How Do You Sign This Word?

I am seeing 2 different signs for "who" and am confused. I think it may be a regional difference. The way we were taught in class was "using a soft L shape, put the thumb on the chin and wiggle the index finger over the lips". The other way came up in some videos and a few books. That's "outline the mouth with index finger". Which is actually correct? Or, is it a regional difference?
 
KristinaB said:
I am seeing 2 different signs for "who" and am confused. I think it may be a regional difference. The way we were taught in class was "using a soft L shape, put the thumb on the chin and wiggle the index finger over the lips". The other way came up in some videos and a few books. That's "outline the mouth with index finger". Which is actually correct? Or, is it a regional difference?
Click to expand...

Circle the mouth with the index is used here.
 
KristinaB said:
I am seeing 2 different signs for "who" and am confused. I think it may be a regional difference. The way we were taught in class was "using a soft L shape, put the thumb on the chin and wiggle the index finger over the lips". The other way came up in some videos and a few books. That's "outline the mouth with index finger". Which is actually correct? Or, is it a regional difference?
Click to expand...

i use both. it depends on my mood. I first learned the outline the mouth with index finger and later, i also sign for using a l shape, put the thumb on the chine and wiggle the indes finger over the lips.

Both is fine. it depends on my mood when the conversation brings up.

I think more common for L shape, put the thumb on the chin and wiggle the index finger over the lips. But for me i use both.
 
Thanks you two. Seems that the wiggly finger one is used more down here, so I will stick with that, but at least I am aware of the other.
 
Wirelessly posted (BB Curve 9300)

The "circular index" form is older, and the "L bend" form is newer. I prefer the newer form.
 
Kalista said:
sign like merge ?
Click to expand...

yes ,with 2 spread out hands with winggling fingers migggling as the 2 hand meshed thru together like 2 rivers joining in the big Y junction, ending with 1 hand on top another, so its like a deep, thick river with more rush (or less rush) depending on context of mainstreaming' lke if hard struggle , rush' if falling behind , lose in nowwhere then slow, like so unnoticable...
 
agnostic, hmmm, no god? say 'not believe god' or just god (point up) believe no, all sort of joined one after another, not too hard.. or
god "religion not believe.no god...no heaven when die...
in this fasion. familiar?
 
Wirelessly posted (Blackberry Bold )

Grummer said:
agnostic, hmmm, no god? say 'not believe god' or just god (point up) believe no, all sort of joined one after another, not too hard.. or
god "religion not believe.no god...no heaven when die...
in this fasion. familiar?
Click to expand...
Agnostic doesn't mean one doesn't believe there is a God (or gods). It means that someone believes the existance or lack there of of God/gods is unknowable (hence the "nostic"). It literally means "without knowing", or "unknowable".

That's why an accurate sign is difficult (versus a phrase). The closest signed phrase would be (person who)"know god exists,for-certain,can't. Maybe yes, maybe no".

Atheist on the other hand means (generally) "without god" - ie a person who doesn't believe in a theos (god/higher power/divine order etc).
 
Last edited:
Depending on the circumstances, I usually use both. Spell and define.

Example:

The word "agnostic" is brought up in a lecture. The professor first uses the word, I spell it. The prof explains it (as Anij did) to the students. I sign the description as given by the prof.

Many times, these questions resolve themselves. If the hearing audience doesn't know what the word means, and the speaker explains the term, then problem solved. If the hearing audience doesn't know what the word means, and the speaker does NOT explain it, then everyone is still on an equal level. One shouldn't assume that the Deaf audience should get more understanding on the lecture than the hearing audience does. (The Deaf audience should not get less understanding either.) The interpreter is not a tutor.

That being said, no one expects all the hearing and Deaf members of an audience to know every term the lecturer uses. But that terp is expected to know everything! I'm not kidding.
 
Wirelessly posted

I have seen people sign it mainstream but with fingers wiggling.
 
Anij said:
Wirelessly posted (Blackberry Bold )


Agnostic doesn't mean one doesn't believe there is a God (or gods). It means that someone believes the existance or lack there of of God/gods is unknowable (hence the "nostic"). It literally means "without knowing", or "unknowable".

That's why an accurate sign is difficult (versus a phrase). The closest signed phrase would be (person who)"know god exists,for-certain,can't. Maybe yes, maybe no".

Atheist on the other hand means (generally) "without god" - ie a person who doesn't believe in a theos (god/higher power/divine order etc).
Click to expand...

ah, yes sorry!!!\my mistake
yes
so

it would be moer like
"god yes, but no bible and no church' in signs

'god yes' but what god be "dont know" no religion" mixed religion ideas, but not 1 way

something to that effect, i guess depending on convo and context then decided which order these combination would adapt...

cheers
you right, actually im an agnostic myself...but more and more im become more an atheist...(guess im changing), but same time i believe less in science...so i'm strange one i guess...
 
Wirelessly posted (Blackberry Bold )

Grummer said:
Anij said:
Wirelessly posted (Blackberry Bold )


Agnostic doesn't mean one doesn't believe there is a God (or gods). It means that someone believes the existance or lack there of of God/gods is unknowable (hence the "nostic"). It literally means "without knowing", or "unknowable".

That's why an accurate sign is difficult (versus a phrase). The closest signed phrase would be (person who)"know god exists,for-certain,can't. Maybe yes, maybe no".

Atheist on the other hand means (generally) "without god" - ie a person who doesn't believe in a theos (god/higher power/divine order etc).
Click to expand...

ah, yes sorry!!!\my mistake
yes
so

it would be moer like
"god yes, but no bible and no church' in signs

'god yes' but what god be "dont know" no religion" mixed religion ideas, but not 1 way

something to that effect, i guess depending on convo and context then decided which order these combination would adapt...

cheers
you right, actually im an agnostic myself...but more and more im become more an atheist...(guess im changing), but same time i believe less in science...so i'm strange one i guess...
Click to expand...

Sorry - no that's still not correct as a definition of agnostic.

Religion and belief in God aren't actually mutually inclusive concepts.

An agnostic believes it's impossible to know if there is, or isn't a God/gods - which is a seperate thing than religion.

Religion is an expression in one's beliefs surrounding God/gods. Totally seperate concept than "is/are there (a) God/gods"
 
anij said:
wirelessly posted (blackberry bold )



sorry - no that's still not correct as a definition of agnostic.

Religion and belief in god aren't actually mutually inclusive concepts.

An agnostic believes it's impossible to know if there is, or isn't a god/gods - which is a seperate thing than religion.

Religion is an expression in one's beliefs surrounding god/gods. Totally seperate concept than "is/are there (a) god/gods"
Click to expand...

read my post again carefully
 
Grummer said:
read my post again carefully
Click to expand...

I did (I'm also a former Theology/Seminary student ... )

You stated:
it would be more like
"god yes, but no bible and no church'
Click to expand...

This isn't an accurate statement about what Agnostic means.

Also:
'god yes' but what god be "dont know" no religion"
Click to expand...
This is also not an accurate statement of what the term Agnostic means.


Agnostic is defined as someone who believes the idea of God is "un-knowable". This means that they believe there may, or may not be a God (or gods) - but for them the idea that humans can say one way or the other definitively is impossible.

As a side point there are a number of people who actually attend church or other religion services on a regular bases who are actaully agnostic. They are faithful church/synagogue/mosque etc. attendees, however they are not certain that there is in fact a God/gods.

Religion, sacred texts and God are really separate issues, which may or may not intersect at all depending on the topic.
 
Anij said:
I did (I'm also a former Theology/Seminary student ... )

You stated:

This isn't an accurate statement about what Agnostic means.

Also: This is also not an accurate statement of what the term Agnostic means.


Agnostic is defined as someone who believes the idea of God is "un-knowable". This means that they believe there may, or may not be a God (or gods) - but for them the idea that humans can say one way or the other definitively is impossible.

As a side point there are a number of people who actually attend church or other religion services on a regular bases who are actaully agnostic. They are faithful church/synagogue/mosque etc. attendees, however they are not certain that there is in fact a God/gods.

Religion, sacred texts and God are really separate issues, which may or may not intersect at all depending on the topic.
Click to expand...
Not to be confused with "Let the force be with you." :giggle:
 
Wirelessly posted (Blackberry Bold )

@ Reba ;) ;)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top