Why my wife and I want our children to hear and speak a little.

Cloggy said:
Dan,

Any positive feedback to this thread?
I will not dispute that being able to use your mouth to talk and understand other people who do that is a good thing. I never said it was. I will never say it is. Kim and I love surprising people who see us signing by speaking orally (sometimes they give us the strangest faces...).

I am only saying that focusing on oral speech over signing has caused a number of identity and educational problems for deaf people in the past and continues to do so.
 
deaflinuxgeek said:
Neither of us are stepping out of the picture whether you like it or not big guy. And where did you get that clinche I never heard of that one and really have you ever heard the phrase "Two heads are better than one" apparently not. Can we leave clinches out uh? really you think one of us backs out which will never happen.. enjoy us cuz neither of us are leaving!

Deaflinuxgeek

Hey, it was worth a try... :rofl:

Not on your life am I giving up my clinches! Too darned useful ;)

As for your clinche, it is a good one but not when one is parroting the other...

FYI - The clinche that I posted is really a reference toward marriage (hint!!!) but can be used in other contexts. Bottomline...In this world, no two people especially married ones ever agree on everything. If they were, something isn't right... you will learn this soon enough if you don't get it now, most assurely you will later on...
 
Fragmenter said:
that is TOTAL :bsflag:

You really don't have a clue, don't you? It's the other way around, buddy. And if you can't take my word for it, then ignorance is indeed bliss.

Had the Alexandria Graham Bell's wife fluent in ASL?
 
Welcome back, Mookie!

Here's a nugget for you: Imagine Gallaudet University's founders had hearing aids or CI technology back then -- do you think they would still have stuck to ASL only?
 
Fragmenter said:
Welcome back, Mookie!

Here's a nugget for you: Imagine Gallaudet University's founders had hearing aids or CI technology back then -- do you think they would still have stuck to ASL only?

Nope, they would educate their students to speak instead of using their hands. I bet the students would require the professors to hand out the copies of the outlines in order to avoid any misunderstanding...

Methinks that it would be better for them to attend to other universities to have better GPA. What in the world would they enroll at the oralism university for?
 
Interesting.

Methinks it would have been Vanderbilt University instead of Gallaudet University ;)
 
Fragmenter said:
Welcome back, Mookie!

Here's a nugget for you: Imagine Gallaudet University's founders had hearing aids or CI technology back then -- do you think they would still have stuck to ASL only?
I just keep wondering what you have against signing. If you want people to have a full "communications toolbox", signing is a good tool that would be better if more people had that tool.
 
gnulinuxman said:
I just keep wondering what you have against signing. If you want people to have a full "communications toolbox", signing is a good tool that would be better if more people had that tool.

Let's read a novel via braille instead of using our eyes!

Let's run a mile on crutches instead of on our legs!

You've officially gotten on my last nerve. Do you not remember I use sign language full-time? For 25 years and counting? Shut up.
 
gnulinuxman said:
I just keep wondering what you have against signing. If you want people to have a full "communications toolbox", signing is a good tool that would be better if more people had that tool.

My brother in law and I came to a conclusion that sign language can be used as an espionage tool or in situations that you cannot communicate through sounds.

These aforementioned situations doesn't occur in everyone's lives daily, do they? I mean, look at underwater diving, the hearing people has already come up with effective signs... they don't need to understand american sign language to communicate underwater.

What kind of good use would the world acquire from gaining knowledge of sign language? I'm genuinely interested in what you think.
 
Fragmenter said:
sign language can be used as an espionage tool.

:topic: I make myself laugh. When I reviewed my post, I pictured Tom Cruise signing to another character during an intense action scene in Mission: Impossible 4.
 
Fragmenter said:
:topic: I make myself laugh. When I reviewed my post, I pictured Tom Cruise signing to another character during an intense action scene in Mission: Impossible 4.

:rofl:


even in military they use them but they are not trained to know ASL at all...
 
deafdyke said:
NOBODY HERE is against Signing......why are you anti-speech?
I'm not anti-speech! I am a HEARING person, and I use it and rely on it every day.

I am pro-signing, though. But you probably already knew that.
 
Fragmenter said:
My brother in law and I came to a conclusion that sign language can be used as an espionage tool or in situations that you cannot communicate through sounds.

These aforementioned situations doesn't occur in everyone's lives daily, do they? I mean, look at underwater diving, the hearing people has already come up with effective signs... they don't need to understand american sign language to communicate underwater.

What kind of good use would the world acquire from gaining knowledge of sign language? I'm genuinely interested in what you think.
http://www.alldeaf.com/showpost.php?p=527926&postcount=36

Seriously, I'm tired of repeating myself.
 
Fragmenter said:
You've officially gotten on my last nerve. Do you not remember I use sign language full-time? For 25 years and counting? Shut up.
OK, if you use sign language full-time, why are you praising oralism when you have not experienced it?
 
gnulinuxman said:
OK, if you use sign language full-time, why are you praising oralism when you have not experienced it?

He's not going to become oralist so no need for him to experience and he already saw what his wife can do. And he just want his kids mainstreamed.

He's not alone, there are many of us that are supporter of Oral Approaches and Sign Approaches. now there are 3 type of Oral Approaches so keep in mind we do not favor the Pure Oral method (the one that is forced and the one who get their hands beaten with wooden stick or ruler, you see, that is old news. Those culturally deaf folks, you included, should put this fear behind because this dangerous practice is not still pursed. )

now 3 approaches are;
Auditory-Oral (Multi-sensory) – Requires children to use their residual hearing in combination with speechreading, kinesthetics or tactile cues, such as placing the child’s hand upon the teacher’s throat. This is the most common approach used in self-contained Oral classrooms.

Auditory-Verbal – Emphasizes the use of residual hearing as the primary modality for language learning; may deprive child of speechreading cues by covering mouth; seeks to develop an “attitude of listening” by integrating child into regular schools.

Cued Speech – Uses speech and auditory cues in combination with phonemically-based handshapes that distinguish speech sounds that look alike on the lips.

Signs Approaches are;
Total Communication (TC) – Advocates the use of all communication modalities appropriate for a given child, including speech, signs, listening, fingerspelling, and speechreading. The most common implementation of TC is the simultaneous use of speech and English-based sign.

Bilingual/Bicultural (Bi/Bi) – Relies upon American Sign Language, a naturally-evolved and complete manual language used by culturally Deaf people in the United States . English is often taught secondarily through reading and writing. ASL is typically presented without voice because spoken English does not correlate word-for-word with ASL.


So in the end, he has the right to choose communication method for his childrens! not you! so how about backing off on him? let him be.
 
gnulinuxman said:
OK, if you use sign language full-time, why are you praising oralism when you have not experienced it?

Nobody will go through the hassle of learning sign language when they've gotten around these situations you mentioned already.

You forget I live with a wife who was purely an oral deaf person for her first 17 years on Earth. She's now very flexible in both worlds. I've seen it all already.

I've seen how far the deaf CAN go if only they could communicate with the hearing. I'm a believer now that I've been on my own in the world for almost 10 years. There has been too manty opportunies missed in my case... for example, like I wanted to talk to my neighbor right away about something that was time sensitive were lost.
 
Boult said:
So in the end, he has the right to choose communication method for his childrens! not you! so how about backing off on him? let him be.

Thanks man. :cheers:
 
Back
Top