Childs behavior

[BecLak]

Yes! HUGE difference in developing oral skills (articulation, ability to forms words verbally) and acquiring a spoken language.

Grendel, you are missing my point entirely, I am saying the exact opposite! I am saying that oral skills is knowledge of language. Articulation is not knowledge therefore oral skills is not articulation but knowledge. Articulation is not necessary to be fluent in spoken language. To expect perfection in articulation from a deaf person is an unreasonable expectation and an audist attitude which is unacceptable.

 

[GrendelQ]

I am saying that oral skills is knowledge of language.

Oral skills is not the same as knowledge of language.

That doesn't mean that people who have worked to develop oral skills did not also acquire language. People without oral skills can also acquire language.

Having the ability to form handshapes, even knowing how to sign every letter, is not the same as knowing ASL. Having the ability to use a pen and write, even knowing all of the letters in the alphabet is not the same as knowing written English. Having the ability to form words, to articulate, even every sound in use in English, is not the same as knowing spoken English.

There is a great difference between the ability and skill involved in forming signs, writing words, and speaking words and knowing the language in which those skills can be employed.

 

[BecLak]

Right. But it seems silly to think our teachers would teach us how to articulate, and then do nothing with it afterwards. Why teach us how to say "horse" if we don't learn how to apply it in the English language? That would be like a kindergartener being taught how to write the alphabet on dotted-lined paper and then not taught words and English fluency.




Why not?

Although it is possible to achieve near perfection, it is unreasonable for hearing people to demand perfection in articulation. As a deaf person we will always have an 'accent' to some degree or other because we are not hearing.

 

[BecLak]

Oral skills is not the same as knowledge of language.

That doesn't mean that people who have worked to develop oral skills did not also acquire language. People without oral skills can also acquire language.

Having the ability to form handshapes, even knowing how to sign every letter, is not the same as knowing ASL. Having the ability to use a pen and write, even knowing all of the letters in the alphabet is not the same as knowing written English. Having the ability to form words, to articulate, even every sound in use in English, is not the same as knowing spoken English.

There is a great difference between the ability and skill involved in forming signs, writing words, and speaking words and knowing the language in which those skills can be employed.

My point is that oral skills is not articulation, it is the knowledge of language. Forming handshapes is parallel to learning the alphabet. Learning the alphabet is not the knowledge of language. Articulation is not knowledge. You are saying that oral skills is articulation only and nothing else. I am saying oral skills is knowledge of spoken language. Whether a person is able to perfect articulation or not is irrelevant.

 

[faire_jour]

Although it is possible to achieve near perfection, it is unreasonable for hearing people to demand perfection in articulation. As a deaf person we will always have an 'accent' to some degree or other because we are not hearing.

I know lots of deaf people who I could not pick out that they were deaf through listening to their voice. Not that it matters at all. I don't care what someone voice sounds like, even my daughter. If she understands and is able to use the language well, that's perfect to me!

 

[faire_jour]

My point is that oral skills is not articulation, it is the knowledge of language. Forming handshapes is parallel to learning the alphabet. Learning the alphabet is not the knowledge of language. Articulation is not knowledge. You are saying that oral skills is articulation only and nothing else. I am saying oral skills is knowledge of spoken language. Whether they are able to perfect articulation or not is irrelevant.

Oral skills is articulation. That is our whole point. You can have oral skills and not understand language. If you are talking about language, call it language, in this case, it is spoken English. When one focuses just on the act of speech, it disrespects the language and the work that people did to learn it. Language is the key, not just the sounds you make.

 

[AlleyCat]

Although it is possible to achieve near perfection, it is unreasonable for hearing people to demand perfection in articulation. As a deaf person we will always have an 'accent' to some degree or other because we are not hearing.

Okay. Gotcha. I guess I consider myself one of those who have achieved near-perfection as you said, but I see what you mean about it being unreasonable that all of us can.

 

[AlleyCat]

My point is that oral skills is not articulation, it is the knowledge of language. Forming handshapes is parallel to learning the alphabet. Learning the alphabet is not the knowledge of language. Articulation is not knowledge. You are saying that oral skills is articulation only and nothing else. I am saying oral skills is knowledge of spoken language. Whether a person is able to perfect articulation or not is irrelevant.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think that is not what she was saying, but rather the opposite. There are a number of us here who are saying that oral skills is learning the art of articulation -- the ability to speak. And that having the ability to speak doesn't mean you're fluent, it just gives you the mechanisms to produce sounds and words.

It is indeed revelant in spoken language to be able to articulate the words you have learned. It isn't relevant for written English, but it is for spoken.

 

[Bottesini]

Botts, I never said that striving for good speech was wrong. I just said that hearing people should not expect perfection or in other words demand perfection. There should be understanding and give and take from their side also.

From what you have shared, I can understand your predicament, that is all the more reason I am saying what I am saying. Please don't swear at me.

Not being able to articulate perfectly for whatever reason, whether hearing or deaf creates an 'accent'. The fact of the matter is that to be verbal at all in these circumstances should be acceptable. There should be no discrimination. In your case, it is not a matter of poor 'oral skills'. It is not the skills at fault here.

Sorry about swearing at you. I took that the wrong way and thought you meant expect nothing from deaf kids.

 

[Beowulf]

Okay. Gotcha. I guess I consider myself one of those who have achieved near-perfection as you said, but I see what you mean about it being unreasonable that all of us can.

Cool. Folk tell me that I have a strange accent they cannot put their finger on, lol. It reminds me---several years ago a woman was found wandering the streets here and she had no recollection of who she was or where she came from. Someone from the linguistics department from a nearby university interviewed her and pinpointed her place of origin which turned out to be from a small segment in another state. (It turned out to be from her pronunciation of certain words, such as creek, which she pronounced "crick", and so forth.) They found her family and there was a joyful reunion, a happy ending. Anyway, I am curious if the same would apply to you: if that linguistics person interviewed YOU, would they find your place of origin? I have no idea, but it is interesting, lol.

 

[BecLak]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think that is not what she was saying, but rather the opposite. There are a number of us here who are saying that oral skills is learning the art of articulation -- the ability to speak. And that having the ability to speak doesn't mean you're fluent, it just gives you the mechanisms to produce sounds and words.

It is indeed revelant in spoken language to be able to articulate the words you have learned. It isn't relevant for written English, but it is for spoken.

What I am saying is that there are many deaf who know and understand spoken language but are not able to perfect articulation. Just because they are unable to perfect articulation does that mean they do not know and understand spoken language?

 

[BecLak]

Sorry about swearing at you. I took that the wrong way and thought you meant expect nothing from deaf kids.

That's ok Botts, I knew it was a misunderstanding. Glad you understand me now.

 

[GrendelQ]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think that is not what she was saying, but rather the opposite. There are a number of us here who are saying that oral skills is learning the art of articulation -- the ability to speak. And that having the ability to speak doesn't mean you're fluent, it just gives you the mechanisms to produce sounds and words.

It is indeed revelant in spoken language to be able to articulate the words you have learned. It isn't relevant for written English, but it is for spoken.

AlleyCat, that's what I'm saying, too. These are different concepts, and can be closely related -- some people learn spoken language while developing their oral skills. And just like having a certain manual dexterity is really useful (some would argue necessary) for effectively using ASL, it's not the same as knowing ASL. Having certain oral skills is really useful in, but isn't the same as, knowing spoken English.

There are times when I'll intentionally restate a word my daughter mispronounces in answering or responding to her, but at 4YO I'm focused on her language over her articulation. I'm not going to interrupt my daughter's use of language as she tells me a long, involved story about her day at school or what her latest work of art means to correct a mispronounced word, to address her oral skills. If she chooses to tell part of the story in sign, I'm not going to make her say the words: what's most important is the language, not the delivery. Working on delivery (refining handshapes, articulation) is something that can, for the most part, occur organically as she's doing what's most important: learning English and ASL. And when those skills need work (they have, they do, they will), we'll take some time, but not as the primary focus.

Big difference from focusing on oral skills.

 

[BecLak]

Many hearing people do not realise I am deaf because I have good near perfect articulation, but I still struggle with some words and it is still an effort for me to annunciate every word I speak. But an audi will pick up my 'accent' immediately. And this is even after over 30 years of oral only, living in a hearing family and hearing environment. I will never reach perfection in articulation it is not physically possible for me. But does that mean I do not have fluency in spoken language? I don't think so.

 

[GrendelQ]

Many hearing people do not realise I am deaf because I have good near perfect articulation, but I still struggle with some words and it is still an effort for me to annunciate every word I speak. But an audi will pick up my 'accent' immediately. And this is even after over 30 years of oral only, living in a hearing family and hearing environment. I will never reach perfection in articulation it is not physically possible for me. But does that mean I do not have fluency in spoken language? I don't think so.

Absolutely, even if you don't have very good oral skills (your articulation is rough, accented, constrained physically, etc.), you can be fluent in spoken language.

 

[BecLak]

Absolutely, even if you don't have very good oral skills (your articulation is rough, accented, constrained physically, etc.), you can be fluent in spoken language.

You obviously didnt read my previous post. Need I repeat myself yet again: Oral skills is not articulation only - it is the knowledge of the spoken language. Whether you can perfect articulation or not is irrelevant.

What I am saying is that there are many deaf who know and understand spoken language but are not able to perfect articulation. Just because they are unable to perfect articulation does that mean they do not know and understand spoken language?

 

[Daredevel7]

You obviously didnt read my previous post. Need I repeat myself yet again: Oral skills is not articulation only - it is the knowledge of the spoken language. Whether you can perfect articulation or not is irrelevant.

What I am saying is that there are many deaf who know and understand spoken language but are not able to perfect articulation. Just because they are unable to perfect articulation does that mean they do not know and understand spoken language?

I know how to solve this problem.

BekLak- when you read the other posts, replace the words "oral skills" with "articulation", and you will agree.

Grendel and FJ - when you read BekLak's posts, replace the words "articulation" with "oral skills" and you will agree.

At this point, I'm seeing that y'all are agreeing on the practically the same thing. Just arguing about word semantics.

 

[GrendelQ]

I know how to solve this problem.

BekLak- when you read the other posts, replace the words "oral skills" with "articulation", and you will agree.

Grendal and FJ - when you read BekLak's posts, replace the words "articulation" with "oral skills" and you will agree.

At this point, I'm seeing that y'all are agreeing on the practically the same thing. Just arguing about word semantics.

 

[BecLak]

I know how to solve this problem.

BekLak- when you read the other posts, replace the words "oral skills" with "articulation", and you will agree.

Grendel and FJ - when you read BekLak's posts, replace the words "articulation" with "oral skills" and you will agree.

At this point, I'm seeing that y'all are agreeing on the practically the same thing. Just arguing about word semantics.

Daredevel7, nice try. Thanks for being the mediator here. But this is the whole point of the argument: Grendel and FJ see oral skills as articulation. I don't, so it is not just a matter of changing the words 'oral skills' to 'articulation' the whole argument is that I see 'oral skills' not as articulation but as 'spoken language'.

However, although I have made my point and keep repeating it over and over in different angles. It is not getting anywhere. Either you see it or you don't. For me, it is not a matter of whether these two ladies here see my point. If others out there can see it then that's fine with me. Let's just agree to disagree shall we? Is that ok with you Grendel and FJ?

Thank you Daredevel. ;-) Problem now solved.

 

[KristinaB]

I am so glad I am out of this. I am totally lost and I've only been here every few days.