Finding the Right Fit

L

loml

New Member
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
1,645
Reaction score
0
Deaf children's access to BSL is not a problem for 10% of children who have BSL-using parents - but what about the remaining 90%? If their parents learn and use BSL - a big 'if' - then this should produce children with age-appropriate use of BSL. However, in practice the family is required to be the primary deliverers of a language they have yet to learn. This is not an empowering situation for parents. Although the families' capacity to communicate in BSL may improve over time, the crucial time that a young child needs access to a complete, grammatical language is in its first few years and this is usually before the family is competent in BSL. Visiting CSWs and BSL-using ToDs have an important role to play but it is hard to compensate for impoverished language within the home. Consequently many BSL-using children will arrive at school with delayed language. Despite expert and dedicated teaching, problems of grammar and vocabulary may remain. Even if the deaf child acquires full, grammatically correct, vocabulary-rich BSL they still may not be able to communicate with their parents... and... they have yet to learn English. Hearing families are perfectly able to model English (or the home spoken language), but how accessible is it to a deaf child?
One solution to these problems is to modify the aims of bilingualism and concentrate on ensuring that children learn primarily written English. But is this full bilingualism? Additionally, BSL is not a direct or easy route to literacy in English. Do children brought up this way have average, or even functional, written English skills? The evidence, and the increasing use of 'modified' language would suggest that they do not.

The sound-based system of Cued Speech can be learnt in 20 hours, so twin problems of
a) complete and early access to the home language in a hearing family and
b) full and easy access to sound-based language leading to age-appropriate literacy
can be overcome by its use in the home.

But how can Cued Speech fit into a bilingual model?
Click to expand...


Bilingualism - two different models
 
I would not consider a child using CS to be bilingual, nor would I consider a child using a manually coded system of English to be bilingual. I would categorize them as bimodal, as the base language is still English. It is simply English that has been manually coded. Still, the syntax, vocabulary, and grammar are English. In the case of ASL or BSL, the language is not only manually coded, but possesses its own syntax, grammatical rules, pragmatics, and conceptual vocabulary. Linguistically, it is a separate language, and therefore, one who is fluent in ASL (or BSL) and English is truly bilingual.
 
jillio said:
I would not consider a child using CS to be bilingual, nor would I consider a child using a manually coded system of English to be bilingual. I would categorize them as bimodal, as the base language is still English. It is simply English that has been manually coded. Still, the syntax, vocabulary, and grammar are English. In the case of ASL or BSL, the language is not only manually coded, but possesses its own syntax, grammatical rules, pragmatics, and conceptual vocabulary. Linguistically, it is a separate language, and therefore, one who is fluent in ASL (or BSL) and English is truly bilingual.
Click to expand...


I do not understand how you have come to the conclusions that you state.
Using the delivery system of Cued Speech, enables the child to understand the grammer, syntax, vocabulary and phonemes of English, French, Dutch etc.
 
loml said:
I do not understand how you have come to the conclusions that you state.
Using the delivery system of Cued Speech, enables the child to understand the grammer, syntax, vocabulary and phonemes of English, French, Dutch etc.
Click to expand...


Absolutely. Inwhich case the child would have to speak their native tongue, plus an adiitional language to be considered bilingual. Simly using the CS system to code does not make a child bilingual. They are still only proficient in one language. For instance, a child who speaks English, and uses CS to code the spoken English, still is only proficient in English. A code system is NOT a separate language. That would make that child bimodal in one language.

However, a child who is proficient in both English and ASL is bilingual, just as a child who is proficient in English and French is bilingual. Why? Because these are are linguistically separate languages, and meet all of the criteria to be identified as a separate language. CS is a cue system, and does not meet the criteria of being a separate language.
 
jillio said:
Absolutely. Inwhich case the child would have to speak their native tongue, plus an adiitional language to be considered bilingual. Simly using the CS system to code does not make a child bilingual. They are still only proficient in one language. For instance, a child who speaks English, and uses CS to code the spoken English, still is only proficient in English. A code system is NOT a separate language. That would make that child bimodal in one language.

However, a child who is proficient in both English and ASL is bilingual, just as a child who is proficient in English and French is bilingual. Why? Because these are are linguistically separate languages, and meet all of the criteria to be identified as a separate language. CS is a cue system, and does not meet the criteria of being a separate language.
Click to expand...

It has never been stated that CS is a language. To suggest that a deaf person who chooses to use cueing for delivery of languages not bilingual/triligual/multilingual, would give you pie on your face with cueing deaf individuals.

Do not confuse using a system with the learning of a language.
 
loml said:
It has never been stated that CS is a language. To suggest that a deaf person who chooses to use cueing for delivery of languages not bilingual/triligual/multilingual, would give you pie on your face with cueing deaf individuals.

Do not confuse using a system with the learning of a language.
Click to expand...

Exactly. So why do you insist on using the term bilingual? Bilingual by definition is proficiency in TWO languages. The proper term is bimodal. ONE language, TWO delivery systems.
 
jillio said:
Exactly. So why do you insist on using the term bilingual? Bilingual by definition is proficiency in TWO languages. The proper term is bimodal. ONE language, TWO delivery systems.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting two delivery systems from?
 
loml said:
Where are you getting two delivery systems from?
Click to expand...

And, since we are speaking about the efficacy of English acquisition and its relationship to literacy, that would be "From where are you getting two delivery systems?"
 
P.S. Loml; I didn't say different delivery systems, I said different modes of delivery (i.e. bimodal vs bilingual).
 
Back
Top