'Cued speech' has produced strong academic results -- and a dispute

[loml]

Right before my very eyes......

Cloggy

You seem to think "pro-CS = anti-ASL" ... which is not the case...

shel90

I said those words "Pro-CS=anti-ASL"? I must have missed that one.

shel90

Pray tell..what statement of Cloggy's that I changed?

shel90- you dropped the words "You seem to think" from Cloggys' statement. This changed the intended meaning of his statement.

 

[rick48]

Jeff used to post here!

Yes, as well as other forums and he is also one of the most knowlegable people around with respect to the technical aspects of the ci.

The Hilary Franklin mentioned in the article was a frequent poster on another forum, very bright and articulate person.

 

[Cloggy]

Actually, cloggy, I can interpret the sentence into ASL. I simply see no need to play your childish games. And, you seem to be ignoring the fact that simply being able to cue the phonetic representations of the words does not equate to comprehension. Esample: you obviously use words that you do don understand on a regular basis, and continually distort the message intended. So while you may be able to reproduce a word by typing is no indication that you have comprehension of the message. Your equation is a perfect example of lack of comprehension and distortion of the intended message. That is why the conclusions you draw are quite often, completely innacurate.

Again, you are assuming and misinterpreting.... as usual.. I don't use words I don't know....

On the other hand... you use a lot of words other people don't know... (No, it's not just me..)

Actually, I think it's your way to insult other posters. Just misinterpret anything they write, and it will never be regarded as an insult by the moderators... good thinking!.


Back on topic,
Since, as a transliterator, one does not need to know the meaning of the words, one just needs to pass it on. It's up to the student to interpret the message.

 

[rick48]

Back on topic,
Since, as a transliterator, one does not need to know the meaning of the words, one just needs to pass it on. It's up to the student to interpret the message.

Good point Cloggy it is always better for the student to get the message directly and be the one that interprets its meaning rather than have it filtered for them through a third person.

 

[deafdyke]

Something you guys missed. Ancedote is NOT the singular of data.
There's NO data, just basicly "Oh here are three high acheiving types" ....there's no statistics in the article about the Cued Speech population as a WHOLE!
I'm sure that we could produce high acheiving oral only or TC or even Sign only (even thou that population is VERY small) people as "proof" that this or that method is the ANSWER!
Couldn't Cued Speech work in conjunction with a bi-bi philopshophy? Exactly like how hearing kids learn phonetics , but they ALSO learn it in conjunction with a WHOLE language approach!
I also was not aware that there are only 100 Cued Speech transliterators in the US. That is a very small number. Does anyone know how many dhh folks use it in the US? Maybe the impressive gains are simply a result of a very small sample size. The limited number of transliterators argues for a multimodal approach, so that if circumstances prohibit using one tool, another tool can be used. Like oral only folks complain that they don't have access to something equalivant to a 'terp.(eg deafies have 'terps but we don't get offered FM/oral 'terps etc) Yet, if they were fluent in ASL, they COULD use a 'terp.

 

[flip]

Since, as a transliterator, one does not need to know the meaning of the words, one just needs to pass it on. It's up to the student to interpret the message.

I have seen cued language system interpreters with late deafened or vision impaired(tactile) people before, but lately, they all use type interpreters. Guess it's because laptops are so cheap and available now. Also those CS interpreters would blow my eyes away if staring on them for hours.

But the ultimate is an ASL interpreter if you follow the head direction in an audience with deaf modal bilingual people, where both ASL and type interpreters are available.

 

[rick48]

Something you guys missed. Ancedote is NOT the singular of data.
There's NO data, just basicly "Oh here are three high acheiving types" ....there's no statistics in the article about the Cued Speech population as a WHOLE!
I'm sure that we could produce high acheiving oral only or TC or even Sign only (even thou that population is VERY small) people as "proof" that this or that method is the ANSWER!
Couldn't Cued Speech work in conjunction with a bi-bi philopshophy? Exactly like how hearing kids learn phonetics , but they ALSO learn it in conjunction with a WHOLE language approach!
I also was not aware that there are only 100 Cued Speech transliterators in the US. That is a very small number. Does anyone know how many dhh folks use it in the US? Maybe the impressive gains are simply a result of a very small sample size. The limited number of transliterators argues for a multimodal approach, so that if circumstances prohibit using one tool, another tool can be used. Like oral only folks complain that they don't have access to something equalivant to a 'terp.(eg deafies have 'terps but we don't get offered FM/oral 'terps etc) Yet, if they were fluent in ASL, they COULD use a 'terp.

Where did anyone call the article research or say that it was proof of anything? If anyone "missed" anything it is you who "missed" Cloggy's very clear introduction of the article:

"Found this article.... hope it's of interest"

Sometimes a posting of an article that some may find to be of interest, is simply that and nothing more.

Interesting that the experiences expressed by the subjects, who are identified, in the article are immediately label "anecdotal" and with the clear implication that they are to be given no weight but yet we are constantly being told that we must accept as genuine and give much weight to the "anecdotal" experiences of the unidentified posters on this forum. Rather than being told which experiences one must accept as valid and those that one should ignore, perhaps it is better to let each indvidual decide that for themself.

 

[flip]

Good point Cloggy it is always better for the student to get the message directly and be the one that interprets its meaning rather than have it filtered for them through a third person.

So even if a deaf student ask for an ASL interpreter, you think it would be better for that student to have a transliterator? Or do you mean that transliterators are unwanted, too?

 

[flip]

Rather than being told which experiences one must accept as valid and those that one should ignore, perhaps it is better to let each indvidual decide that for themself.

If I was going to understand deafness, I would put more weight on the experiences of deaf people, rather than hearings with experiences limited to deaf children and the methods provided where they live. That's plain common sense, and perhaps why different experiences are weightened different here?

 

[Cloggy]

I have seen cued language system interpreters with late deafened or vision impaired(tactile) people before, but lately, they all use type interpreters. Guess it's because laptops are so cheap and available now.

Don't you think it is because it's easier to find someone that can type at the rate of speaking than finding an ASL interpreter?

Also those CS interpreters would blow my eyes away if staring on them for hours.

Probably because you don't know CS. Someone who doesn't know ASL would have the same feeling regarding ASL interpreter.

But the ultimate is an ASL interpreter if you follow the head direction in an audience with deaf modal bilingual people, where both ASL and type interpreters are available.

If you are deaf and know ASL... sure...
and then they still want the transcripts from the type I guess....
which makes sense..

 

[Cloggy]

If I was going to understand deafness, I would put more weight on the experiences of deaf people, rather than hearings with experiences limited to deaf children and the methods provided where they live. That's plain common sense, and perhaps why different experiences are weightened different here?

They are deaf

Zainab Alkebsi, 18, writes for the student newspaper at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, which she attends on a full academic scholarship. Rockville native Allison Kaftan, 25, is pursuing a doctorate in English at George Washington University. Jeff Majors, 33, studies computer programming in Houston.

If they weren't deaf, they would simply be high-achievers. But when the average American deaf 18-year-old reads at just a fourth-grade level, these students' accomplishments are as noteworthy as their secret to success is controversial.

 

[flip]

Don't you think it is because it's easier to find someone that can type at the rate of speaking than finding an ASL interpreter?

I said nothing about ASL interpreters. I said I have seen CS interpreters before, but they are now less common, that's what I said. It's easier to get an ASL interpreter than type interpreter most places as far I know.

Probably because you don't know CS. Someone who doesn't know ASL would have the same feeling regarding ASL interpreter.

No, it's not. CS are widely known to be more exhausting than ASL when used to communicate, something that it never was meant to be used as.

If you are deaf and know ASL... sure...
and then they still want the transcripts from the type I guess....
which makes sense..

Yes, you got it! In action, most deaf people prefer ASL interpreters, after the lecture, both hearings and deafs would like to have a transcript.

 

[flip]

They are deaf

Yes, you should listen to their experiences. I never said they was wrong?

 

[rick48]

So even if a deaf student ask for an ASL interpreter, you think it would be better for that student to have a transliterator? Or do you mean that transliterators are unwanted, too?

No and no.

 

[rick48]

If I was going to understand deafness, I would put more weight on the experiences of deaf people, rather than hearings with experiences limited to deaf children and the methods provided where they live. That's plain common sense, and perhaps why different experiences are weightened different here?

Perhaps you would but if the experiences were both from deaf individuals then you may choose to weight them differently. If the issues involved parenting you may view the hearing parents' experiences of more value.

Bottomline, I say leave it to the individual to decide and disagree with that. We could each point out hundreds of scenarios where "common sense" would favor one set of experiences over another but then that is why O say leave it to the individual to decide rather then be told whose expereinces are more genuine.

Apparently you just find it necessary to argue that point for the sake of arguing

 

[Angel]

shel90- you dropped the words "You seem to think" from Cloggys' statement. This changed the intended meaning of his statement.

, that's the reason why I don't post in these threads cause I'm trying to understand both sides but while you're here trying to confused me even more.

Yet this line does not make no sense, how about letting Cloggy explain this to her instead of you making this more diffcult as it is.

 

[shel90]

Cloggy



shel90



shel90

shel90- you dropped the words "You seem to think" from Cloggys' statement. This changed the intended meaning of his statement.

It was directed to Cloggy not to u or anyone else. I had a reason for it and now u and others just made it more confusing.

 

[shel90]

, that's the reason why I don't post in these threads cause I'm trying to understand both sides but while you're here trying to confused me even more.

Yet this line does not make no sense, how about letting Cloggy explain this to her instead of you making this more diffcult as it is.

Thank u. No point in continuing with this issue...it has gotten pointless by now.

 

[Angel]

Thank u. No point in continuing with this issue...it has gotten pointless by now.

I don't blame you Shel and I agree.

 

[loml]

Very different ......

flip

No, it's not. CS are widely known to be more exhausting than ASL when used to communicate, something that it never was meant to be used as

flip - ASL is used to communicate in ASL. CS can be and is used to communicate or learn to write in English, French, Spanish etc.