Which Choices of Communication should Hearing parents use for their implanted child?

[jillio]

Ah really.... I noticed you refrain from showing anyone where I said that....
So please... where have I said that a child with CI falls into a special category / totally separate from any other?? She's no more special than your son.

I believe it was in the thread you started that used an equation......Deaf +HOH + CI<--------->Deaf + (HOH + CI), and in your numerous posts that have asserted that individuals with CI do not function as HOH, but as a completely different entity.

 

[Angel]

No Cloggy, look at the chart that's shows examples of positive and negative phrases, in Liebling's link she provide, the word "handicapped" is a negative phrase...


If you want our respect, then show yours....

 

[jillio]

The key phrase is - "Do not consider themself handicapped."

Not speaking a language is not considered handicapped. You could of course argue that not speaking another language is "mental unfitness".

And of course does a handicap not mean that you cannot do anything. In general, people with a handicap can do almost anything. Just like people without a handicap can do almost anything.
The difference is that people with a handicap cannot do some things because of "physical or mental unfitness".
(There are plenty of people that are not handicapped that cannot do anything..)

Anyway,
I don't see deaf people as handicapped, I don't see Lotte as handicapped, nor Jillio's son. However, I do know Lotte is handicapped....
It's just a definition. Except... it is highly charged..

Tell me - do you consider blind people handicapped?
Do you consider a person in a wheelchair handicapped?
Do you consider retarted people handicapped?

There you go, cloggy. You want to talk about offensive language and language that should consider the indiviual person....the term ( and I am assuming that this is what you were referring despite the misspelling) "retarted". The term "retarded is considered to be offensive.....how about trying an individual who is developmentally disabled?

And, if you don't see deaf people as "handicapped", why inthe world did you make the statement that they were? Simply to provoke an argument?

 

[jillio]

No the idea is there all along. That's how me and my wife refer to children with CI. Or Lotte.
But your "it" remark did bring it up...
Corrected... no....

About handicapped:
Deaf people ARE handicapped.
Your son is handicapped, my daughter is handicapped. They are deaf.
I'm sure you have a better definition... looking forward to it.

But to you, "handicapped" is a bad word. You don't like that label on him... Why is that. Insecurity?
You said.. "He can do more than a hearing person." and that was for you a reason to reject the label "handicapped". As if performance has anything to do with being handicapped.
Your son is handicapped. He might do well in all kind of area's, he cannot use a cellphone because he's deaf. He cannot understand you when he is in another room than you, because he's deaf. It's a handicap. So what.

Now, does he allow his handicap, his deafness, to rule his world. No. He can do most of the things other people can do. Excellent!. And that what he cannot do he will either find a way around it, or it is considered "not important"

Condecending... not surprising...
New-found... did anything change in my English?
Teacher.... and that is you...
You are really full of yourself.. Actually... that makes sense...

Yes, cloggy, I have noticed changes in your pragmatic use of language, particularly in your most recent posts subsequent to your offensive language being pointed out to you. You are becoming more aware of the fact that there are both denotative and connotative meanings to the use of any one particular term, and that the connotative often carries more impact than the denotative.

 

[Cloggy]

Yes, cloggy, I have noticed changes in your pragmatic use of language, particularly in your most recent posts subsequent to your offensive language being pointed out to you. You are becoming more aware of the fact that there are both denotative and connotative meanings to the use of any one particular term, and that the connotative often carries more impact than the denotative.

Oh my god !!
Can someone help me!!!

Please explain...

denotative and connotative​

 

[jillio]

Oh my god !!
Can someone help me!!!

Please explain...

denotative and connotative​

Oh, my goodness! Does this mean that you are "handicapped" by having limited functioning in yor comprehension because you do not understand the language?

Denotative=dictionary defininition.
Connotative=contextually defined meaning

 

[Cloggy]

Oh, my goodness! Does this mean that you are "handicapped" by having limited functioning in yor comprehension because you do not understand the language?

Denotative=dictionary defininition.
Connotative=contextually defined meaning

Oh Jillio Thank you for this lesson in linguistics...

But "dictionary defininition" and "contextually defined meaning"... I'm sooo lost!!!

Please, teach me more....

BTW... not handicapped. Just like you are not handicapped when you think a hole is drilled into the skull, or when you don't know if there's a bump behind the ear of o child with CI. (Hope you checked the right - as in correct ear...

 

[jillio]

Oh Jillio Thank you for this lesson in linguistics...

But "dictionary defininition" and "contextually defined meaning"... I'm sooo lost!!!

Please, teach me more....

BTW... not handicapped. Just like you are not handicapped when you think a hole is drilled into the skull, or when you don't know if there's a bump behind the ear of o child with CI. (Hope you checked the right - as in correct ear...

So, again you are saying that bone is not removed?

And you are the one that said people are not handicapped by not knowing the language. Obviously, this casued some reduced functioning in your case.

And this was not a lesson in linguistics, cloggy. It was a lesson in vocabulary. Two very different concepts.

It is only possible to teach those whom are teachable, cloggy.

 

[Cloggy]

So, again you are saying that bone is not removed?


And you are the one that said people are not handicapped by not knowing the language. Obviously, this casued some reduced functioning in your case.

And this was not a lesson in linguistics, cloggy. It was a lesson in vocabulary. Two very different concepts.

It is only possible to teach those whom are teachable, cloggy.

Did I say that... Cannot be.. Bone is removed Jillio. But Jillio. The implant is not inside the skull. It's OK to admit you were mistaken... NOt wrong, not lying... just mistaken...
It's OK..

Did it really "casued" that...

Thank you ... don't stop all this teaching....Linguistics, Vocabulary.... Oh my god... potatoes, potatoes...

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Wow, Thank you Liebling, this helps A LOT!!...I saved this in my favorites..

Very welcome...

I was like wow when I saw those link.. It´s very positive tips how to respect each other.

 

[Angel]

Very welcome...

I was like wow when I saw those link.. It´s very positive tips how to respect each other.

Yes but respect goes both ways, so I'm hoping they will do the same likewise

 

[jillio]

Did I say that... Cannot be.. Bone is removed Jillio. But Jillio. The implant is not inside the skull. It's OK to admit you were mistaken... NOt wrong, not lying... just mistaken...
It's OK..

Did it really "casued" that...

Thank you ... don't stop all this teaching....Linguistics, Vocabulary.... Oh my god... potatoes, potatoes...

I never said it was inside the skull cloggy. You are mistaken. I said that bone was removed creating a depression.

 

[Cloggy]

I never said it was inside the skull cloggy. You are mistaken. I said that bone was removed creating a depression.

You are mistaken. You said that thay drill through the bone to insert the electrode.. implying that they drill through the skull..

 

[shel90]

I can understand where Cloggy is coming from I have never really been comfortable with using that term "CI kids"..I try to type Kchildren with CIs" here at my work, we don't label them as "CI kids" just say "this so-so has a CI or This so so has been planted."

Iam sure I have typed "CI kids" a few times here on AD but try not to cuz it makes me feel uncomfortable.

 

[Cloggy]

I can understand where Cloggy is coming from I have never really been comfortable with using that term "CI kids"..I try to type children with CIs" here at my work, we don't label them as "CI kids" just say "this so-so has a CI or This so so has been planted."

Iam sure I have typed "CI kids" a few times here on AD but try not to cuz it makes me feel uncomfortable.

I must have typed it as well, probably quit a few times. It's something that just happens, until you think about it.

 

[Angel]

I can understand where Cloggy is coming from I have never really been comfortable with using that term "CI kids"..I try to type Kchildren with CIs" here at my work, we don't label them as "CI kids" just say "this so-so has a CI or This so so has been planted."

Iam sure I have typed "CI kids" a few times here on AD but try not to cuz it makes me feel uncomfortable.

But what about deaf kids, hard of hearing kids? why only CI kids?

 

[Cloggy]

But what about deaf kids, hard of hearing kids? why only CI kids?

I know, we thought about that as well.
I think it really matters when a single individual is in focus. Or when it comes too close to home.
I guess when I hear "CI-kid", I see the children before me with CI. And looking at them, they are all individuals. They might have CI in common, but they are not CI-kids.

Perhaps... we don't talk about "piercing-kids" or "tattoo-kids" or "glasses-kids".. is it because they are external things. Not born with it.
Deaf, and hearing we are born with. We feel fine defining deaf children and hearing children.... black children, short children.

Could it be it has to do with "born with" or "having"....???

 

[jillio]

You are mistaken. You said that thay drill through the bone to insert the electrode.. implying that they drill through the skull..

There is bone in other areas of the body other than just the skull, cloggy. What I said was bone; what you assumed was skull. I did not imply anything; you simply made an assumption based on your desire to see all of my posts as incorrect.

 

[Angel]

I know, we thought about that as well.
I think it really matters when a single individual is in focus. Or when it comes too close to home.
I guess when I hear "CI-kid", I see the children before me with CI. And looking at them, they are all individuals. They might have CI in common, but they are not CI-kids.

Perhaps... we don't talk about "piercing-kids" or "tattoo-kids" or "glasses-kids".. is it because they are external things. Not born with it.
Deaf, and hearing we are born with. We feel fine defining deaf children and hearing children.... black children, short children.

Could it be it has to do with "born with" or "having"....???

I see.....:quiet:

 

[Cloggy]

There is bone in other areas of the body other than just the skull, cloggy. What I said was bone; what you assumed was skull.

... on the contrairy... I did not assume it was the skull, i assumed you were intentionally suggesting that the drilling is into the skull.
With your focus on correct writing, you could have written "through the bone but not into the skull" but instead you decided to insinuate otherwise...
You like to do that... insinuate one thing, and when needed you have your escape route....

So we agree. There's no drilling through the skull. There's a recess drilled on the outside of the skull, and there's a hole drilled from that recess to the middle ear, which is outside the skull....

I did not imply anything; you simply made an assumption based on your desire to see all of my posts as incorrect.

No desire to see your posts as incorrect. I love to read correct posts from you.. really.!!

Such a negative view you have.... ah, yes.... well, that happens...