Signing exact English (SEE) Resources

R

rockdrummer

Guest
I have looked a long time for online Signing Exact English resources and always came up empty handed. An online dictionary with additional resources geared towards teaching SEE concepts and signs is what I seek. Similar to lifeprint and aslpro. Well I finally found something but unfortunately it is not quite robust as of yet but I do wish them luck in moving it forward.

If this is something that interest you, go to Welcome to SEE Resources for more information and to sign up if you choose to.

If anyone knows of any other online SEE resources please share them here if you don't mind.

If you are not supportive of SEE and only have negative comments regarding it or it's use then please participate in another thread.

Thank you!
RD
 
I took a look at it and it will be free?

I might actually like to learn it, as it might be easier for my granddaughter.
 
Can you explain the basic difference between ASL and SEE, rockdrummer?

More people use ASL, right? If a person learns SEE instead, does that mean that she has more limited people to sign with?

TIA for any info.
 
sallylou said:
Can you explain the basic difference between ASL and SEE, rockdrummer?

More people use ASL, right? If a person learns SEE instead, does that mean that she has more limited people to sign with?

TIA for any info.
Click to expand...

I went through middle school and part of high school with SEE. They add endings -s, -ing, -ed to the word, as well as beginnings such as pre-. They fingerspell the suffixes and prefixes.

Like for example: "THAT IS A PRETTY GROUP OF GIRL-S." In ASL, it would be "THEY (point to to the girls) BEAUTIFUL"

also they tend to initalize signs like for example, breakfast would be initalized with a B while using the sign for eat. In ASL, it would be "MORNING EAT," but in SEE it would be "B-EAT" Why? They follow the philosophy of "one sign for one word." If the SEE users are not careful enough, they could actually be too quick and sign "BITCH" instead.

The biggest downfall would be when they have multiple meaning of one word. In ASL, if you want to say "my nose is running," you just indicate that something is dripping from your nose ("NOSE DRIP" or "NOSE FLOW"). in SEE, it would be literally "MY NOSE IS RUN-ING"... with the actual sign for RUN being the one for the physical activity of running-- conceptually it would make it look like your nose ran away, rather than dripping.

So... you might as well stick with PSE or contact signs? To someone that is an auditory learner, SEE makes sense... but to someone that is visual-learner, it confuses the heck out of them. Ideally, SEE was meant to improve literacy rate... which is fine-- until you get into conceptual classes like advanced physics, biology and calculus; history and philosophy are a few other classes that need conceptual means to bridge the gap.
 
sallylou said:
Can you explain the basic difference between ASL and SEE, rockdrummer?

More people use ASL, right? If a person learns SEE instead, does that mean that she has more limited people to sign with?

TIA for any info.
Click to expand...

Souggy is right, and the only reason I am thinking of it is my hearing grandchildren,as I am the only deaf adult they will contact. My husband is hoh, but he will always communicate with them in spoken English.

If you want to communicate ASL is your best choice.
 
I have SEE and ASL books. My husband borrowed the SEE from my old teacher in his old neighborhood.

Souggy is right about SEE and ASL. The SEE is good for English grammar to help understand. ASL don't follow the English grammar.
 
Thank you for the responses. I understand now.
 
sallylou said:
Can you explain the basic difference between ASL and SEE, rockdrummer?

More people use ASL, right? If a person learns SEE instead, does that mean that she has more limited people to sign with?

TIA for any info.
Click to expand...
I am no expert but I will share what I have learned and anyone please correct me if I am wrong.
ASL is a language that meets linguistic criteria and SEE is a method of making a verbal language (English) manual and visual

SEE is used mainly to teach deaf kids to read and write English and uses English grammar and syntax. Some people communicate using SEE but it is very cumbersome as a communication method whereas ASL is more efficient for communication but ASL does not follow English grammar and syntax. SEE was probably initially to be a tool to help make English visual and accessable to deaf kids to help teach them to read and write English.

I can't say which is used more and there are also other variations to consider (PSE, contact , rochester method etc) I would have to imagine the methods used in the world vary due to the fact that things evolve. I just can't speak to which is the most used.

I personally like the fact that this website has come about because there are a lot of times when I sign to my son in ASL he doesn't understand and when I show him in writing what I mean he tells me I am usinig the wrong sign and shows me the SEE equivilent. While there are many similar signs between SEE and ASL there are also many that are different for the same words.

I hope that answers your questions.
 
Well, I met a 19-years-old deaf man at NTID, and he uses a full ASL most of his life. His English in writing is really excellence. I use SEE most of my life. I don't see a problem with ASL which is fine with me. It is most important of all for everyone is to keep reading and reading. If it is hard for someone to read a book, then start reading children books. No kidding.
 
I would encourage anyone interested in a visual SEE dictionary to sign up for this site in the hopes that new memberships will help to support them. It is 100% FREE!
 
rockdrummer said:
I would encourage anyone interested in a visual SEE dictionary to sign up for this site in the hopes that new memberships will help to support them. It is 100% FREE!
Click to expand...
The website that you linked has a dictionary of only 14 words. Is there another one?
 
webexplorer said:
Well, I met a 19-years-old deaf man at NTID, and he uses a full ASL most of his life. His English in writing is really excellence. I use SEE most of my life. I don't see a problem with ASL which is fine with me. It is most important of all for everyone is to keep reading and reading. If it is hard for someone to read a book, then start reading children books. No kidding.
Click to expand...

I agree...reading is the key to higher literacy.
 
This is the misconception some people have with ASL and SEE.

SEE doesn't always enable English comprehension.

ASL enables English comprehension.

I must admit this, RD, when I went to GBC [George Brown College], I had an ego. I thought I was L1 and L2. [L1 ASL, L2 English] Get this, I was wrong and really humbled after my first week.

It's 6 weeks now in college and ASL is my first language. I no longer state I'm L1 and L2. ASL is my language.

I find that ASL enables me to read/write English much better. I have admitted this to my Deaf professors that I wished they were my teachers when I was mainstreamed. I know I would have grasped the English concept much better than burying my nose in books almost my whole life.

Hope this helps, RD. :)
 
Reba said:
The website that you linked has a dictionary of only 14 words. Is there another one?
Click to expand...
Yes that website is just getting off the ground and as you can understand, it will take time to have a robust dictionary. It is the only online SEE dictionary I have found thus far. If anyone else knows of anything, please post it here.
 
Mrs Bucket said:
This is the misconception some people have with ASL and SEE.

SEE doesn't always enable English comprehension.

ASL enables English comprehension.

I must admit this, RD, when I went to GBC [George Brown College], I had an ego. I thought I was L1 and L2. [L1 ASL, L2 English] Get this, I was wrong and really humbled after my first week.

It's 6 weeks now in college and ASL is my first language. I no longer state I'm L1 and L2. ASL is my language.

I find that ASL enables me to read/write English much better. I have admitted this to my Deaf professors that I wished they were my teachers when I was mainstreamed. I know I would have grasped the English concept much better than burying my nose in books almost my whole life.

Hope this helps, RD. :)
Click to expand...
I am sure there are variations and exceptions to the rule as everyone is different. There is clearly controversy in this and many areas of deaf education where it's been clear to me that one size does not fit all. What works well for one may not work for others. MCE's are a way of making English visual. I am no expert but I would have to imagine it would be difficult to teach English to a pre-lingually profoundly deaf child without the ability to make it visual. There is an article on Wikipedia regarding SEE that may be worth reading to some. I read it and it seems to be fair and objective.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_Exact_English
 
rockdrummer said:
I am sure there are variations and exceptions to the rule as everyone is different. There is clearly controversy in this and many areas of deaf education where it's been clear to me that one size does not fit all. What works well for one may not work for others. MCE's are a way of making English visual. I am no expert but I would have to imagine it would be difficult to teach English to a pre-lingually profoundly deaf child without the ability to make it visual. There is an article on Wikipedia regarding SEE that may be worth reading to some. I read it and it seems to be fair and objective.

Signing Exact English - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...
Be careful using Wikipedia as a source.

It's difficult to teach any second language if the child isn't fluent in a first language.

If a deaf American child is fluent in ASL as a first language, then English can be taught as a second language.

English does have a visual form--that is the printed word. Of course, printed words themselves are just two-dimensional; it's our minds that give the words dimension, feeling, and movement.

If a child can't communicate fluently in any language, then how can he even follow directions in school? How can he know that he's supposed to pay attention to the teacher, sit quietly during instruction, raise his hand to go to the bathroom, and socialize properly with the other kids? Without grounding in a native language, how can he make application of the two-dimensional written words to the real-life three-dimensional world?

I'm not an "educator", so maybe someone else can answer those questions.

I'm also curious about how Deaf people learned to read and write English prior to the invention of SEE? Obviously they were literate long before SEE was developed, so they must have used other methods. I've read things written by Deaf people who lived prior to SEE, and their English composition was just fine. I need to do more research on that.

BTW, I'm not criticizing people who use PSE or SEE forms for communication. If deaf adults prefer those modes, that's totally up to them, and if that's what they want interpreted, that's also fine with me.
 
Reba said:
Be careful using Wikipedia as a source.

It's difficult to teach any second language if the child isn't fluent in a first language.

If a deaf American child is fluent in ASL as a first language, then English can be taught as a second language.

English does have a visual form--that is the printed word. Of course, printed words themselves are just two-dimensional; it's our minds that give the words dimension, feeling, and movement.

If a child can't communicate fluently in any language, then how can he even follow directions in school? How can he know that he's supposed to pay attention to the teacher, sit quietly during instruction, raise his hand to go to the bathroom, and socialize properly with the other kids? Without grounding in a native language, how can he make application of the two-dimensional written words to the real-life three-dimensional world?

I'm not an "educator", so maybe someone else can answer those questions.

I'm also curious about how Deaf people learned to read and write English prior to the invention of SEE? Obviously they were literate long before SEE was developed, so they must have used other methods. I've read things written by Deaf people who lived prior to SEE, and their English composition was just fine. I need to do more research on that.

BTW, I'm not criticizing people who use PSE or SEE forms for communication. If deaf adults prefer those modes, that's totally up to them, and if that's what they want interpreted, that's also fine with me.
Click to expand...

That what I was thinking... archived letters and documents written by deaf people were held up to high standards, and they did this before the introduction of SEE1 and SEE2.
 
I thought I read somewhere poor English reading and comprehension skills in deaf students were why some of the MCE systems came about. The average deaf student was leaving high school with 4th grade English skills. I don't know what the numbers are today. If anyone has access to the stats please post a resource.

thanks
 
rockdrummer said:
I thought I read somewhere poor English reading and comprehension skills in deaf students were why some of the MCE systems came about. The average deaf student was leaving high school with 4th grade English skills. I don't know what the numbers are today. If anyone has access to the stats please post a resource.

thanks
Click to expand...

Stats are unchanged.
 
Back
Top