ok why do HoH or Deaf People Have poor Grammar?

ANYONE who have poor grammar would be due to lack of education, help on reading and writing, and such. Some may have got alot of education but not getting it in the right way or whatever.
 
Bottesini said:
No. If you can read you have access. Hearing has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

I think it has a lot to do with it. Childhood up to the age of 14 is a time when the brain is "wired" to grab langauge. Babies and young children get most of their language passively for at least the first two years; they don't talk but they hear language around them constantly and are assimilating it all - its sounds, its structures, it's words, its grammar. It's a very different process than sitting down later an learning a language in lessons or out of a book.

I watched an American friend's 4-year-old learn Turkish on the fly. It was amazing, he went through all the stages a baby goes through - first making all sorts of sounds, then eliminating the ones that didn't belong in the new language. Then he started talking "baby talk" again, but it was Turkish baby talk - all the sounds of Turkish, asking questions with the same intonation as a Turkish kid would, but with no meaning. Then he started talking, and bit by bit it all fell into place.

A deaf baby misses out on that, because as one poster mentioned above, the hearing loss is often diagnosed until later, and because of ignorance of their needs, oralism, and (I suspect) sometimes just laziness on the part of the parents who don't see the need for sign and are hung up on the baby being "like them."

So in a very real sense, the spoken language is like a "second language" for deaf people, even if they get it before they get sign, because rather than assiilating it naturally, they have to be taught, and it takes a huge amount of effort.

Ideally deaf babies should be diagnosed as early as possible, so that they have the opportunity for that early assimilation.
 
Dixie said:
That's what I'm thinking. It's easier and faster to sign

RIVER ENTER DAM THROUGH SPIN T-U-R-B-I-N-E MAKE ELECTRIC. THIS NAME H-Y-D-R-O-E-L-E-C-T-R-I-C-I-T-Y.

than to sign the exact english phrase

The river flows into the the dam and gravity drains the water into large turbines which turn from the force of the water to generate electricity. This is how Hydroelectric power works.

My god just signing the entire sentence out to myself seems long and cumbersome.
Click to expand...


Bingo! Because to sign that is long and cumbersome. The transcribed ASL sentence seems "simplistic" to an English speaker but when a person signs it, it actually contains lots of information that can't be written down in terms of the "dictionary definition" signs alone. Spoken languages takes the directness of visual experience and "codifies" it into lots and lots of symbols, and many are needed to describe the visual experience "exactly." It works because they are very short, sometimes a single sound held just for an instant. But to sign them all takes time and is superflous when you already have the information in 3-D and by inference.
 
jillio said:
Having needs has absolutely nothing to do with being needy. All human beings have needs. A deaf student has a need to have access to communication in the same way that a hearing student has a need to have an access to communication. A deaf student has a need to know what is being communicated in the classroom and a hearing student has a need to know what is being communicated in the classroom. A hearing student's need is simply addressed in a different manner than the deaf student's need. They both have the same need. There is nothing disabling about having a need for communication, or the entire human population would be disabled by it. What is disabling is the refusal to address that need for the entire population.

There is nothing wrong with using a word that accurrately describes something.
Click to expand...

Sorry i disagree, really nicely composed answer but reality is needs is something they used against us. Hearing people 'dont have needs, except when discussing economics prioritys that is, needs against wants.
They impose needs assessment, very clever 'compromise' to fulfil the hunger for control those in power and to 'administrate' the playing field to their likings by introducing a 'communicative process' in the name of 'needs assessment'.
Sorry Jillo i dont buy your explanation, it is nice but too idealistic. I have done research, and I am lending to the likes of some writers from Disability advocates in Britain. They eloqently expounds all this arguement with great clarity, even though its British, its well fitting for New Zealand, as right now New Zealand is similar to Canada, well maybe 10-15 year behind but both share similar characterisitics of mutating their social admininstration protocols. The British focuses on direct power, whereas the American disability tend to rely on the power from use of the congress admentments.
 
jillio said:
Having needs has absolutely nothing to do with being needy. All human beings have needs.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

A hearing person's needs are no more or less important than a Deaf person's needs and vice-versa.

If you're going to separate yourself in terms of Deaf needs vs. hearing needs, you're only placing more of a distance between you and hearing society.
 
Grummer said:
Sorry i disagree, really nicely composed answer but reality is needs is something they used against us. Hearing people 'dont have needs, except when discussing economics prioritys that is, needs against wants.
They impose needs assessment, very clever 'compromise' to fulfil the hunger for control those in power and to 'administrate' the playing field to their likings by introducing a 'communicative process' in the name of 'needs assessment'.
Sorry Jillo i dont buy your explanation, it is nice but too idealistic. I have done research, and I am lending to the likes of some writers from Disability advocates in Britain. They eloqently expounds all this arguement with great clarity, even though its British, its well fitting for New Zealand, as right now New Zealand is similar to Canada, well maybe 10-15 year behind but both share similar characterisitics of mutating their social admininstration protocols. The British focuses on direct power, whereas the American disability tend to rely on the power from use of the congress admentments.
Click to expand...

No no..everyone, whether dead, hering, blind, and so on have needs and people will do what it takes to get their needs met. Why do people eat, have sex, sleep, and so on..we all have needs. Simple as that.
 
deafskeptic said:
I find that attitude infuriating. Though I have language delays, that doesn't mean that I shouldn't improve myself. I think the same goes for others.
Click to expand...

Blind children and adults are guilty of doing this as well. They think lack of eyesight means they are unable to be the best they can be and instead give into a sighted world's idea of what they think a blind person is capable of.
 
shel90 said:
No no..everyone, whether dead, hering, blind, and so on have needs and people will do what it takes to get their needs met. Why do people eat, have sex, sleep, and so on..we all have needs. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Dead?

(I'm sure you meant deaf and not dead. :))
 
Hahahaha! HearAgain, u caught my typo...maybe dead people have needs too? Lol!
 
Hear Again said:
Exactly.

A hearing person's needs are no more or less important than a Deaf person's needs and vice-versa.

If you're going to separate yourself in terms of Deaf needs vs. hearing needs, you're only placing more of a distance between you and hearing society.
Click to expand...

maybe, but you would also be severing the chains of controls, which means d/Deaf people can define what their 'needs' are , and how it is to be administrated. As long as we are in 'under' their decree, no amount of redefinition of 'needs' is going to change how we are subject to 'their ideas' of procedures.

So 'distance' could be a good thing, but in real terms it would affect in the opposite manner, we would be more 'included in society' just as how they have said forever to this date, as long as we are included in their perceptions of this widely recognised word from the dictionary, this means sharing their ideas of power and what happened? we get exclued further and further away.

duh its hard to explain, but thats all i can say for now.
 
Grummer said:
maybe, but you would also be severing the chains of controls, which means d/Deaf people can define what their 'needs' are , and how it is to be administrated. As long as we are in 'under' their decree, no amount of redefinition of 'needs' is going to change how we are subject to 'their ideas' of procedures.

So 'distance' could be a good thing, but in real terms it would affect in the opposite manner, we would be more 'included in society' just as how they have said forever to this date, as long as we are included in their perceptions of this widely recognised word from the dictionary, this means sharing their ideas of power and what happened? we get exclued further and further away.

duh its hard to explain, but thats all i can say for now.
Click to expand...

Actually, a Deaf person cannot define how their needs are to be administered since they must be considered reasonable accommodations under the ADA.

As long as you continue to focus on the differences you have with hearing people, you only have yourself to blame for the distance that exists between you and hearing society.

Aside from that, deaf people aren't the only ones who are excluded. Many others are as well including African-Americans, gays/lesbians and those with non-Christian beliefs.

Deaf people are certainly not alone in their struggles. I don't mean to bring myself into this, but try being deafblind for a week. Then come back and tell me how it feels to not only be unable to communicate with others, but how it feels to have no (or very little) connection or awareness of your environment.

Take a good look outside of yourself. You may be surprised at what you see.
 
hmmm dead people have needs we have a necro in here...hear again glad we found her get her!!!!!! lol
 
shel90 said:
No no..everyone, whether dead, hering, blind, and so on have needs and people will do what it takes to get their needs met. Why do people eat, have sex, sleep, and so on..we all have needs. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Interesting you say that, yes it is a 'widely known term' perhaps brought on about by the popular media, such as womens magazines, health magazines, and perhaps from the late 1970's when psychologist begin to simplfy and commercialise Abraham Maslow's concepts of needs. I would bet that prior the popularising of Maslow or Carl Rogers's ideas of self-actualisation (i am aware that american spelling is with a 'z' instead of 's') the popular belief or discussion of people's unhappiness would not have been concluded or be made with a link to with these ideas of 'needs', everything was in denial, perhap attributed from the 'denial generation' dating back prior the post-war boom period of the mid 20th century.

Yes we all have needs, but i refuse to use that term to describe what we 'need' because social administrators have long been technicalising our lives, thus making it more difficult. It has to stop, and start looking for alternative description and hence alternative process which we have formulated ourselves, not the overarching policy makers where Hearing people dominate.

I have to agree to disagree with you. But ok, i just prefer to think differently no harm in stating a different view here, afterall this is what one of the function of this forum is for, to splash down ideas and gathering new ones.
Cheers
 
Buffalo said:
:shock: What do you mean by that??
Click to expand...

A Deaf person cannot ask for accommodations that are beyond what is considered reasonable under the ADA.

For example, they cannot request a terp and captioning for a medical appointment.

Similarly, they can't do this as a student since an educational institution is only expected to provide enough accommodations necessary for equal access to communication and classroom information.

Please do not take what I've said as a personal attack. It's clearly stipulated under the ADA.
 
Back
Top