Deaf + HOH + CI <------> Deaf + (HOH + CI)

[Cloggy]

It is still assisted auditory function. And there is nothing wrong with it. What is wrong is the assumption that assisted auditory function somehow superior to non-assisted, and the categorization of a population into numerous sub-divides that creates a system of discrimination within the population as well as without.

Oh, wow jillio, such big words....
I really have no clue what you are talking about.... please, can you elaborate on that...????

BTW.. .where did I assume that "What is wrong is the assumption that assisted auditory function somehow superior to non-assisted"??

 

[jag]

Oh, wow jillio, such big words....
I really have no clue what you are talking about.... please, can you elaborate on that...????

BTW.. .where did I assume that "What is wrong is the assumption that assisted auditory function somehow superior to non-assisted"??

Hi Cloggy just wanted to repeat what you said somewhere on here but from my own expericence...maybe it'll have more meaning from one whom actually expericnces it. I am deaf but I hear.

Life is great.

 

[Cloggy]

Hi Cloggy just wanted to repeat what you said somewhere on here but from my own expericence...maybe it'll have more meaning from one whom actually expericnces it. I am deaf but I hear.

Life is great.

Thanks!!

(BTW.... you will be ignored !)

 

[jillio]

Oh, wow jillio, such big words....
I really have no clue what you are talking about.... please, can you elaborate on that...????

BTW.. .where did I assume that "What is wrong is the assumption that assisted auditory function somehow superior to non-assisted"??

In every post you make.

 

[jillio]

Oh, wow jillio, such big words....
I really have no clue what you are talking about.... please, can you elaborate on that...????

BTW.. .where did I assume that "What is wrong is the assumption that assisted auditory function somehow superior to non-assisted"??

I figured out a long time ago that you had no idea what I was talking about!

 

[R2D2]

I voted for CI users being HOH. I'm aware that there is a subsection of CI users who function almost as if they are hearing people when they are wearing their CIs, but would say that being deaf at nighttime, background noise issues that we are closer to HOH. Also there is variation in the results of children with CIs due to a range of factors (quite a high percentage of deaf children have other issues for example). I still believe that deaf children with CIs need good social and educational support at the school level for example.

I don't think that going to HOH is to be sniffed at. Going from profoundly deaf to HOH is in my eyes a huge progress, which allows for more flexible choices and opportunities.

Looking at my nephew who is now completing his schooling I can really see a difference between him and his non CI HOH friends in terms of the choices they've had and made use of. They are billingual due to the fact that they can hear with hearing aids etc, whereas he is not, as he has no usable residual hearing.

 

[shel90]

I voted for CI users being HOH. I'm aware that there is a subsection of CI users who function almost as if they are hearing people when they are wearing their CIs, but would say that being deaf at nighttime, background noise issues that we are closer to HOH. Also there is variation in the results of children with CIs due to a range of factors (quite a high percentage of deaf children have other issues for example). I still believe that deaf children with CIs need good social and educational support at the school level for example.

I don't think that going to HOH is to be sniffed at. Going from profoundly deaf to HOH is in my eyes a huge progress, which allows for more flexible choices and opportunities.

Looking at my nephew who is now completing his schooling I can really see a difference between him and his non CI HOH friends in terms of the choices they've had and made use of. They are billingual due to the fact that they can hear with hearing aids etc, whereas he is not, as he has no usable residual hearing.

Isnt your nephew bilingual since he can read and write in a different language than from his primary language? I see that my brother is bilingual cuz he is fluent in 2 languages which are ASL and English even though he cant use English in the spoken form if his life depended on it. He is able to come in here and exchange ideas and his thoughts using English, right? To me that is bilingual...doesnt matter if the deaf person can speak it or not.

It seems that being hoh is being better than deaf, depending on how the person adapts to whatever degree of hearing loss they have.

 

[R2D2]

Isnt your nephew bilingual since he can read and write in a different language than from his primary language? I see that my brother is bilingual cuz he is fluent in 2 languages which are ASL and English even though he cant use English in the spoken form if his life depended on it. He is able to come in here and exchange ideas and his thoughts using English, right? To me that is bilingual...doesnt matter if the deaf person can speak it or not.

It seems that being hoh is being better than deaf, depending on how the person adapts to whatever degree of hearing loss they have.

He can read and write enough to make himself understood, but he's not "fluent" in it. He struggles with his grammar and my sister has had to personally coach him in her own time ahead of his recent exams.

I see what you are getting at in terms of looking at someone whose bilingual and in a sense someone who can read English has a good understanding of that language but it's not entirely bilingual is it? If I could read German but couldn't speak it then I would say I could read German but I wouldn't claim I was bilingual, which implies to me a complete mastery of that language. I respect your different point of view though.

 

[shel90]

He can read and write enough to make himself understood, but he's not "fluent" in it. He struggles with his grammar and my sister has had to personally coach him in her own time ahead of his recent exams.

I see what you are getting at in terms of looking at someone whose bilingual and in a sense someone who can read English has a good understanding of that language but it's not entirely bilingual is it? If I could read German but couldn't speak it then I would say I could read German but I wouldn't claim I was bilingual, which implies to me a complete mastery of that language. I respect your different point of view though.

Curious..why is the spoken form superior to the non spoken form? Isnt being able to communicate with each other whether it is thru speaking or writing the most important thing? Just asking u on why u have that different view? No disrespect but just curious..

To me it seems like if that's how hearing people who view it that way , that's why sign language is considered an inferior language? I wonder why does it really matter as long as the deaf person can communicate very well via writing. If the deaf person's writing skills are poor, then I can understand. I know so many deaf people who know many languages but cant use them in the spoken form.

 

[R2D2]

Curious..why is the spoken form superior to the non spoken form? Isnt being able to communicate with each other whether it is thru speaking or writing the most important thing? Just asking u on why u have that different view? No disrespect but just curious..

To me it seems like if that's how hearing people who view it that way , that's why sign language is considered an inferior language? I wonder why does it really matter as long as the deaf person can communicate very well via writing. If the deaf person's writing skills are poor, then I can understand. I know so many deaf people who know many languages but cant use them in the spoken form.

It's not about superiority or inferiority. It's about knowing the language in all it's different expressions. The spoken form is at least equal in value in terms of usage to those who communicate in English as the written form, maybe more so.

That's how I understand bilingualism to be. I understand that you view it in a different way. To me, being fluent in the written form would be partly bilingual. I'm not looking down on it - it's just a more accurate description.

 

[sr171soars]

It's not about superiority or inferiority. It's about knowing the language in all it's different expressions. The spoken form is at least equal in value in terms of usage to those who communicate in English as the written form, maybe more so.

That's how I understand bilingualism to be. I understand that you view it in a different way. To me, being fluent in the written form would be partly bilingual. I'm not looking down on it - it's just a more accurate description.

Good way to put it!

Shel,
From a hearing person's vantage point, as spoken language is the medium of communication that conveys the most information quickly. The written language compliments it but it is more rigid and inflexible and takes longer to get across. Put differently, there is a whole lot more give and take with the spoken language that the written one can't match no matter what. One doesn't have to be so grammatically accurate as the communication protocol is continuous and active for the participants. It is much more difficult to achieve that in the written form.

Take "IM" for instance, nobody text messages the way one would expect in the pure written form simply because it is way too slow and cumbersome. I don't use "IM" but I have seen enough of it to know that it takes on the spoken language "tempo" and "lingo" and it shortens many words and expressions to be similar to spoken language in terms of getting the point across quickly. No wonder it is so popular... Still for all that, it doesn't easily convey the additional information that voice can with spoken language (think irony, sarcasm, humor) without adding extra verbiage.

For a comparison, sign is the same as spoken language in that sense of give and take. The problem is for a deaf person who can't use spoken language, is the fact that the written language is not the same as spoken language in its myriad forms as R2D2 was pointing out.

To make this even clearer, spoken languages were developed long before written language ever gotten off the ground. Obviously, this would not have been the case if it weren't a better means communication for the hearing. Heck, one doesn't has to be formally educated either to use it!!! On the other hand, this is not the case with written languages.

 

[jillio]

Good way to put it!

Shel,
From a hearing person's vantage point, as spoken language is the medium of communication that conveys the most information quickly. The written language compliments it but it is more rigid and inflexible and takes longer to get across. Put differently, there is a whole lot more give and take with the spoken language that the written one can't match no matter what. One doesn't have to be so grammatically accurate as the communication protocol is continuous and active for the participants. It is much more difficult to achieve that in the written form.

Take "IM" for instance, nobody text messages the way one would expect in the pure written form simply because it is way too slow and cumbersome. I don't use "IM" but I have seen enough of it to know that it takes on the spoken language "tempo" and "lingo" and it shortens many words and expressions to be similar to spoken language in terms of getting the point across quickly. No wonder it is so popular... Still for all that, it doesn't easily convey the additional information that voice can with spoken language (think irony, sarcasm, humor) without adding extra verbiage.

For a comparison, sign is the same as spoken language in that sense of give and take. The problem is for a deaf person who can't use spoken language, is the fact that the written language is not the same as spoken language in its myriad forms as R2D2 was pointing out.

To make this even clearer, spoken languages were developed long before written language ever gotten off the ground. Obviously, this would not have been the case if it weren't a better means communication for the hearing. Heck, one doesn't has to be formally educated either to use it!!! On the other hand, this is not the case with written languages.

While I can't disagree with the points you ahve made, I would like to point out that gestural languages preceeded even oral languages.

 

[signpammygirl]

I think whatever it is I am Hard of hearing with Has, so basically I won't need ci, yet if I ever want to explore the area I could check it out, but it is very costly surgery of course, I believe if a person is deaf then he or she is deaf, I consider myself deaf because even though I grew up oral, I am thankful that I learn ASL in college. I guess it is only really important if a person can define himself.

 

[shel90]

It's not about superiority or inferiority. It's about knowing the language in all it's different expressions. The spoken form is at least equal in value in terms of usage to those who communicate in English as the written form, maybe more so.

That's how I understand bilingualism to be. I understand that you view it in a different way. To me, being fluent in the written form would be partly bilingual. I'm not looking down on it - it's just a more accurate description.

I posted a reply to your post but it is gone or maybe it never got submitted. I had said that I get where u are coming from. Thanks for clearing it up.


I guess I just see things in more black and white..if a person is fluent in another language even in only in the written form, I consider that person fluent in that language and bilingual. I guess I have that view cuz I know that mastering the spoken language is difficult for many deaf people? I think it is still great.

 

[jillio]

I think whatever it is I am Hard of hearing with Has, so basically I won't need ci, yet if I ever want to explore the area I could check it out, but it is very costly surgery of course, I believe if a person is deaf then he or she is deaf, I consider myself deaf because even though I grew up oral, I am thankful that I learn ASL in college. I guess it is only really important if a person can define himself.

There are a lot of people on this board that agree with you, having been raised oral and learning sign once they reached college.

You are so right.....deaf is deaf.

 

[sr171soars]

There are a lot of people on this board that agree with you, having been raised oral and learning sign once they reached college.

You are so right.....deaf is deaf.

A rose is a rose by any other name of course. However, that doesn't prevent one from the opportunity of "doing as the Romans do"...

Each to their own.

 

[jillio]

A rose is a rose by any other name of course. However, that doesn't prevent one from the opportunity of "doing as the Romans do"...

Each to their own.

Of course, one can "do as the Romans do" as long as one realizes that "doing as the Romans do" doesn't make one a Roman.

 

[sr171soars]

Of course, one can "do as the Romans do" as long as one realizes that "doing as the Romans do" doesn't make one a Roman.

They usually don't realize that fact...so, what does that make me? A Roman by any other name!

 

[jillio]

They usually don't realize that fact...so, what does that make me? A Roman by any other name!

LOL!