Cued Speech: A benefit to deaf and hard of hearing

owen06 said:
The way that I understood CS was that one of the ways it helps is to remove the ambiguities of lip reading. So the cuer wouldn't have to be communicating with another cuer because the deaf person would be able to read the lips of the speaking person successfully.
Click to expand...

Only if that speaker was cuing. Likewise the deaf person could only be understood through cuing if the receiver is also a cuer. And, if you don't know Hebrew, the cues are simply phonetic representations of unknown words. That is not communication.
 
owen06 said:
The way that I understood CS was that one of the ways it helps is to remove the ambiguities of lip reading. So the cuer wouldn't have to be communicating with another cuer because the deaf person would be able to read the lips of the speaking person successfully.
Click to expand...

If I had to choose, I would rather pick CS over lipreading without visual cues. I cant lipread for too long..hurts my eyes. Anything to take the strain off, I would go for it. :)
 
Why? There should be no reason that the person can't read lips. If they are familiar with being cued to in that language, they would have been exposed to both the cues and the mouth/lip movements of that language. I wasn't claiming that if you didn't know Hebrew you would understand. I was saying that if you have Hebrew as a language (I guess in this case, via cueing) that there should be no reason that the person needs to be communicating with another cuer (in this case a Hebrew cuer)--they should be able to read lips b/c cueing removes the ambiguities in speech reading. Did I explain my train of thought enough? :)

Sorry, not the merry-go-round part of the why...
 
owen06 said:
Why? There should be no reason that the person can't read lips. If they are familiar with being cued to in that language, they would have been exposed to both the cues and the mouth/lip movements of that language. I wasn't claiming that if you didn't know Hebrew you would understand. I was saying that if you have Hebrew as a language (I guess in this case, via cueing) that there should be no reason that the person needs to be communicating with another cuer (in this case a Hebrew cuer)--they should be able to read lips b/c cueing removes the ambiguities in speech reading. Did I explain my train of thought enough? :)

Sorry, not the merry-go-round part of the why...
Click to expand...

Because unless the cuing is present, it is not there to removre the ambiguity. Too many sounds look alike on the mouth. That is where the cuing comes in to remove the ambiguity. Without the cues, it goes back to ambiguous, because it is the cuing itself that differentiates between sounds that appear the same on the lips.

No, you aren't part of the merry-go-round....yet! LOL.
 
From what I've read, when a person speaks English (I'm switching from Hebrew b/c I don't know any Hebrew:)), groups of vowel sounds make distinct shapes on the mouth (I think 4). Obviously the person is having a conversation, so they have a context and a person brought up with cueing would be able to see the differences on the others mouth, even without the cues to assist them because they are aware of the differences and can pick them out when lip reading.
 
owen06 said:
From what I've read, when a person speaks English (I'm switching from Hebrew b/c I don't know any Hebrew:)), groups of vowel sounds make distinct shapes on the mouth (I think 4). Obviously the person is having a conversation, so they have a context and a person brought up with cueing would be able to see the differences on the others mouth, even without the cues to assist them because they are aware of the differences and can pick them out when lip reading.
Click to expand...

That's just it, oweno6. They cannot pick up the difference. Are you aware that lipreading is only accurate to 30%? That is in ideal conditions. The cues are necessary to distinguish between those sounds that look alike. And they are numerous. I suggest you go stand in front of a mirror, and without overexaggerating your mouth movement, say "milk" and "beer" without voice. Then try it with "beach" and "peach". Now try it in dim light. Try it from a 3/4 angle. Lip reading is extremely difficult, and context is not always enough to remove ambiguity. How about trying to lip read someone with a full mustuache? Or someone who does not articulate well, and barely moves their mouth. Likewise, try to lipread someone who over articulates. Or someone chewing gum. If one were always able to lipread with accuracy, a system to remove the ambiguity would never have been believed to be necessary.

Ask some of the deaf posters about lipreading. Let them tell you of the difficulites involved, and how accuracy is very dependent upon conditions being ideal. Better yet, just go back and read the numerous posts made by deaf individuals that are all over this forum.

You are assuming that a sound once cued will always be recognized without the cue based on the fact that a cue was used at some point in time. This is just incorrect.
 
Hmmm...so here's where I think we aren't looking at this from the same stance. You are saying cued once. I'm saying that these people have been cueing for a long time...to the point that they are very good at it. So chances are, they have seen the word/mouth shape waaaayyy more than once. I would totally agree that if the person only saw the sound/cue once they would not be able to distinguish it from something else. However, I think that if the person had been exposed to cueing for awhile, and were fluent in producing correct cues, they would be able to distinguish the lip movements.

These people are doing it withing the context of a conversation, they know what point they are trying to get across, so there should be no problem with context and words that they were not expecting and may not recognize probably won't come up. I am not saying that lip reading isn't hard. I've tried it and am absolutely horrible at it! :giggle:
 
owen06 said:
Hmmm...so here's where I think we aren't looking at this from the same stance. You are saying cued once. I'm saying that these people have been cueing for a long time...to the point that they are very good at it. So chances are, they have seen the word/mouth shape waaaayyy more than once. I would totally agree that if the person only saw the sound/cue once they would not be able to distinguish it from something else. However, I think that if the person had been exposed to cueing for awhile, and were fluent in producing correct cues, they would be able to distinguish the lip movements.

These people are doing it withing the context of a conversation, they know what point they are trying to get across, so there should be no problem with context and words that they were not expecting and may not recognize probably won't come up. I am not saying that lip reading isn't hard. I've tried it and am absolutely horrible at it! :giggle:
Click to expand...

Yes, they are seeing a mouthshape that they have seen in conjuction with a cue for a long time. They are also seeing the same mouthshape in conjuction with a different cue. And perhaps with a 3rd. Unless the cue is present, there is no visual means by which to discriminate those based on speech reading alone. That is the whole point of cuing. To distinguish between those mouthshapes that represent different phonemic elements. Without the cue, all you have is a mouthshape that could be representing any one of a number of phonemes. You are simply back to square one, which is lipreading alone. 30% of a conversation is unnaceptable.
 
jillio said:
Yes, they are seeing a mouthshape that they have seen in conjuction with a cue for a long time. They are also seeing the same mouthshape in conjuction with a different cue. And perhaps with a 3rd. Unless the cue is present, there is no visual means by which to discriminate those based on speech reading alone. That is the whole point of cuing. To distinguish between those mouthshapes that represent different phonemic elements. Without the cue, all you have is a mouthshape that could be representing any one of a number of phonemes. You are simply back to square one, which is lipreading alone. 30% of a conversation is unnaceptable.
Click to expand...

From what I have read regarding CS, each consonant handshape represents a group of consonant phonemes, within that one group, each phoneme has a distinct mouthshape. So, that one hand shape can only represent in conjunction with the mouth shape, one sound, which is part of the word. The same goes for the vowels. My understanding from this then, is that from learning English through cueing, when a person is having a conversation with a speaking person, they are able to distinguish between b/c they have a context, and are able to know that they are talking about "Going to the beach" rather than "Going to the peach", since going to the peach doesn't make sense.
 
owen06 said:
From what I have read regarding CS, each consonant handshape represents a group of consonant phonemes, within that one group, each phoneme has a distinct mouthshape. So, that one hand shape can only represent in conjunction with the mouth shape, one sound, which is part of the word. The same goes for the vowels. My understanding from this then, is that from learning English through cueing, when a person is having a conversation with a speaking person, they are able to distinguish between b/c they have a context, and are able to know that they are talking about "Going to the beach" rather than "Going to the peach", since going to the peach doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

And a certain amount of context is used in all speech reading,with or without cuing. That is exactly why it is unreliable. Cuing does not distinguish between phonemes or morphemes unless it is used, period.
 
owen06 said:
My understanding from this then, is that from learning English through cueing, when a person is having a conversation with a speaking person, they are able to distinguish between b/c they have a context, and are able to know that they are talking about "Going to the beach" rather than "Going to the peach", since going to the peach doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

Even if you are an extraordinary speech-reader speaking a language with highly disctinct movements for most sounds, it's a very tiring task to constantly assume in a reasonably paced conversation what the person might be saying, because there is NO language whatsoever that does not employ sounds that look identical.

Learning cued speech inevitably makes you better at speechreading itself, but speechreading IS quite ambiguous, unlike cued speech. Thus, a person who ordinarily uses cued speech might be able to give or take guess a relatively small percentage of the words being spoken by a non-cuer, it is not comparable to the comprehension that the same person would get, if say, they wrote notes.

(Note, this is from my experiences with deaf speechreaders, I cannot personally do so to save my own life :rofl: )
 
Back
Top