Deaf is Disabled quote

[Grummer]

They are disabled not so much by the fact of their deafness as by the social construction of communication barriers put in place by hearing society.

That was a quote from Jillio's excellent summary to define where does 'disabled' applies to deaf/Deaf people.

I really like that quote, it's spot on, with 6 elements that we think and talk about alot, put in together in one sentence and resulted a clarity which is quite rare in Alldeaf, however I have a question that how might we make this quote accessible to ALL deafs? by that I mean how do you suggest to modify or code-switch from Hearing-English to Deaf english ?

Reason that i bring this up, its becuase it is based on 'perfect' handling of [hearing[ English, and that I feel its not going to be useful if its only going to he understood by a handful of d/Deaf people... (even few still will even appreciate what it REALLY means, i mean like the whole slew/slant/fluency with the disability concept AND knowing how it (might) fit in with the "Deaf paradigms"... so if we made a replica of this quote but in the form of Deaf English is at close proxity then we would have more chance to spread out the idea/understand of disablity since its dissapointing due to 'Deaf politics' there is widespread denial of Deaf being disabled.....which is stupid and contradictory.

Now I might add that im not looking for what is Wrong with deaf english but what is Right about Deaf English Ok?

indeed this tread ( i hope) might bring out all sorts of debate about grammers, definition, definition order... or even how should a context be contained in the same way as this original quote

thanks
Grum

 

[jenni-m]

They are disabled not so much by the fact of their deafness as by the social construction of communication barriers put in place by hearing society.

That was a quote from Jillio's excellent summary to define where does 'disabled' applies to deaf/Deaf people.

I really like that quote, it's spot on, with 6 elements that we think and talk about alot, put in together in one sentence and resulted a clarity which is quite rare in Alldeaf, however I have a question that how might we make this quote accessible to ALL deafs? by that I mean how do you suggest to modify or code-switch from Hearing-English to Deaf english ?

Reason that i bring this up, its becuase it is based on 'perfect' handling of [hearing[ English, and that I feel its not going to be useful if its only going to he understood by a handful of d/Deaf people... (even few still will even appreciate what it REALLY means, i mean like the whole slew/slant/fluency with the disability concept AND knowing how it (might) fit in with the "Deaf paradigms"... so if we made a replica of this quote but in the form of Deaf English is at close proxity then we would have more chance to spread out the idea/understand of disablity since its dissapointing due to 'Deaf politics' there is widespread denial of Deaf being disabled.....which is stupid and contradictory.

Now I might add that im not looking for what is Wrong with deaf english but what is Right about Deaf English Ok?

indeed this tread ( i hope) might bring out all sorts of debate about grammers, definition, definition order... or even how should a context be contained in the same way as this original quote

thanks
Grum

I will probably catch flak for this, but I personally do not know 'Deaf English'...
I understand there may be a dialect of English, but English is English, more or less, to me. However, I will try to help, if I can... it will be hard to not be 'wordy', because that is just what I do, and is how -I- have learned English.

In short:

Deafness is not disability itself.
It is only put in that 'category', by people. It is -people- who call deafness 'disability'. (it is also people who write dictionaries and come up with the 'real' meaning of words)

This is because of being 'different'. Many hearing people cannot imagine what it is like to not hear, they think it is a loss, a 'disability'.

So, until deaf people become more 'included' in 'normal' society, equal in communication and function (in the eyes of most people), and everyone gets used to it, many will still class deafness as a disability.

 

[jillio]

Grummer.

And, jenni-m.....good job of rephrasing.

 

[Grummer]

I will probably catch flak for this, but I personally do not know 'Deaf English'...
I understand there may be a dialect of English, but English is English, more or less, to me. However, I will try to help, if I can... it will be hard to not be 'wordy', because that is just what I do, and is how -I- have learned English.

In short:

Deafness is not disability itself.
It is only put in that 'category', by people. It is -people- who call deafness 'disability'. (it is also people who write dictionaries and come up with the 'real' meaning of words)

This is because of being 'different'. Many hearing people cannot imagine what it is like to not hear, they think it is a loss, a 'disability'.

So, until deaf people become more 'included' in 'normal' society, equal in communication and function (in the eyes of most people), and everyone gets used to it, many will still class deafness as a disability.

hi there,
not your not getting any flanks from me, even your paraphasing is good attempt, but its not closer enought to deaf english me thinks..(remmy its my opinion im not attacking you)

and erm I feel compelled to point out to a couple of things here...

that is
you are right deafness is itself not a disability but its an impairment
but dont trust the dictionary either, its a normative interpretation of what is disability, scholars in that field will stand it closer to jillo's quote as mentioned above (read that again, again not insult, just see if you can see it from a slightly different angle which you might not have considered before....)
that said they ARGUE like FUCK !!!!! forever, and its incredibally complex and fascinating

you said,
This is because of being 'different'. Many hearing people cannot imagine what it is like to not hear, they think it is a loss, a 'disability'.

its partly correct they tend to think of it as a hearing loss, professionals call it an impairment and they smear it was disability, again like you said they THINK its a disability, when looked closer, its really impairment that they are dealing with, and make the situation worse for deaf people by subjecting them to lengths of interventions, also the way society subject us- deaf people to difficulty in everyday lives due to lack of communicative connection or fear or ignorance can be found in a more subtle level, like attitudes, or prejudience these contributes to the phenomena as we known disabilty.

Disability is more to do with how society treats people who are different with covert disrespect.

impairments is a catogerised, with specific treatments, interventions as such often makes the experience of being different worse..... thats' disability....

i think id stop now, and let it flow

but yeah your last sentence is good, left me wondering...time will tell eh?
the bit about if disability wil still be around, utopia is gonna be a long way off yet imo, so im inclined to agree with you there

cheers

 

[jenni-m]

hi there,
not your not getting any flanks from me, even your paraphasing is good attempt, but its not closer enought to deaf english me thinks..(remmy its my opinion im not attacking you)

and erm I feel compelled to point out to a couple of things here...

that is
you are right deafness is itself not a disability but its an impairment
but dont trust the dictionary either, its a normative interpretation of what is disability, scholars in that field will stand it closer to jillo's quote as mentioned above (read that again, again not insult, just see if you can see it from a slightly different angle which you might not have considered before....)
that said they ARGUE like FUCK !!!!! forever, and its incredibally complex and fascinating

you said,
This is because of being 'different'. Many hearing people cannot imagine what it is like to not hear, they think it is a loss, a 'disability'.

its partly correct they tend to think of it as a hearing loss, professionals call it an impairment and they smear it was disability, again like you said they THINK its a disability, when looked closer, its really impairment that they are dealing with, and make the situation worse for deaf people by subjecting them to lengths of interventions, also the way society subject us- deaf people to difficulty in everyday lives due to lack of communicative connection or fear or ignorance can be found in a more subtle level, like attitudes, or prejudience these contributes to the phenomena as we known disabilty.

Disability is more to do with how society treats people who are different with covert disrespect.

impairments is a catogerised, with specific treatments, interventions as such often makes the experience of being different worse..... thats' disability....

i think id stop now, and let it flow

but yeah your last sentence is good, left me wondering...time will tell eh?
the bit about if disability wil still be around, utopia is gonna be a long way off yet imo, so im inclined to agree with you there

cheers

I understand, thank you for explaining and for your kind words (and pointing out that you are not attacking).

Hopefully someone who actually knows (as opposed to me) will come in and write something.

And as far as definition goes, I am pretty strict on that, as currently it is the ONLY way I know a lot of things. I don't have a lot of room for connotations, I depend on what linguists come up with as being 'correct' (as I do not hear English, or speak it, and do not see very well)

So I too have my form of English, it might just be less apparent because I tend to 'mask' it in ways. Like it is hard to write something until I start writing it, it is difficult to arrange it before then. I need 'paths' and mnemonic triggers in order to write and read properly because there are just so many things to remember.

 

[lex]

disabled means to me if u are deaf or cant walk or blind or ill for life u cant get better from it so i guess any of them things u cant get better from is class disabled (i dont know if im right as im getting alot of confuesing here)

 

[deafbajagal]

I'm going to give a shot. (Don't throw rotten tomatoes at me if I'm wrong, LOL).

What makes deafness a disability isn't the fact that you cannot hear but the fact that the majority of the people (who happens to be hearing) is a society that uses communication that is not always readily accessible and easy for people who are deaf. Also, the majority has the tendency to make decisions on what communicaiton methods are best for deaf people as oppose to letting the deaf people themselves make these decisions. By trying to "help" the deaf people, the hearing people are in fact not enablers but disablers.

So, what is my grade for this attempt? A? B-? C+? F!

 

[shel90]

I'm going to give a shot. (Don't throw rotten tomatoes at me if I'm wrong, LOL).

What makes deafness a disability isn't the fact that you cannot hear but the fact that the majority of the people (who happens to be hearing) is a society that uses communication that is not always readily accessible and easy for people who are deaf. Also, the majority has the tendency to make decisions on what communicaiton methods are best for deaf people as oppose to letting the deaf people themselves make these decisions. By trying to "help" the deaf people, the hearing people are in fact not enablers but disablers.

So, what is my grade for this attempt? A? B-? C+? F!

I couldnt agree with u on that one more!

 

[jillio]

I'm going to give a shot. (Don't throw rotten tomatoes at me if I'm wrong, LOL).

What makes deafness a disability isn't the fact that you cannot hear but the fact that the majority of the people (who happens to be hearing) is a society that uses communication that is not always readily accessible and easy for people who are deaf. Also, the majority has the tendency to make decisions on what communicaiton methods are best for deaf people as oppose to letting the deaf people themselves make these decisions. By trying to "help" the deaf people, the hearing people are in fact not enablers but disablers.

So, what is my grade for this attempt? A? B-? C+? F!

I'll give you an A. Good job, and no rotten tomatoes.

 

[Bottesini]

I'm going to give a shot. (Don't throw rotten tomatoes at me if I'm wrong, LOL).

What makes deafness a disability isn't the fact that you cannot hear but the fact that the majority of the people (who happens to be hearing) is a society that uses communication that is not always readily accessible and easy for people who are deaf. Also, the majority has the tendency to make decisions on what communicaiton methods are best for deaf people as oppose to letting the deaf people themselves make these decisions. By trying to "help" the deaf people, the hearing people are in fact not enablers but disablers.

So, what is my grade for this attempt? A? B-? C+? F!

You can have an A from me. ( But I am throwing rotten tomatoes just for fun and excitement.)

 

[jillio]

You can have an A from me. ( But I am throwing rotten tomatoes just for fun and excitement.)

I guess we've got ourselves a trouble maker!

 

[Interpretrator]

I'm really not sure what you mean by "Deaf English." Do you mean the kind of English that has common errors made by deaf signers? I can't say I agree that supporting nonstandard English is the best way to remove communication barriers. Rather, early intervention that ensures deaf infants naturally acquire a first language -- ANY language -- and if that language is not English, then English can be taught later as a second language, if bilingualism is not an option. (And it isn't, for many families.)

I'm currently teaching English writing and grammar to underprepared deaf college students who were unfairly whisked through their secondary education and pretty much left for dead, in terms of literacy. We're getting them ready for the mainstream English prep classes and hopefully will be pairing our advanced classes with them. Why?

Because we believe that of primary importance for deaf students whose first language is ASL is for their teachers at ALL grade levels to understand the profound differences between ASL and English. It's unfair to expect deaf signers to pick up on verb tenses, subject-verb agreement, articles, and other English grammatical features that simply don't appear in ASL as quickly as students who can transfer this knowledge from their first spoken language, like Spanish. In my class I spend a lot of time comparing ASL and English so the students -- who are required to take ASL as well -- understand the reasons these things are difficult for them, instead of being yelled at for it like some terrible ESL teachers I have interpreted for.

 

[shel90]

I'm really not sure what you mean by "Deaf English." Do you mean the kind of English that has common errors made by deaf signers? I can't say I agree that supporting nonstandard English is the best way to remove communication barriers. Rather, early intervention that ensures deaf infants naturally acquire a first language -- ANY language -- and if that language is not English, then English can be taught later as a second language, if bilingualism is not an option. (And it isn't, for many families.)

I'm currently teaching English writing and grammar to underprepared deaf college students who were unfairly whisked through their secondary education and pretty much left for dead, in terms of literacy. We're getting them ready for the mainstream English prep classes and hopefully will be pairing our advanced classes with them. Why?

Because we believe that of primary importance for deaf students whose first language is ASL is for their teachers at ALL grade levels to understand the profound differences between ASL and English. It's unfair to expect deaf signers to pick up on verb tenses, subject-verb agreement, articles, and other English grammatical features that simply don't appear in ASL as quickly as students who can transfer this knowledge from their first spoken language, like Spanish. In my class I spend a lot of time comparing ASL and English so the students -- who are required to take ASL as well -- understand the reasons these things are difficult for them, instead of being yelled at for it like some terrible ESL teachers I have interpreted for.

Sounds like what I am doing in my grammar class for my 3rd graders. We have daily practice in which they have to analyze and explain the grammatical errors in one sentence. For example..one student tells me to make the "i" capitalized and I ask her why does it have to be capitalized and she is required to explain, using ASL, why. One intern who observed my class was amazed that I make the students explain why they correct the mistakes. Well, of course! They need to think critically about everything! LOL!

Do u do the same too?

 

[Grummer]

Deaf English, like Black English, i think it could be more 'forgivable' for informal group discussion /tasks in classrooms (say a brainstorm session or straight out writing on ideas) then it can be reviewed again to be re-ordered and edited 'back' to Hearing english. that way is more relaxing and more productive in using the natural deaf intellect without strains from having to be so rigorous to write in perfect, difficult to master hearing English.

It wont remove communication barriers, but it might help to alleviate workplace tolerance between hearing and deaf co-workers, like if say, hearing people come to realise there such thing as Deaf english, then we might see alot less scowl on deaf people's intelligence on times when (quick?) written communications takes place. Amongst this sort of thing. but in this thread my point is that i feel this quote really hit it on the head of the nail, and as long as d/Deaf people dont grasp the full effects of this quote which is written in perfect Hearing English, there very little chance of tehm learning about what Disability really means while in the haze dominated by Cultural Deaf Politics which has largely denied factors of disabiltiy being relevant to Deaf People.

 

[Interpretrator]

Deaf English, like Black English...

I'm going to cut the quote right there. AAVE (African American Vernacular English, also known as "Ebonics") has been accepted by many if not most linguists, although it's still a controversial topic. It meets the requirements because it has a unique and specific grammar and vocabulary.

"Deaf English" is not a dialect. It would be like calling contact sign a language. It does not follow predictable rules of grammar like AAVE. The two have nothing in common. There really is no such thing as "Deaf English." It is simply incorrect English, and I do not believe that settling for this is a positive step. I see it as accepting defeat and not empowering to the community in any way.

That said, I completely agree that for things like brainstorming or in more casual situations (like online forums!), it's silly to insist upon good English from anyone, hearing or deaf. Throwing around ideas, whether you're writing an essay or in a work group, should not be limited by worries about proper English.

 

[deafbajagal]

An example of Deaf English is the word "why."

Deaf English: I go store why? buy bananas three.

Hearing English: I went to the store to buy three bananas.
OR: I went to the store because I needed to buy three bananas.

 

[Boult]

deafbajagal,

hearing do say "I went to store today, why? bananas!"

 

[jillio]

deafbajagal,

hearing do say "I went to store today, why? bananas!"

What hearing?

 

[VamPyroX]

An example of Deaf English is the word "why."

Deaf English: I go store why? buy bananas three.

Hearing English: I went to the store to buy three bananas.
OR: I went to the store because I needed to buy three bananas.

This was one of the most common problems when it came to tutoring deaf students. They didn't know how to make a formal question. They thought that you could just add a question mark and the sentence automatically becomes a valid question. Some others thought that by simply adding WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WHY, WHO, and HOW... you automatically make a question.

 

[jenni-m]

This was one of the most common problems when it came to tutoring deaf students. They didn't know how to make a formal question. They thought that you could just add a question mark and the sentence automatically becomes a valid question. Some others thought that by simply adding WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WHY, WHO, and HOW... you automatically make a question.

I am interested to know if you had a method to overcome this difficulty in tutoring. I had been thinking the past few days about possible experimental teaching methods, but I first need to understand more about how ASL works (I stopped learning it at a very young age, and don't think the way I used it is nearly the same as others)

So any insight would be valuable to me.