jillio
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 60,232
- Reaction score
- 19
That's what I thought.
Thanks, Jillio.
Not a problem.
That's what I thought.
Thanks, Jillio.
Perhaps it's not the phonetical issue or the orthographical issue which seems to be in pertain of this but as to how both different groups are in the "play" for what it says otherwise?
Well, this is what everyone in the professional field has to say about it. Even as much as it seems like it is reasonable that it is relevant to phonetic errors, they are unable to draw a conclusion.
Both professors who conducted the 'Deaf spelling' reached a conclusion that although sounds are what seems plausible, there is no solid black-white answer. Dr. Marschark, the reference who was indicative of the deaf cognitive thinking process has replied that he is unsure of what exactly are the indications that cause this as well, but he notes that this can easily be done if anyone is to take on the task of performing the study.
I'm going to have to offer a correction here, Naisho. He did not say that cause could be easily determined. In fact, the very reason that exact cause has not been determined is because it is extremely difficult to do so. The phenomenon has been shown to exist, results have been replicated, so we know the difference is there. However, determining the exact biological changes that would have to be evident to empirically determine cause is next to impossible.
Although like he said, there is no ultimate purpose in doing it unless the major focus was that we were to attempting to find something wrong with language in general. (Which I'm not intending to do, all I was looking to see if there is a correlation for the word definitely-definately specifically that ties differently between hearing and deaf in some form or another.)
Well, this is what everyone in the professional field has to say about it. Even as much as it seems like it is reasonable that it is relevant to phonetic errors, they are unable to draw a conclusion.
Both professors who conducted the 'Deaf spelling' reached a conclusion that although sounds are what seems plausible, there is no solid black-white answer. Dr. Marschark, the reference who was indicative of the deaf cognitive thinking process has replied that he is unsure of what exactly are the indications that cause this as well, but he notes that this can easily be done if anyone is to take on the task of performing the study.
Although like he said, there is no ultimate purpose in doing it unless the major focus was that we were to attempting to find something wrong with language in general. (Which I'm not intending to do, all I was looking to see if there is a correlation for the word definitely-definately specifically that ties differently between hearing and deaf in some form or another.)
I'm going to have to offer a correction here, Naisho. He did not say that cause could be easily determined. In fact, the very reason that exact cause has not been determined is because it is extremely difficult to do so. The phenomenon has been shown to exist, results have been replicated, so we know the difference is there. However, determining the exact biological changes that would have to be evident to empirically determine cause is next to impossible
Exactly. Research is much more interested in the typical errors across the board, than in one specific word area. One specific word is not enough to show pattern, or to establish a direction for further applied research.
Allright - That's like saying in another sense with the correlation of words that can't be proven because we know it is there but it can't be based on one thing just because virtually, anyone could do the same mistake even if they're not deaf or hearing?
What I mean is, There's no empirical sources that can be refuted to this because of the typical errors which cannot be applied for any further notice?
I'm going to have to offer a correction here, Naisho. He did not say that cause could be easily determined. In fact, the very reason that exact cause has not been determined is because it is extremely difficult to do so. The phenomenon has been shown to exist, results have been replicated, so we know the difference is there. However, determining the exact biological changes that would have to be evident to empirically determine cause is next to impossible.
Allright - That's like saying in another sense with the correlation of words that can't be proven because we know it is there but it can't be based on one thing just because virtually, anyone could do the same mistake even if they're not deaf or hearing?
What I mean is, There's no empirical sources that can be refuted to this because of the typical errors which cannot be applied for any further notice?
I would think that for someone who was raised in a mostly deaf environment would rarely make phonetic mistakes.
You know, sometimes I wonder if Deaf people have a hard time with lolcats pictures at:
Lolcats ‘n’ Funny Pictures of Cats – I Can Has Cheezburger?
since most of the captions are purposefully spelled out phonetically (with some bad grammar added too.)
I was brought up orally. I spell fairly well, but I pronounce words like how they are spelled, so my pronunciation is off, not my spelling.
I was brought up orally. I spell fairly well, but I pronounce words like how they are spelled, so my pronunciation is off, not my spelling.
I was also raised orally. I'm more likey to make mistake based on sight than phonics though I do make phonically based errors like using mail or male when I mean mail and I spell it male or vice versa.
Same thing with words like "their" and "they're". They sound exactly the same (at least I think so. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.) So, many people make the mistake of using the wrong their/they're term when writing. It's all about the structure behind the word that determines which one should be used. Same for "your" and "you're".
I think you could refute that by using this forum, to search words and find percentage of wrong spellings between deaf and hearing.
Exactly. We can say that these types of errors are seen consistently when we compare deaf and hearing spellers, and that there is a positive correlation between hearing status and type of error made. What we can't say is that this correlation is seen because of actual organic changes in the brain of deaf people. In order to assign cause, we would have to be able to show that.
I frequent some other message boards that are not deaf related and the mistakes mentioned here are ones I see on other message boards by hearing people. I think it may be part of our education system in America and the way grammar is taught vs a hearing/Deaf thing.