I found it ironic

VacationGuy234 said:
Why not? Most ASL users know the difference between a language and a, "state of being".

Have you not been reading though your other thread?
Click to expand...

did i say that ASL is not a language in the other threads. i dont think so.

Link for the most ASL users know the difference between a language and a state of being. maybe your interpretation may be different.
 
Frisky Feline said:
did i say that ASL is not a language in the other threads. i dont think so.

Link for the most ASL users know the difference between a language and a state of being. maybe your interpretation may be different.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it's divine intervention. Is it your position that most users feel it is divine intervention?
 
ASL is a language, not like a god for ASL users. :dunno2: I am not sure why you think that way.

I use ASL to communicate effectively.
 
dereksbicycles said:
There are people that grew up who needed ASL to get by. Then there are people that wants to learn ASL because they're going into a profession that needs it. Then there are people that wants to learn ASL just because they want to. Those all make difference.
Click to expand...


true
 
Frisky Feline said:
ASL is a language, not like a god for ASL users. :dunno2: I am not sure why you think that way.

I use ASL to communicate effectively.
Click to expand...

I don't look at it as a state of being, it's a tool created by man for man like any other language. If it didn't suit the needs for the people who use it man would change it.

I can't see any other real way to look at it.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
I don't look at it as a state of being, it's a tool created by man for man like any other language. If it didn't suit the needs for the people who use it man would change it.

I can't see any other real way to look at it.
Click to expand...

Whatever, you say so.

There is nowhere else for us to focus on the small details for nothing. Don't worry about it.

My thread is not about what you were talking about anyway.

i still found it ironic in hearing people's perspective. nothing else.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
I don't look at it as a state of being, it's a tool created by man for man like any other language. If it didn't suit the needs for the people who use it man would change it.

I can't see any other real way to look at it.
Click to expand...

An Engishman speaks English is in a state of being English!

A Spanish speaks Spanish is in a state of being Spanish

A Japanese Speaks Japanese is in a state of being Japanese

A Deaf speaks ASL is in a state of being an American Deaf

A Russian speaks in English is in a state of using English but is still a Russian.

a hearing speaks ASL is in a state of conversing in ASL
 
Grummer said:
An Engishman speaks English is in a state of being English!

A Spanish speaks Spanish is in a state of being Spanish

A Japanese Speaks Japanese is in a state of being Japanese

A Deaf speaks ASL is in a state of being an American Deaf

A Russian speaks in English is in a state of using English but is still a Russian.

a hearing speaks ASL is in a state of conversing in ASL
Click to expand...

I don't understand the link you are trying to make.

They speak those languages because they choose to they are not limited physically, baring a disability, from speaking another language. Humans are capable of the full range of sound.

Ethnicity has nothing to do with it.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
I don't understand the link you are trying to make.

They speak those languages because they choose to they are not limited physically, baring a disability, from speaking another language. Humans are capable of the full range of sound.

Ethnicity has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

YES is does, are you stupid or what? No you see,

for Bolded...Deaf is a cultural significance, and it has been argued for a long time, the Deaf is a sociolinguistic minority , ethnicity is a way of Being, indeed it has a LOT to do with it. You just don't want to know or care about it.

for italics, Oh, so you're saying deaf/Deaf people are NOT human? that's very nice of you. Full range of sound? So since d/Deaf not capable of full range of sound mean they are not human enough to speak a language? let alone ASL, BSL or JSL??!! What a shocking view you have!!
 
Grummer said:
YES is does, are you stupid or what? No you see,

for Bolded...Deaf is a cultural significance, and it has been argued for a long time, the Deaf is a sociolinguistic minority , ethnicity is a way of Being, indeed it has a LOT to do with it. You just don't want to know or care about it.

for italics, Oh, so you're saying deaf/Deaf people are NOT human? that's very nice of you. Full range of sound? So since d/Deaf not capable of full range of sound mean they are not human enough to speak a language? let alone ASL, BSL or JSL??!! What a shocking view you have!!
Click to expand...

So, if you change the language your not Deaf anymore?
 
jonnyghost said:
Learning language physically alters your brain. Learning another changes it more. What language you use has an influeance on how you think. You are correct that culture shapes language but language shapes thought, it's a bi-directional thing.

Does the language you speak change the way you think? - Brainiac

BBC NEWS | Health | Learning languages 'boosts brain'
Click to expand...

The first article is from a philosopher which has about as much credibility as, "I've seen Elvis".

The second article states that learning more improves the brain, no argument there.

Language is a tool for the transference of information so if information is transferred in a different sequence you would probably think about it in a different way.

Still, none of that alters the fact that language is the first information system of storing knowledge. Instad of using a hard drive we store the information in our brains.

If you don't believe it, try to figure out how you know how to spell certain English words. Since the words are borrowed from another language, pronunciation rules do not apply, yet you say them correctly. This is because you have stored the correct pronunciation of that word and you retrieve it when needed.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
The first article is from a philosopher which has about as much credibility as, "I've seen Elvis".

The second article states that learning more improves the brain, no argument there.

Language is a tool for the transference of information so if information is transferred in a different sequence you would probably think about it in a different way.

Still, none of that alters the fact that language is the first information system of storing knowledge. Instad of using a hard drive we store the information in our brains.

If you don't believe it, try to figure out how you know how to spell certain English words. Since the words are borrowed from another language, pronunciation rules do not apply, yet you say them correctly. This is because you have stored the correct pronunciation of that word and you retrieve it when needed.
Click to expand...

Does Language Shape What We Think?: Scientific American
 
Language isn't the first storage system. There are days where i have almost no internal dialog. Things play in my head visually like video. When i'm putting a car together i don't think "this flywheel needs to go on next" i picture the flywheel and how itgoes together.

Language is better for understanding abstract ideas but i'm not good in that department.
 
jonnyghost said:
Does Language Shape What We Think?: Scientific American
Click to expand...

Yes, I read that one before. Notice the conclusion:
"Do more words mean more thoughts? Probably not. But more words do make it easier to remember those thoughts -- and sometimes that's just as important."

If you look at the Uruk period 3,350 - 3,100 BC of Mesopotamia, how symbols of the pristine languages took shape is interesting. If you have an ideograph of a goat, you don't need a sound to understand it. In fact, it's devoid of phonetics. If you instead use a symbol, a circle with an overlaid plus sign, you now have a symbol that represents something with no shape attached. The latter requires you to translate the symbol while the former requires no translation. And, more people recognize it. Based on this: I would say less symbols mean less thought, but only on a very specific subject.

The reason we use symbols instead of actual pictures is for economy. It would take too much memory to remember all the animals in the world.

Does this mean that ancient Babylonians are Babylonians because they made the symbol? I don't think so. I think it means they needed another way to label livestock.
 
jonnyghost said:
Language isn't the first storage system. There are days where i have almost no internal dialog. Things play in my head visually like video. When i'm putting a car together i don't think "this flywheel needs to go on next" i picture the flywheel and how itgoes together.

Language is better for understanding abstract ideas but i'm not good in that department.
Click to expand...

You have just described an ideograph. Many languages use that system and we use it today. Anytime you get something from the store like a cabinet, to put together it is usually just a series of pictures so that anyone can understand it. Same as the safety manual on an airplane.

Language comes from man's thoughts and the storage system he uses is his brain.

Take that picture in your head of a flywheel and how it goes on and try to explain it to someone else. To do that you'll use a cool tool called language.

EDIT: To be more exact you stored that picture of the fly wheel in memory. You took it out and thought about how to put it on then stored it away again. And, to find it you used language(whatever represents a flywheel).
 
I don't just think of any fly wheel. I think of that exact flywheel. It is a photo realistic 3d model in my head. I don't have any problem remembering things i see in very clear detail.

It is not a graphical representation it is the exact image.
 
Back
Top