True or False?? About CI

[Smithtr]

Anyone vs Everyone means SAME. For me, everyone is more friendly than anyone.

Don't worry
world is alots of trillion is very alots deaf and hoh

CI is very alots of problem on doesn't help perfect.

 

[Smithtr]

Isn't that statement just as rude as the person who claimed that every deaf person should get a cochlear implant?

it is bit vulgar offense on inappropriate insult.
that is why reading

you know deaf person. as well you complaint dont need. be polite to to talking to people!

 

[Jane B.]

You think you know everything, but you don't. You lost your hearing at late age versus some of us lost our hearing at very young age.

You think ALLL of CI's are working for ALL of them. No. CI's are not for anyone period. Some are qualified for CIs and some others are not qualified for CIs for various reasons. Some mastered speaking skills, some don't.

Google is your best friend and do your frigging homework before posting your assuming posts. :roll:

Did you really mean to say for anyone? Or was that intended to say for everyone?

Anyone vs Everyone means SAME. For me, everyone is more friendly than anyone.

When Oddball says CI's are not for anyone period. I take that to be saying that CI's are not for any person with no exceptions.

Saying CI's are not for everyone period. To me means that they are for some but not for others.

 

[ambrosia]

Anyone vs Everyone means SAME. For me, everyone is more friendly than anyone.

Frisky the words everyone and anyone are very very different and can completely change the meaning of a sentence. Jane was spot on with the difference.

 

[ambrosia]

Isn't that statement just as rude as the person who claimed that every deaf person should get a cochlear implant?

I would agree with you, that is if that is what oddball meant, yes it's just as rude. But things can get tricky here. ASL is the first language of a lot if the posters here, and yes its different from English.....so sometimes we get misunderstandings. It's probably not what she meant.

 

[tuatara]

When Oddball says CI's are not for anyone period. I take that to be saying that CI's are not for any person with no exceptions.

Saying CI's are not for everyone period. To me means that they are for some but not for others.

Ok, this is something I am slowly learning.

Right, if you're focusing on standard English usage and just getting a quick gut reaction, "not for anyone" seems to mean "for no one". But. There are some cues to bring your attention to the fact that this wasn't the intended meaning. First of all, Oddball says in the next sentence that some are (qualified for CIs) and some are not. So you have a chance to start to realize that Oddball probably meant that CI's are for some and not others.

I notice that if I'm reading really fast, and someone's English is pretty close to the way I speak/write, I won't notice little differences. But if that any/every vs next-sentence conflict jumped out at you, you might go back and notice some articles that aren't there that you might have included, things like that. *Then* you realize that you may need to be a little more flexible in your interpretation of what's been written. Because there might be other slight variations in language usage.

And really, there are times hearing, English-as-first/only-language users do use "any" for "every". If you imagine adding the word "just", you can see it. "CI's are not for just anyone". Then you get the idea.

So I feel like getting the heavy artillery out on this one is definitely avoidable.

Or, what Bott said (with so much less blathering on!) : Learn to speak Deaf.

The first step of course, is to realize there's something to be learned.

 

[dogmom]

Look beyond the words

look at the concept

remember where you are here....

I agree with Botti and Amy

 

[drphil]

How can one speak DEAF-a condition?

aside: notwithstanding I am bilateral DEAF I speak English-that hasn't changed.

 

[tuatara]

How can one speak DEAF-a condition?

aside: notwithstanding I am bilateral DEAF I speak English-that hasn't changed.

Ha, Botti said deaf, I said Deaf, and you said DEAF. This should be an interesting conversation. I say that with sarcasm and fear. But the rest of this post is serious.

Anyway, it's not about the condition. Sorry if what I said seemed to suggest that. Can't speak for Botti. And wouldn't if I could because she would hurt me. But what *I* was refering to (and sorry that I wasn't more precise, but I have this problem already of writing these novel posts) was as follows.

So this is about language as used by people who learned (and lets just make this in the U.S. for simplicity) ASL as their first language, and and English as a (usually) second language. Unless they go as far as fully conforming to standard English usage, there are certain differences you might start to notice. I don't have a full enough mastery of the subject to be certain of all the details, but my feeling is that it's not the same as what I would call a broken English. It's more something like "language with many components of English, but informed by ASL as a first language". And since many deaf people who have ASL as their first language have come together to form a community, and these days sometimes interact via typed messages, there are places where this way of communicating can survive and even flourish. And so that usage becomes something specifically recognizable. It's related to English, but sometimes there are differences in meaning from what you might expect from a particular word or phrase.

For example, ASL is big on active voice, not so much passive. So if you're dating a culturally Deaf person, and they say "I lose you now", do you think they're sad because they think you're breaking up with them, or do you think they're breaking up with you?

Another (more from the deaf experience/culture): If a hearing English user refers to someone as more extremely Hard of Hearing than someone else, who can hear more? What if a culturaly Deaf person makes the same comparison?

And then there are just so many radical differences between the grammars. I'm seeing other differences that I'm sure stem from that, but since I'm still learning I can't really dive into those yet. All I can tell you is that I feel like I'm doing something really good for my brain by trying to wrap my head around this stuff. Starting to climb out of some truly miserable ruts.

Ok, so sorry if I in any way made you feel that because you are deaf/DEAF, that the language you use would necessarily be anything other than English. Didn't mean that at all. I hope this clears things up, but can't imagine it actually does. On the plus side, I'm coming to really love subjects I don't yet have all figured out

 

[Jane B.]

It would be hard to quote just what add clarity but I popped in with what I did because of posts by TODtobe starting along about post 31 and several following.

 

[ambrosia]

You know, this may not even be an ASL/English issue. She may have just brain farted and left one word out that would have made anyone fit better, or she may have been typing, then decided to say something else, but didn't go back and edit what was already said so it'd fit better. I do that to myself ALL the time, and leave out important words like not, wasn't, that really leaving out negatives really sucks, because end up saying the opposite if what you mean to. And my iPhone "helps" me, and it's stupid not smart.

So anyway, it's always good to clarify, and I don't think it's rude to ask for clarification. But TODtobe, you may have noticed that this is a little touchy spot for the Deaf.

Anyway, if I remember right, I think oddball has a CI. There are only a couple members that are really anti CI. In general, you'll find that implanting children is still a touchy subject and you'll find a lot more opposition there. But CI for adults? And implants in general, you won't see a lot of negativity. At least that's been my observation here.

Quite a few members have decided that a CI is not for them, but I have never seen any of them question or criticize another posters decision to get implanted. I've only seen support and well wishes.

 

[tuatara]

Hey Jane, this isn't a response to you - just a continuation of my previous post. 49. Always more thoughts. Sigh.

It's also worth noting that there's a spectrum involved. A native ASL user studying English might come to conform completely to standard English usage, or learn the words but sort of use them as though they were signing them in ASL (so English words, ASL order, sort of), or anywhere in between. Which makes sense - the same thing happens in the signing experience. There are native English speakers who learn ASL expertly, and sign with no traces of English or its influences. There are people who try to learn ASL but end up just signing in English word order (PSE, although it's apparently not really a pidgin - I've got more reading to do before I fully understand the difference), and again, every possible place in between.

There's an interesting piece in an interview by Ben Bahan of Bonnie Kraft at the end of her CD "Tomorrow Dad will still be Deaf" where she talks about different modes of communication among CODAs. Specifically, CODAs who have two first languages, ASL and English, fluent in both and able to use parts of one and parts of another. One of them was something she called CODA talk. Basically spoken language, but ASL word order. And she describes it as something that she and her CODA friends really enjoy using. So it's something that happens: people take part of a language they know and use it in the context made up of aspects of another language. They find ways that work for them.

So if there's CODA talk, speaking (or, well, typing I guess) Deaf makes sense too.

I am thinking that you're going to catch something that I'm doing so I feel I better come clean about it before it comes up. I am not using the same kind of language to talk about learning English as when talking about learning ASL. I talk about learning ASL expertly vs not, but I talk only about conforming (or not) fully to standard English usage. My reason is that Deaf ASL native users who have not perfectly mastered standard English usage are, in many contexts, up against institutionalized and inappropriate judgements about their intelligence and worthiness as human beings. I. Do. Not. Want. To. Contribute. To. That. So I choose to refer more respectfully to a lack of conformity, rather than a lack of mastery, and I will adamantly insist on my right to continue to do that. There are many good reasons for Deaf pride. It's not that hearies never take abuse, but abuse for specifically being able to hear? It's not institutionalized in the larger, more powerful, surrounding culture. The same level of care in choosing perspectives and associated words isn't necessary.

 

[ecp]

True or False:

Are CI working on ALL of Deaf individuals?

I know it is not 100 percent fact that it works on all Deaf individuals. Sigh.

I'm going to pretend that all sorts of other posts didn't already happen and say that it really depends on the individual.
Some Deaf people are not helped at all by CIs. Some Deaf people are helped immensely and are even able to understand speech.

So, it really depends on the individual.
A CI candidate undergoes tests to ensure that the auditory nerve is intact (otherwise the CI would be pointless because the connection between the cochlea and the auditory cortex is the auditory nerve (8th cranial nerve)).

You have to keep in mind that the human brain is able to change BUT it is so much easier to change during childhood. So, if a person has never worn hearing aids and decides to get a CI at age 30, they might not do as well as someone who had some auditory input in childhood and then got a CI.
The cochlea, auditory nerve, and auditory cortex are like muscles. They need to be stimulated to continue to work well.

I'm not saying someone who never heard a sound wouldn't do well with a cochlear implant or that someone who wore hearing aids their whole life would do well. But having the auditory pathway paved would be useful.

 

[JMH]

I agreed with ecp's post above. There's one more thing it should mention: commitment. It require 100% commitment to make it work. I have seen several CI people gave up and not wearing it anymore. They had no patience and their exception is way too high. That's one other issue along CI.

 

[JClarke]

I do not understand why everyone has to bash about CI. Really! :roll:

Seriously, the internet has provided plenty of answers. My answer to this is no.

It depends on the levels of your hearing loss, with profound deafness, and the ability to learn and hear in the past is the best bet. I suggest you read my blog in my signature to get the better understanding of it - a lot of people have found to be very benefitical.

The official websites for cochlear implant companies provides the facts, so please get your facts right and do the research appropiately before asking the community. Everyone with their CI has their unique results.

 

[ecp]

I agreed with ecp's post above. There's one more thing it should mention: commitment. It require 100% commitment to make it work. I have seen several CI people gave up and not wearing it anymore. They had no patience and their exception is way too high. That's one other issue along CI.

You have a great point. It is hard work to learn a new skill. Learning how to interpret sound is hard work and takes commitment.
That doesn't mean everybody who works hard will be successful but not working hard is a sure way to failure in anything.

 

[diehardbiker]

With that holy war over CI issues that has been ongoing for way too long.

You are Pre and post CI user and experienced, which helped you realize the appropriate answer to the question, how can your answer be wrong?

I do not understand why everyone has to bash about CI. Really! :roll:

Seriously, the internet has provided plenty of answers. My answer to this is no.

It depends on the levels of your hearing loss, with profound deafness, and the ability to learn and hear in the past is the best bet. I suggest you read my blog in my signature to get the better understanding of it - a lot of people have found to be very benefitical.

The official websites for cochlear implant companies provides the facts, so please get your facts right and do the research appropiately before asking the community. Everyone with their CI has their unique results.

 

[Frisky Feline]

Frisky the words everyone and anyone are very very different and can completely change the meaning of a sentence. Jane was spot on with the difference.

Alright.

 

[JClarke]

With that holy war over CI issues that has been ongoing for way too long.

You are Pre and post CI user and experienced, which helped you realize the appropriate answer to the question, how can your answer be wrong?

you got that right, DHB.

 

[Oddball]

I do not understand why everyone has to bash about CI. Really! :roll:

Seriously, the internet has provided plenty of answers. My answer to this is no.

It depends on the levels of your hearing loss, with profound deafness, and the ability to learn and hear in the past is the best bet. I suggest you read my blog in my signature to get the better understanding of it - a lot of people have found to be very benefitical.

The official websites for cochlear implant companies provides the facts, so please get your facts right and do the research appropiately before asking the community. Everyone with their CI has their unique results.

Thank you for your honest input regarding to CIs.