Is ASL Fading Away or Not?

loml said:
Tousi


Cloggy




Is it necessary to be counterprodutive?
Click to expand...

How is that counterproductive? It is an illustration of experiencing, in reverse, what the deaf individual who has been unable to develop oral skills experiences every day of their life. That isn't counter-productive at all. In fact, culture shock is a well accepted technique for increasing understanding and empathy.
 
loml said:
Learning and using do not necessarily equate to the same thing.
Click to expand...

Nothey don't. But in this case, the correlation is there. Likewise with learning CS. Learning and using to not mean the same thing. And the ASL users in this country far outumber the CS users. So what's your point, exactly?
 
shel90 said:
and u know what is so sad? That hearing kids are being enrolled in signing classes cuz their hearing parents see the value of communicating with their children before they start talking.
Click to expand...

One of the variables being that the hearing parents children are hearing. They are not relying on sign as their childs only form of communication and inclusion.
 
jillio said:
Nothey don't. But in this case, the correlation is there. Likewise with learning CS. Learning and using to not mean the same thing. And the ASL users in this country far outumber the CS users. So what's your point, exactly?
Click to expand...

Learning and using do not necessarily equate to the same thing.
 
loml said:
One of the variables being that the hearing parents children are hearing. They are not relying on sign as their childs only form of communication and inclusion.
Click to expand...

The most important variable is that they have not been exposed to the professionals who portray sign language as detrimental to the development of oral skills. If hearing children shold not relay on sign as their only means of communication and inclusion, why is it that a deaf child should rely on oral communication as their only means of communication and inclusion?
 
loml said:
One of the variables being that the hearing parents children are hearing. They are not relying on sign as their childs only form of communication and inclusion.
Click to expand...

Right but yet it is ok for deaf children to rely on the very language that is not fully accessible to them?
 
jillio said:
The most important variable is that they have not been exposed to the professionals who portray sign language as detrimental to the development of oral skills.If hearing children shold not relay on sign as their only means of communication and inclusion, why is it that a deaf child should rely on oral communication as their only means of communication and inclusion?
Click to expand...


Of course they have not exposed to the same professionals. The "baby sign professional programs" that I am familiar with, do not entail learning from a deaf person, fluent in ASL, not exactly an optimum learning program of ASL, imo.

As far as the second questions, I cannot answer it as I do not subscribe to that philosophy.
 
shel90 said:
Right but yet it is ok for deaf children to rely on the very language that is not fully accessible to them?
Click to expand...

English language can and is fully accessible to deaf children via the system of Cued Speech.
 
loml said:
English language can and is fully accessible to deaf children via the system of Cued Speech.
Click to expand...

If that's so, then why didnt it work for all then?
 
loml said:
Of course they have not exposed to the same professionals. The "baby sign professional programs" that I am familiar with, do not entail learning from a deaf person, fluent in ASL, not exactly an optimum learning program of ASL, imo.

As far as the second questions, I cannot answer it as I do not subscribe to that philosophy.
Click to expand...


Since when are hearing parents of hearing chidlren exposed to audiologists, and deaf ed specialists? Not to mention, implant clinics?

CS is a manual code for oral language. You have stated that deaf children should not be exposed to ASL until they have developed a strong foundation in oral language. Therefore, you obviously do subscribe to that philosophy.
 
loml said:
English language can and is fully accessible to deaf children via the system of Cued Speech.
Click to expand...

What happened to your affirmation that CS is a tool to develop literacy, and those using it as a communication system and to develop speech are presecribing off label, so to speak? We are taliking about full communciatiaon, not literacy tools, in this thread.

In addition, you claim that CS is not intended to replace ASL. You're going in circles again.
 
shel90 said:
If that's so, then why didnt it work for all then?
Click to expand...

Sorry cannot answer that one, I have not met anyone who has not been successful with learning English or French for that matter, via Cued Speech.

It is unrealistics to ask me the causation of another individuals lack of success.
 
loml said:
Sorry cannot answer that one, I have not met anyone who has not been successful with learning English or French for that matter, via Cued Speech.

It is unrealistics to ask me the causation of another individuals lack of success.
Click to expand...

And I haven't met anyone who has not been successful with the learning and uise of ASL.
 
loml said:
Sorry cannot answer that one, I have not met anyone who has not been successful with learning English or French for that matter, via Cued Speech.

It is unrealistics to ask me the causation of another individuals lack of success.
Click to expand...

According to the thread about Cued Speech where ADers shared their experiences with it. Some said it was too hard for them while others found it beneficial. I dont see any reason why someone would lie about their experiences with a communication tool.
 
loml said:
loml




I do not know, nor did I state that they did.
Click to expand...

Yes, you did. You stated "Of course they are exposed to the same professionals" in response to my post regarding the fact that hearing parents of hearing children saw ASL as beneficial, but hearing parents of deaf chidlren did not due to the fact that group A was not exposed to the same professionals as Group B was.
 
shel90 said:
According to the thread about Cued Speech where ADers shared their experiences with it. Some said it was too hard for them while others found it beneficial. I dont see any reason why someone would lie about their experiences with a communication tool.
Click to expand...

Especially when they have no motivation for being less than truthful, such as membership in an organization.
 
Back
Top