ok why do HoH or Deaf People Have poor Grammar?

If so, how do you clean up the grammar on this site? just curious.
 
Frisky Feline said:
If so, how do you clean up the grammar on this site? just curious.
Click to expand...

Grammar_Nazi_Logo.jpg
 
deafbajagal said:
And when someone mentions it...they get accused of having an "attitude." Check out my post in the Forum Suggestions when I suggested cleaning up the grammar on this site.

Apparently I have an "attitude" for wanting good grammar. :whistle:
Click to expand...

Maybe, its a double standard?:giggle:
 
deafbajagal said:
And when someone mentions it...they get accused of having an "attitude." Check out my post in the Forum Suggestions when I suggested cleaning up the grammar on this site.

Apparently I have an "attitude" for wanting good grammar. :whistle:
Click to expand...

I attended to your grammar thread as a willing participant, but it died out before it was old.

Why not revive it for interested people?

Or start a thread that shows examples of what bothers you in posts here?

No one would have to look if they were afraid of hurt feelings, but people wanting to improve could see what to do.
 
In the US all newborns are also required to go through a hearing test at birth and again at six weeks. However between the six weeks and up until a child enters school the child may not ever undergo a hearing test unless the parents themselves suspect something is wrong, and at this point the child still may have fallen behind in language development, usually right at 18 months to two years.

The earlier a hoh or deaf child is give access to a viable communication tool, the higher their chances of success in catching up to their peers in language.

When comparing a hearing 5 year old to a deaf 5 year old, both know roughly the same amount of words and both have a nearly complete set of language they can use to communicate with. Only difference is one speaks and listens, the other signs and uses visual cues to determine their actions and statements.

The hurdle the educational system is facing is teaching ASL-based students English grammar and syntax.

To give you an idea of what this means for the child is, he has to learn to speak in an entirely different way. For example what if those of use who were raised orally and use spoken English, had to start speaking in ASL grammar or syntax. A lot of us would struggle with it, and would have a hard time learning and adjusting to it. We would be immersed in this new grammar and syntax for eight hours a day, but then we return to our homes or to our dorms were we would revert back to the 'style' that we're most comfortable with, spoken English.

Imagine having to read books in ASL format, imagine having to go through a simple math lesson in ASL, we would struggle with the basic concepts of mathematics because we could not understand the language is was instructed in clearly enough. This is what happens to children who are strongly ASL-based and then they are immersed in an all-English educational program.

It also doesn't help that some deaf schools teach students below grade level, 4th graders are still reading out of 1st and 2nd grade primers in some schools.

Not only that, even the federal gov't has lower expectations of what deaf students can accomplish by modifying standardized tests (which are the work of the devil), and thus require a lower score in order to pass.

These kids are not only not being encouraged forward, but in some cases, they are actually being pushed back.

I think a Bi-Bi approach from a very early age can be beneficial. Basically the child grows up knowing two languages, much like how more and more children these days from public schools come from homes that speak two languages, and in some rare cases, the children are actually fluent in 3 languages depending on the household and the background of each parent. I know of a lady I worked with that she grew up speaking English, Filipino, and Spanish, and she could move from one language to the next without any trouble.

It may very well be that these same kids start speaking later, but the fact is they are absorbing it from birth.

The same should go for deaf and hoh children. As soon as it is found that they are not hearing they should be immersed in not just spoken English, but ASL as well. Again, the hard part is detecting that hearing loss at an early enough age so that the child can begin language development that is on par with their hearing and deaf peers.
 
Frisky Feline said:
If so, how do you clean up the grammar on this site? just curious.
Click to expand...

Well, you know how hearing ASL students come in here asking for help with their ASL? Just reverse it to deaf people asking for help with their English. We could all learn from each other, if people are only willing to participate and learn.
 
Bottesini said:
I attended to your grammar thread as a willing participant, but it died out before it was old.

Why not revive it for interested people?

Or start a thread that shows examples of what bothers you in posts here?

No one would have to look if they were afraid of hurt feelings, but people wanting to improve could see what to do.
Click to expand...

Yep, it died a premature death. Unfortunately.
 
Dixie said:
In the US all newborns are also required to go through a hearing test at birth and again at six weeks. However between the six weeks and up until a child enters school the child may not ever undergo a hearing test unless the parents themselves suspect something is wrong, and at this point the child still may have fallen behind in language development, usually right at 18 months to two years.

The earlier a hoh or deaf child is give access to a viable communication tool, the higher their chances of success in catching up to their peers in language.

When comparing a hearing 5 year old to a deaf 5 year old, both know roughly the same amount of words and both have a nearly complete set of language they can use to communicate with. Only difference is one speaks and listens, the other signs and uses visual cues to determine their actions and statements.

The hurdle the educational system is facing is teaching ASL-based students English grammar and syntax.

To give you an idea of what this means for the child is, he has to learn to speak in an entirely different way. For example what if those of use who were raised orally and use spoken English, had to start speaking in ASL grammar or syntax. A lot of us would struggle with it, and would have a hard time learning and adjusting to it. We would be immersed in this new grammar and syntax for eight hours a day, but then we return to our homes or to our dorms were we would revert back to the 'style' that we're most comfortable with, spoken English.

Imagine having to read books in ASL format, imagine having to go through a simple math lesson in ASL, we would struggle with the basic concepts of mathematics because we could not understand the language is was instructed in clearly enough. This is what happens to children who are strongly ASL-based and then they are immersed in an all-English educational program.

It also doesn't help that some deaf schools teach students below grade level, 4th graders are still reading out of 1st and 2nd grade primers in some schools.

Not only that, even the federal gov't has lower expectations of what deaf students can accomplish by modifying standardized tests (which are the work of the devil), and thus require a lower score in order to pass.

These kids are not only not being encouraged forward, but in some cases, they are actually being pushed back.

I think a Bi-Bi approach from a very early age can be beneficial. Basically the child grows up knowing two languages, much like how more and more children these days from public schools come from homes that speak two languages, and in some rare cases, the children are actually fluent in 3 languages depending on the household and the background of each parent. I know of a lady I worked with that she grew up speaking English, Filipino, and Spanish, and she could move from one language to the next without any trouble.

It may very well be that these same kids start speaking later, but the fact is they are absorbing it from birth.

The same should go for deaf and hoh children. As soon as it is found that they are not hearing they should be immersed in not just spoken English, but ASL as well. Again, the hard part is detecting that hearing loss at an early enough age so that the child can begin language development that is on par with their hearing and deaf peers.
Click to expand...

Just a word of caution here....modifications on standardized tests do not alter the expectations, nor do the modifications alter what the exam is testing for. Standardized tests are simply altered to be appropriate linguistically and culturally. That does not change content. And because these are standardized tests, the modified and revised versions are also standardized based on the population they are being modified for. Great care is taken not to change content.
 
missywinks said:
I can name a few reasons: (but not limited to)

1) In the past, the average age for deaf children to be identified with a hearing loss would be 18 months or older. By then, they have missed a significant amount of language development. Then, upon discovering their child is deaf, parents are forced to learn how to communicate with their child which takes time.

But that should change because in British Columbia, Canada (I am not sure about USA) has recently passed a law where all newborns must go through a hearing screening test as soon as they are born to identify any hearing loss to make for early language intervention.

2) Deaf people do not experience the same amount of incidential learning experience as hearing children. It naturally occurs to children with normal hearing who utilize it to shape their language and their perceptions of the world around them via incidential learning. They eavesdrop on their social environment and learn millions of tidbits of priceless cultural and social information. This also applies to learning language.

Also, by listening in on conversations between individuals, they learn not only the language, but also about family matters, economics, politics, personal finance, jobs, sports, health, nutrition, and so on. The list is endless.

3) Communication skills of the immediate family: I feel this plays a very important role in developing a deaf child’s language. Parents cannot only rely on the school system to teach the deaf child language. Parents need to learn how to communicate with their own child, include them in family discussions, and encourage literacy in the home environment.
Click to expand...

U pretty much summed it up!

As for adults who recognize that they have poor grammar skills, it is their decision to improve it or not. I know that with better grammar skills, one would gain better respect. If I tried to write in Spanish, I wouldnt get respect nor praise in the Spanish speaking countries.

If someone doesnt want to improve his/her grammar , then they cant blame society for struggling to find good jobs. As adults, we have to take responsibility for improving our skills if we want to set high standards for ourselves.

I know I make mistakes and I try to edit whenever I can. I am sure I have overlooked plenty of them when posting on AD but I am always happy for constructive criticize to help me improve because I want my writing skills to improve or go to the next level.
 
deafbajagal said:
AKA...DEAFBAJAGAL = GRAMMAR NAZI! And PROUD to be one!
Click to expand...

Could not resist. Mein Leute!! Sieg heil!

25rnzme.jpg



By the way. If people don't want to work on improving their grammar, or only feel like writing short simple text.. There's nothing we can do about that if they choose to make the impression of themselves as "low-life" forms to their audience without interest in improving, both of hearing and deaf alike. I think it's more like a personality trait.

As I was thinking my opinion on this.. Hearing stereotypes of the deaf, sometimes in some areas, has truth to it. Sometimes, deaf in response can get defensive over how they are perceived as well. The only way to break the stereotype is to fix it yourself so others don't get the wrong idea of you, and that can translate to fixing the stereotype overall.
 
Dixie said:
In the US all newborns are also required to go through a hearing test at birth and again at six weeks. However between the six weeks and up until a child enters school the child may not ever undergo a hearing test unless the parents themselves suspect something is wrong, and at this point the child still may have fallen behind in language development, usually right at 18 months to two years.

The earlier a hoh or deaf child is give access to a viable communication tool, the higher their chances of success in catching up to their peers in language.

When comparing a hearing 5 year old to a deaf 5 year old, both know roughly the same amount of words and both have a nearly complete set of language they can use to communicate with. Only difference is one speaks and listens, the other signs and uses visual cues to determine their actions and statements.

The hurdle the educational system is facing is teaching ASL-based students English grammar and syntax.

To give you an idea of what this means for the child is, he has to learn to speak in an entirely different way. For example what if those of use who were raised orally and use spoken English, had to start speaking in ASL grammar or syntax. A lot of us would struggle with it, and would have a hard time learning and adjusting to it. We would be immersed in this new grammar and syntax for eight hours a day, but then we return to our homes or to our dorms were we would revert back to the 'style' that we're most comfortable with, spoken English.

Imagine having to read books in ASL format, imagine having to go through a simple math lesson in ASL, we would struggle with the basic concepts of mathematics because we could not understand the language is was instructed in clearly enough. This is what happens to children who are strongly ASL-based and then they are immersed in an all-English educational program.

It also doesn't help that some deaf schools teach students below grade level, 4th graders are still reading out of 1st and 2nd grade primers in some schools.

Not only that, even the federal gov't has lower expectations of what deaf students can accomplish by modifying standardized tests (which are the work of the devil), and thus require a lower score in order to pass.

These kids are not only not being encouraged forward, but in some cases, they are actually being pushed back.

I think a Bi-Bi approach from a very early age can be beneficial. Basically the child grows up knowing two languages, much like how more and more children these days from public schools come from homes that speak two languages, and in some rare cases, the children are actually fluent in 3 languages depending on the household and the background of each parent. I know of a lady I worked with that she grew up speaking English, Filipino, and Spanish, and she could move from one language to the next without any trouble.

It may very well be that these same kids start speaking later, but the fact is they are absorbing it from birth.

The same should go for deaf and hoh children. As soon as it is found that they are not hearing they should be immersed in not just spoken English, but ASL as well. Again, the hard part is detecting that hearing loss at an early enough age so that the child can begin language development that is on par with their hearing and deaf peers.
Click to expand...

50 States Summary of Newborn Hearing Screening Legislation

Sorry to barge in, but not every state, Dixie. Here's a list of them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with improvement and development in a specialized area. For example, sign language interpreters are always current with the latest signs, trends used in translating a phrase or comments.

Its just not deaf people, take for instance , a foreigner who doesn't speak English. They need to learn English in order to be understood in USA. If I was to enter France, with my minimal skill to get by won't work because I don't have the confidence to fluently speak French, and feel somewhat timid to even speak.

Overall, improvements and practice with a language is always a good way get skilled and fluent.
 
Surprisingly enough though that ASL-based students tend to have little trouble reading simple declarative sentences. The deaf students understand the words, but not clear on the order of them or why, as again, ASL has its own grammar and syntax apart from English.
Click to expand...
It's an ESL issue. Research has shown that kids who use sign make the same syntax and grammar errors as do speakers of other languages. It's basicly an English as a Second language issue. It's not an ASL issue..........
 
shel90 said:
s.

I know I make mistakes and I try to edit whenever I can. I am sure I have overlooked plenty of them when posting on AD but I am always happy for constructive criticize to help me improve because I want my writing skills to improve or go to the next level.
Click to expand...

So do I. I can be quite the grammar nazi toward myself and I'm always correcting my grammar (though not as much on AD as in the past.) when I write posts or write papers for classes. If I were to correct others as often as I correct myself, I'd be the most hated woman on AD.
 
Back
Top