Question

[loml]

An Accurate explanation:

Dumb blond question #2001..........can someone give me a brief explanation of cued speech
Thanks

Raykat - Here is the actual definition of CS, from the National Cued Speech Association of America.

Definition


Cued Speech is a visual communication system that uses eight handshapes in four different placements near the face in combination with the mouth movements of speech to make the sounds of spoken language look different from each other.

Explanation:

The cueing of a traditionally spoken language is the visual counterpart of speaking it. Cueing makes available to the eye(s) the same linguistic building blocks that speaking avails the ear(s). Until the advent of cueing, the term spoken language accurately described what had been the only way of distinctly conveying these building blocks: speaking. In fact, until that time, the sounds of speech and the building blocks were thought of as one and the same.

Nevertheless, speaking is simply a process of manipulating tongue placement, breath stream, and voice to produce a sound code that represents these building blocks. The blocks are assembled by way of the stream of sounds produced by these manipulations. Cueing is a process of manipulating handshapes, hand placements, and non-manual signals to produce a visible code representing the same building blocks. The blocks are assembled by way of the stream of cues produced by these manipulations. Because cueing is the visible counterpart of speaking, cued language is the visible counterpart of spoken language.

CUEDSPEECH.org > Cued Speech > Definition

Raykat

sounds like something an excited italian would do

Cued Speech was created by Dr. R. Orin Cornett. Here is a little information.

Dr. Cornett earned a bachelor’s degree from Oklahoma Baptist University, followed by a master’s degree from the University of Oklahoma and a Ph.D. in physics and applied mathematics from the University of Texas. He taught at his alma mater and at Penn State and Harvard universities.

He earned a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Oklahoma Baptist University in 1934, followed by a Masters of Science from the University of Oklahoma in 1937, and a Ph.D. in physics and applied mathematics from the University of Texas in 1940.

Between 1935 and 1945, Dr. Cornett taught physics, mathematics, and electronics at Oklahoma Baptist University, Penn State University, and Harvard University. From 1945 to 1958, he held various administrative positions, including Vice President of Oklahoma Baptist University.

In 1959, Dr. Cornett became the Director of the Division of Higher Education at the U.S. Office of Education. While at the Education Department, he reviewed Gallaudet’s funding. In the process, he was appalled to learn that most deaf persons have below grade level reading skills.

In 1965, Cornett accepted a position as vice president for Long-Range Planning at Gallaudet. During 1965-66, he developed Cued Speech, with the express purpose of providing a way for deaf and hard of hearing children to become good readers after learning that children with prelingual and profound hearing loss typically had poor reading skills.

Dr. Cornett remained vice president of Long Range Planning at Gallaudet University until 1975 when he became Research Professor and Director of Cued Speech Programs, a position he held until 1984. During this time, he adapted Cued Speech to 52 languages and major dialects. He has written and published audiocassette lessons in 34 of these languages and dialects.

In addition, from 1981 to 1983, he was also Chairman of the Center for Studies in Language and Communication at Gallaudet. When he retired in 1984, Gallaudet University awarded him the status of professor emeritus.


Dr. Cornett’s “work constitutes an invaluable gift non only to the deaf community, but also to the community of scientific research. Our many studies have confirmed what Dr Cornett expected from the Cued Speech system: the delivery of accurate information about spoken language has a strong and positive effect on the development of linguistic and cognitive abilities of deaf children.

Cued Speech > History > Dr. R. Orin Cornett, Inventor of Cued Speech Passes

 

[jasin]

Pigeon sign is made up, so it'll never be integrated into mainstream education. SEE and Asl however, are valid languages, those are integrated into mainstream education; there are lots of hybrid schools now that do one or the other and oral.

Most schools here Use Asl NOT SEE. I don't care for SEE because it tries to be too much like English. I think its actually an advantage to learn English and another language like Asl rather then just using a language that tries to integrate English into it. Learning multiple languages makes you smarter.

 

[Dixie]

Is this the article.

The Use of ASL to Support the Development of English and Literacy -- Wilbur 5 (1): 81 -- The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

Very nice article - now I have a beter understanding of why ASL before English in Deaf children, whether they are children of Deaf parents or hearing parents.

In order to grasp written language and literacy skills one must have a solid foundation of a conversational language whether it is ASL or spoken English.

In other words one learns ASL, then attends school to learn English as a second language (ESL). So now you can teach the students that this is what you mean in ASL - this is how you express it in English.

As for Signed English - that is very hard to do because English itself has so many modifiers as well as many words for the same concept. ASL is easier to grasp because you have one sign for one concept, and any modifier is done by directionality, and time is established early in the conversation and ASL often goes in chronological order, whereas English tends to jump for creative purposes in storytelling.

There is no way possible to effectively speak and use ASL at the same time, the speech is going to come out mangled, or the signs are. It is very difficult to do both at the same time. Also Cued Speech had no effect in helping children accquire English skills.

Good article Shel - thanks for sharing.

-Dixie

 

[shel90]

Very nice article - now I have a beter understanding of why ASL before English in Deaf children, whether they are children of Deaf parents or hearing parents.

In order to grasp written language and literacy skills one must have a solid foundation of a conversational language whether it is ASL or spoken English.

In other words one learns ASL, then attends school to learn English as a second language (ESL). So now you can teach the students that this is what you mean in ASL - this is how you express it in English.

As for Signed English - that is very hard to do because English itself has so many modifiers as well as many words for the same concept. ASL is easier to grasp because you have one sign for one concept, and any modifier is done by directionality, and time is established early in the conversation and ASL often goes in chronological order, whereas English tends to jump for creative purposes in storytelling.

There is no way possible to effectively speak and use ASL at the same time, the speech is going to come out mangled, or the signs are. It is very difficult to do both at the same time. Also Cued Speech had no effect in helping children accquire English skills.

Good article Shel - thanks for sharing.

-Dixie

Thanks...the only students who have passed the state achievement tests in the last few years at my school were the ones from deaf families. My friends told me back in the old days when there were more deaf kids learning ASL regardless of their parents's hearing status, they were able to pass the standardized tests but now it seems like the ones from deaf families are passing the tests. The reason is that cuz many children of hearing parents dont start out at our school first..so there is a huge shift as compared to 30 to 40 years ago.

 

[jillio]

Jasper

Jasper - Families who have choosen CS, use it immediately upon learning it, regardless of the age of the child. Verbal skills of the child have no direct bearing on processing the cues. Babys will "baby cue" just as babys will "baby sign". The benefit for hearing families with deaf children is that they can model/cue a language that they already know. Without an accurate and fluent model of language a child does not learn the "language": English, ASL, French etc. CS shows deaf children the sound and if you ask a deaf cuer, they will tell you they know what is being cued because they "hear the sound/words" in their head, seemingly like hearing people. This always WOWS! me!

And being able to cue a language they already know provides an easy alternative for a hearing parent. But the issue is not waht is easiest for the parent, but what is best for the deaf child.

 

[jillio]

Thanks...the only students who have passed the state achievement tests in the last few years at my school were the ones from deaf families. My friends told me back in the old days when there were more deaf kids learning ASL regardless of their parents's hearing status, they were able to pass the standardized tests but now it seems like the ones from deaf families are passing the tests. The reason is that cuz many children of hearing parents dont start out at our school first..so there is a huge shift as compared to 30 to 40 years ago.

Exactly. We once made the shift away from the oral methods of education for deaf students regardless of parental hearing status, and we saw a rise in the achievement scores of deaf children. Now with so many hearing parents choosing the oral method because of implantation, we are seeing the drops again. Why is it necessary to repeat history?

 

[BearBeauty]

Again with the misconceptions of SEE. SEE does not use the signs for "butter" and "fly" It will use the sign for "butterfly". This is why people don't understand how SEE works, because they misunderstand how it is being used. Yes, it can be confusing for some people, but children can be taught why sentences are signed the way they are. Sorry, Shel, but I feel that people totally misunderstand how SEE works. I grew up using SEE and I often feel like I"m the sole defender of SEE.

LIke I've said in MANY threads, SEE uses the same signs as ASL, it just signs EVERY word in the sentence, unlike ASL which signs concepts, if i'm not mistaken. I'm sorry if i'm off topic, i'm just tired of people continually misunderstanding how SEE works.

 

[shel90]

Again with the misconceptions of SEE. SEE does not use the signs for "butter" and "fly" It will use the sign for "butterfly". This is why people don't understand how SEE works, because they misunderstand how it is being used. Yes, it can be confusing for some people, but children can be taught why sentences are signed the way they are. Sorry, Shel, but I feel that people totally misunderstand how SEE works. I grew up using SEE and I often feel like I"m the sole defender of SEE.

LIke I've said in MANY threads, SEE uses the same signs as ASL, it just signs EVERY word in the sentence, unlike ASL which signs concepts, if i'm not mistaken. I'm sorry if i'm off topic, i'm just tired of people continually misunderstanding how SEE works.

I studied the differences of all coded systems except for CS in my linguistics classes at Gallaudet...if u are doing that in SEE then it is no longer strictly SEE..it becomes PSE since you are changing some signs into ASL like for example, butterfly.

PSE makes more sense than strictly SEE.

 

[BearBeauty]

I used SEE for 5 years. And the research was most likely interpreted a different way than you interpreted it. Remember that everyone who researches a languages usually draws up their own conclusions based on their research. My teacher who taught me SEE probubly interpreted it differently than you did. I know that sometimes SEE is very confusing, even I admit it.

 

[jillio]

Again with the misconceptions of SEE. SEE does not use the signs for "butter" and "fly" It will use the sign for "butterfly". This is why people don't understand how SEE works, because they misunderstand how it is being used. Yes, it can be confusing for some people, but children can be taught why sentences are signed the way they are. Sorry, Shel, but I feel that people totally misunderstand how SEE works. I grew up using SEE and I often feel like I"m the sole defender of SEE.

LIke I've said in MANY threads, SEE uses the same signs as ASL, it just signs EVERY word in the sentence, unlike ASL which signs concepts, if i'm not mistaken. I'm sorry if i'm off topic, i'm just tired of people continually misunderstanding how SEE works.

But the difference is that an aural auditory language is linear in structure, and a manual language is visual /spatial in structure. They are not processed to understanding the same way in the brain. They eye takes in information in a different way than does the ear. When you attempt to put a linear structure to a visual/spatial language, you create a confusing linguistic environment.

 

[BearBeauty]

some of us are not thinking in terms of how a language works, but rather, our own expierence with the language or system that was used. So telling us how things work doesn't exactly help. I am going by my own expierences with SEE, not educational research. I went through 12 years of learning many ways of communicating. So, I'm not exactly eager to learn all that crap again. So i apologize. It's just that I grew up going to Speech therapy, cued speech classes for 2 years, 6 years of summer school, one on one signing classes, among many other things, So please, spare me the lectures. I've heard em all before.

 

[shel90]

some of us are not thinking in terms of how a language works, but rather, our own expierence with the language or system that was used. So telling us how things work doesn't exactly help. I am going by my own expierences with SEE, not educational research. I went through 12 years of learning many ways of communicating. So, I'm not exactly eager to learn all that crap again. So i apologize. It's just that I grew up going to Speech therapy, cued speech classes for 2 years, 6 years of summer school, one on one signing classes, among many other things, So please, spare me the lectures. I've heard em all before.

Glad it worked for u just like oral language worked for me but those 2 approaches do not work for all. The point is..ASL is a language and deaf children need to develop language parralel to their hearing counterparts. I have never once seen ASL not work for a deaf child in my years in the education field unlike those other methods so my question is..why not use the one language that deaf people have full access to for language development and then have them be able to develop language at their age appropriate levels so that way they can be ready to learn English as a 2nd language? That way nobody is deprived of a language. Also, use speech, CS, or SEE as a tools.

I know u r a defender of SEE but the truth is, it doesn't work for all children just like oral approach doesn't either even though it had worked for me.

 

[BearBeauty]

I'm not a defender of SEE, more trying to clear up the misconceptions. Heck, I wouldn't wish any child to learn SEE. I remember signing SEE for literally hours with an teacher and going home with arms that felt like lead.

I'd rather that all deaf people were taught ASL, honestly. And I know not all deaf will learn orally, and that's fine with me. I'd rather we didn't have all these conflicts over which system works better, to be perfectly honest. There are days I even wish I only knew one way of communicating. But I know 2 ways, and there are times I've been with non-oral deaf and was happy to turn off my voice.. until they went into a store to buy a pack of cigarettes, and used me to voice what they wanted. That is the point I hate being orally deaf. because I feel like an interpreter.

 

[shel90]

I'm not a defender of SEE, more trying to clear up the misconceptions. Heck, I wouldn't wish any child to learn SEE. I remember signing SEE for literally hours with an teacher and going home with arms that felt like lead.

I'd rather that all deaf people were taught ASL, honestly. And I know not all deaf will learn orally, and that's fine with me. I'd rather we didn't have all these conflicts over which system works better, to be perfectly honest. There are days I even wish I only knew one way of communicating. But I know 2 ways, and there are times I've been with non-oral deaf and was happy to turn off my voice.. until they went into a store to buy a pack of cigarettes, and used me to voice what they wanted. That is the point I hate being orally deaf. because I feel like an interpreter.

Ok..now, I can understand where u r coming from with SEE. I agree with u about wishing there wasn't all these conflicts. I think the reason for that is some people think about meeting the parents' needs and what's best for them while, on the other hand, I am more about meeting the children's needs first. I guess it is maybe it is because too often, I have seen too many situations where the parents felt this method best fit their and their families' needs but the child ends up struggling and loses years of language development. That is what sets the fire burning on me. That's just me...I want to see all deaf children have the opportunity to acquire language in the most natural way like hearing children do. When I am at my job, I don't criticize the parents for choosing this or that method first before trying ASL. Have to keep nuetral but it is hard when they brush aside my explainations of how ASL is important. Most of them time they question about their childrens' oral language development even after their children have struggled with it for years. Sometimes, I feel like telling them to give it up and let's focus on language development and literacy skills. I have always put literacy skills first...that's me. I know not everyone sees it that way.

About interpreting for non-oral deaf friends..my experience is different than yours. My friends get mad at me when I accidently voice for them without asking them first. They always tell me that they don't need my help cuz they have been able to do just fine without anyone interpreting for them at all times so since then I don't help unless asked which rarely happens.

Now this is a riot! My good friend is HOH and has no speech skills but can understand spoken language without much difficulty so whenever we are both out, I would use her hearing ability to interpret what people have said that I wasn't able understand and she would use my speech skils to "talk" to hearing people for her. It is funny how we got into doing that without realizing it until one day we were at the bank drive thru and the woman said something over the speaker and we weren't expecting anyone to speak to us. So I was like, huh? She told me that the woman was asking for my name for I'D so I spoke into the speaker telling the woman my name and she went "gueiosjgfls frigh prehu ordodeee"...that was what it sounded like to me but my friend could catch all the words which were "thank u ma'am..have a nice day." She repeated what the cashier said. So, I said "Thank u" to the speaker.
After pulling out, my friend and I looked at each other and we were like "did we both function like a hearing person but using 2 of us rather as 1?" We cracked up so hard.

Life is weird sometimes, ha!

Iam posting less here cuz I am getting tired the conflicts but sometimes, it is hard not to hold back when it is about something I strongly believe in. Oh well.

 

[jillio]

I'm not a defender of SEE, more trying to clear up the misconceptions. Heck, I wouldn't wish any child to learn SEE. I remember signing SEE for literally hours with an teacher and going home with arms that felt like lead.

I'd rather that all deaf people were taught ASL, honestly. And I know not all deaf will learn orally, and that's fine with me. I'd rather we didn't have all these conflicts over which system works better, to be perfectly honest. There are days I even wish I only knew one way of communicating. But I know 2 ways, and there are times I've been with non-oral deaf and was happy to turn off my voice.. until they went into a store to buy a pack of cigarettes, and used me to voice what they wanted. That is the point I hate being orally deaf. because I feel like an interpreter.

I, too misunderstood exactly where you were coming from in your post. I took the time to explain how the language functions, because that is where the problems lie in using it with deaf children.

 

[jillio]

Ok..now, I can understand where u r coming from with SEE. I agree with u about wishing there wasn't all these conflicts. I think the reason for that is some people think about meeting the parents' needs and what's best for them while, on the other hand, I am more about meeting the children's needs first. I guess it is maybe it is because too often, I have seen too many situations where the parents felt this method best fit their and their families' needs but the child ends up struggling and loses years of language development. That is what sets the fire burning on me. That's just me...I want to see all deaf children have the opportunity to acquire language in the most natural way like hearing children do. When I am at my job, I don't criticize the parents for choosing this or that method first before trying ASL. Have to keep nuetral but it is hard when they brush aside my explainations of how ASL is important. Most of them time they question about their childrens' oral language development even after their children have struggled with it for years. Sometimes, I feel like telling them to give it up and let's focus on language development and literacy skills. I have always put literacy skills first...that's me. I know not everyone sees it that way.

About interpreting for non-oral deaf friends..my experience is different than yours. My friends get mad at me when I accidently voice for them without asking them first. They always tell me that they don't need my help cuz they have been able to do just fine without anyone interpreting for them at all times so since then I don't help unless asked which rarely happens.

Now this is a riot! My good friend is HOH and has no speech skills but can understand spoken language without much difficulty so whenever we are both out, I would use her hearing ability to interpret what people have said that I wasn't able understand and she would use my speech skils to "talk" to hearing people for her. It is funny how we got into doing that without realizing it until one day we were at the bank drive thru and the woman said something over the speaker and we weren't expecting anyone to speak to us. So I was like, huh? She told me that the woman was asking for my name for I'D so I spoke into the speaker telling the woman my name and she went "gueiosjgfls frigh prehu ordodeee"...that was what it sounded like to me but my friend could catch all the words which were "thank u ma'am..have a nice day." She repeated what the cashier said. So, I said "Thank u" to the speaker.
After pulling out, my friend and I looked at each other and we were like "did we both function like a hearing person but using 2 of us rather as 1?" We cracked up so hard.

Life is weird sometimes, ha!

Iam posting less here cuz I am getting tired the conflicts but sometimes, it is hard not to hold back when it is about something I strongly believe in. Oh well.

I loved that story!

 

[BearBeauty]

I, too misunderstood exactly where you were coming from in your post. I took the time to explain how the language functions, because that is where the problems lie in using it with deaf children.

It's ok. I understand the problems in using it with deaf children, having gone through it myself. I don't wish it on deaf children. Honestly, I felt like I was a guiena pig for deaf education while I was growing up. Because it felt like they wanted me to learn every available system of education. And I'm glad there are advocates who try to help the children so they don't feel the same way that I did.

So, I'm with you guys in terms of teaching children to sign. I just wish the oralists would understand that signing does NOT take away from speech. That's my only problem. I don't advocate the oral method, just wish people would stop feeding that line "if you sign, you will lose your speech abilities". I mean, everyone knows I grew up with oral and sign abilities, and I never felt that learning to sign took away from my speaking/lipreading skills. So i don't understand where people get the idea.

 

[jillio]

It's ok. I understand the problems in using it with deaf children, having gone through it myself. I don't wish it on deaf children. Honestly, I felt like I was a guiena pig for deaf education while I was growing up. Because it felt like they wanted me to learn every available system of education. And I'm glad there are advocates who try to help the children so they don't feel the same way that I did.

So, I'm with you guys in terms of teaching children to sign. I just wish the oralists would understand that signing does NOT take away from speech. That's my only problem. I don't advocate the oral method, just wish people would stop feeding that line "if you sign, you will lose your speech abilities". I mean, everyone knows I grew up with oral and sign abilities, and I never felt that learning to sign took away from my speaking/lipreading skills. So i don't understand where people get the idea.

I know. You would think in this day and time, people would not still hold on to those outdated ideas. In my experience, it has been the parents who don't want to take the time to learn to sign that use those excuses to validate their unwillingness to adapt to their deaf child's needs.

 

[Dixie]

lol good story Shel, it gave me a good giggle.

Ive never ran into that situation before due to my HOH, but I have a friend that is fuly hearing but has a speech impediment so whenever he speaks it sometimes comes out all chewed up.

We went to Dairy Queen one night and it was fairly noisy in there so I had a hard time hearing the cashier place our order. She said - "Would you like that to go or for here?"

"Uhh, uhhhh, uhhhh, uhhhh - ya......"

"She asked if you wanted it here or to go."

"I know, b-but I coll get out fast nuff."

"He wants it here."

"OK that will be $10.27."

So I guess I have to lipread what is said - hope I get it right, and then double check his response to get it right, then I speak back for him. It was weird though.