's what I mean.

To resolve this:
Interesting discussion in theory-what is "real English" spoken or written words when one doesn't utilize "gestures/tone of voice and body language"? I would surmise-not too many people are concerned on resolving.
Click to expand...

Context, English and ASL, is crucial. In written English you have context based on the situation the conversation is taking place in, and descriptive words of the tone of voice and body language... "he shouted," "she replied angrily," "with an injured look in her eyes, she..." etc etc.
 
I suppose one can add to fiction stories/ newspapers etc- others' reaction- "tone of voice/.body language". Doesn't appear to "apply" to textbooks. It seems to me-anyways.
The point of the original OP's query.-textbooks.

Still no comment from Caitlyn
 
Last edited:
Nina_The_Writer said:
I'be seen some books on learning ASL I want to know if people think its a good way to learn the language.
Click to expand...

Can you learn any language from a book?

No.

You can learn enough to communicate enough with people to give you an entrance. But you will not speak correctly.

A person with perfect hearing cannot always learn new English words from a dictionary and pronounce all of them correctly if they have never heard that word spoken before. They will probably be understandable. It is their language. But the chances are the word will sound "wrong" to the person who is used to using it.


Indubitably.
 
drphil said:
I suppose one can add to fiction stories/ newspapers etc- others' reaction- "tone of voice/.body language". Doesn't appear to "apply" to textbooks. It seems to me-anyways.
The point of the original OP's query.-textbooks.

Still no comment from Caitlyn
Click to expand...

Text books are not real English and are not based on real English. They are modeled after the "Lecture by a professional" who is supposed to be unemotional, objective, and "keep to the point" and never include extraneous information. Thus while pretending to communicate facts they actually leave out tremendous amounts of information.

Therefore they can make statements like "Two plus two equals four" and make it sound true, important, and unquestionable.

In truth "Two plus two equals four" only in a number system with a base that includes the number four.

In binary 10 plus 10 equals 100 which would be 4 in our everyday base ten system.

Text books give you the false feeling you have learned something when in truth (Unless you ask questions and google a lot) they cause you to be ignorant of everything they did not teach.
 
Does persons with some/total Hearing loss have "even more problems" due to their condition?
Perhaps not a surprise this group is- AllDeaf.com.

Aside: I became bilateral DEAF on. -December 20, 2006. I have shifted to reading rather than "hearing", Also, I have been out of school over 55 years. Computers weren't around back then-as I remember. Google wasn't invented back then -either.
 
Back
Top