SEE (Signing Exact English) is the best sign language for a child to start with..

[jillio]

Absolutely do not mind!

 

[marcyp06]

The deaf ed teacher here about 10 years ago would tell the kids to sit on the "car" "pet" and reprimand their "b" "have" "your"!

 

[Bottesini]

Seems like anybody who ever used it with a deaf child would have to see how inefficient and cumbersome it is. Arggh....

 

[BecLak]

Exactly. Action and consequence. Unfortunately, there are too many inconsistent parents out there these days, and kids are not learning this very basic concept.

Sadly yes, you can thank Dr Spock for that :roll:

 

[jillio]

Sadly yes, you can thank Dr Spock for that :roll:

Agreed 100%. Unfortunately, all of society pays the cost for those that so blindly followed his mistaken philosophies of child rearing.

 

[Beowulf]

My god is tarnished. I remember an old pic of Spock giving a speech to an audience of cops. Every single cop had his arms crossed and I recall thinking, "Hmmm, the dude has something there."

 

[jillio]

My god is tarnished. I remember an old pic of Spock giving a speech to an audience of cops. Every single cop had his arms crossed and I recall thinking, "Hmmm, the dude has something there."

Well, Spock took some very sound psychological principles that have been endorsed by developmental psychologists for ages, and that part of what he proposed was valid. However, he carried many of his recommendations to the extreme, and that is when negative results show. In addition, many parents also misinterpreted or expanded his theories to the degree that children were more or less left to raise themselves. In moderation and applied selectively, some of his advice was pretty good. But it went far beyond moderation in practice most of the time.

 

[SilenceGold]

One example....

Signing "FACE" for the actual face and then "BOOK" for an actual book to represent the social network, Facebook is linguistically confusing. Another is signing "SUPER" as in someone is super and then "BOWL" for an actual bowl to respresent the football game, Superbowl. Those are the few examples out of many that makes SEE rebundant.

It's not rebundant...it's understandable. You just prefer the lazy way of communication which drops your intelligence level. Simple.

Try telling that to a pirate or a redneck (with heavy southern accent) that English is better than their "ASL". :p

 

[SilenceGold]

I am hearing, and a Deafblind Intervenor who uses sign language with my students... and I would NEVER use SEE with them. It is inaccurate, and cumbersome. It is not an actual language, merely a manual representation of English.
AlleyCat says it well:

Seriously I find it funny.

If a person reads the English language and it says, "Hot dog" in the book - does that mean that it is an animal that is hot? There are no clues to determine whether if it is an animal or food.

No - you use the rules of English to know whether if it's a canine or food just like everyone else. ASL users have the easy way of looking at which signs were used for those words (with multiple meanings) to know which meaning it is. That means lower intelligence language. :-/

 

[deafskeptic]

It's not rebundant...it's understandable. You just prefer the lazy way of communication which drops your intelligence level. Simple.

Try telling that to a pirate or a redneck (with heavy southern accent) that English is better than their "ASL". :p

That has to be one of the more audist posts that I've seen in a while.

 

[SilenceGold]

That has to be one of the more audist posts that I've seen in a while.

I am just pointing out the every day occurrences.

Seriously - if I was at a corporate company in a board meeting and there were two choices of which interpreters I would want: ASL or SEE.

I would choose SEE because I would want to pay attention to the board members' choices of vocabularies and knowing what EVERY word is being spoken in order for me to judge upon whether if those individuals are "intelligent". It would give me a better way to sell my sales pitch as a Deaf person.

If I chose using ASL - I am VERY DEPENDENT on the interpreter choices of vocabularies to make me sound SMART to them.

In order to succeed at SEE in a meeting like this - English language is required to be competent in order to be selling something that is very dependent on how I would present whatever I want to sell.

Is this Audism that I chose to use SEE, which I am already qualified to use and understand, over ASL in a situation like this?

I use ASL around other Deaf people with no problems. ASL can be learned later or co-exist with SEE as it happened for me and many other Deaf people I have met over the last several years (who started with SEE).

EDIT: Added below.

I re-read what I said. I was just picking at the LANGUAGE. Not the hearing abilities of someone. So it is not audism that I performed. Maybe signism? :p

 

[deafskeptic]

For me ASL is used for everyday conservation with signers and SEE doesn't cut it. ASL fits the bill. Everything that makes English a great spoken language also renders it quite cumbersome in signed form.

I see English as necessary for the outside world hence my support for Bi-BI.

It's audistic to assume that SEE is better than ASL and that SEE users are more intelligent than ASL users and you certainly questioned Shel's intelligence in prefering ASL over SEE.

 

[deafskeptic]

I am just pointing out the every day occurrences.

Seriously - if I was at a corporate company in a board meeting and there were two choices of which interpreters I would want: ASL or SEE.

I would choose SEE because I would want to pay attention to the board members' choices of vocabularies and knowing what EVERY word is being spoken in order for me to judge upon whether if those individuals are "intelligent". It would give me a better way to sell my sales pitch as a Deaf person.

If I chose using ASL - I am VERY DEPENDENT on the interpreter choices of vocabularies to make me sound SMART to them.

In order to succeed at SEE in a meeting like this - English language is required to be competent in order to be selling something that is very dependent on how I would present whatever I want to sell.

Is this Audism that I chose to use SEE, which I am already qualified to use and understand, over ASL in a situation like this?

I use ASL around other Deaf people with no problems. ASL can be learned later or co-exist with SEE as it happened for me and many other Deaf people I have met over the last several years (who started with SEE).

EDIT: Added below.

I re-read what I said. I was just picking at the LANGUAGE. Not the hearing abilities of someone. So it is not audism that I performed. Maybe signism? :p

Is using oral terps somehow a more independant choice?

 

[KarissaMann05]

Wirelessly posted

Then, by your definition, I'm extremely unintelligent and a backward-thinker. Which is fine by me. Luckily I know better than to be defined by numbers and systems. I define myself.

Measuring intelligence with language and/or communication mode isn't advisable. That is exactly how the misconstrued views of what intelligence really means started from. Especially for deaf people.

You can't speak, therefore you are dumb. The more you know English, the smarter you are. Those myths thrive, even today. It's perfectly fine if someone is incompetent in English but is fluent in ASL. English is NOT superior to ASL. It's not a hearing world. It's a world full of many languages. And ASL is one of them. If a deaf person can't read or write at all but is very fluent in ASL, then my hat is off to him/her. Being fluent in one language is better than being "okay" in two languages.

Of course, English is not superior to any language. Well, I was in public school, I learned PSE (with a bit of SEE) and I was okay in the school. But it only helped me a bit. So I moved to the Deaf school, my writing skill was very improved and much better. Thanks to ASL.

 

[KarissaMann05]

Wirelessly posted

And I think someone tries to piss you guys off here.

I already see someone claimed that Shel90 (and others) is lazy and unintelligent or something. It's better not to feed that troll.

 

[chipmunkis]

It's not rebundant...it's understandable. You just prefer the lazy way of communication which drops your intelligence level. Simple.

HOW on EARTH does using a language other than English translate into a "lazy way of communication"???? Someone who prefers ASL over SEE...which is not a language in and of itself... is less intelligent? Seriously?

 

[SilenceGold]

Wirelessly posted



Of course, English is not superior to any language. Well, I was in public school, I learned PSE (with a bit of SEE) and I was okay in the school. But it only helped me a bit. So I moved to the Deaf school, my writing skill was very improved and much better. Thanks to ASL.

You begun with "a bit of SEE" even when it's PSE. Proved my point.

 

[SilenceGold]

For me ASL is used for everyday conservation with signers and SEE doesn't cut it. ASL fits the bill. Everything that makes English a great spoken language also renders it quite cumbersome in signed form.

I see English as necessary for the outside world hence my support for Bi-BI.

It's audistic to assume that SEE is better than ASL and that SEE users are more intelligent than ASL users and you certainly questioned Shel's intelligence in prefering ASL over SEE.

My point is for a child to begin with SEE to develop their English skills early in their childhood. ASL does not fit in the bill to teach English writing or reading. How does an English teacher (or sign language interpreter in mainstream schools) say in ASL to a child to write down, "My red car is parked outside" without spelling any part of the words?

It is not audism when I did not say anything about the hearing abilities. It is actually linguicism. I gave a scenario where SEE has the strongest pros compared to ASL.

If we were in Deaf club - oh no problem...leave the SEE out of this picture as that is what I always do when I socialize with other Deaf people...BUT..it's not the point of this thread anyways. A child with a sign language choice to begin with? I am saying SEE and there are disagrees with just words showing disagreements. NO EVIDENCE to back it up that SEE lacks the abilities to teach a child how to acquire learning logics. I started this thread because I have encountered hundred of Deafies. The easiest way to find out if a Deaf person is "smart" (yes too vague but think - not a sad puppy needing to depend on everyone) - I just ask which sign language did they start with. I have only met one person who said SEE but easily could tell that this person could not even get around the world without needing friends as this person's crutch. Those started with ASL?...oh too many that need crutches!

Is using oral terps somehow a more independant choice?

I did not pull the oral interpreters in this picture but I do use laptop with a 18 yrs old girl typing at 90 WPM for me. She would orally speak out whatever I type. Decent enough because I am already proficient with English.

 

[SilenceGold]

HOW on EARTH does using a language other than English translate into a "lazy way of communication"???? Someone who prefers ASL over SEE...which is not a language in and of itself... is less intelligent? Seriously?

Go and see a doctor - move hands in few motions while the interpreter speaks out a lot more words. It is just a picture becoming a thousand words scenario with the interpreter carrying your voice across the bridge. Simple.

Rednecks say "ya'all" instead of "All of you". Got it?

 

[posts from hell]

You begun with "a bit of SEE" even when it's PSE. Proved my point.

Please back up your point with research. May I suggest a research where the child is started up with SEE in a deaf family, and the control group being ASL in a deaf family.



I could start off a list of pure ASL from birth members that have done great contributions to the world and our society.

I'll start with one, Lon Chaney.