Once in a while, someone come along and make all sort of claims to put down the people who capitalize the letter D in the word, 'Deaf'. On an unnamed forum owned by a deaf person, the owner decided to start a discussion on if ASL (American Sign Language) is a language or not. I'm going to post a few comments made from the forum. I'm going to share some of my opinions on the subject as a response rather than on the forum.
I encourage the members from the forum to participate in this discussion instead of the forum. The forum lack diversity when it comes to opinions, if everybody shared the same opinion, it would be quite a boring world to live in. So I'm hoping to read a lot of interesting opinions even if I disagree with some of them. Learning from each other and working together is how we make progress.
Person No. 1,
language
c.1290, from O.Fr. langage (12c.), from V.L. *linguaticum, from L. lingua "tongue," also "speech, language" (see lingual).
Person No. 1 posted the definition from an unnamed source. Basically, s/he is claiming that ASL isn't a true language. It would be unfair to withdraw some information though I'm going to keep them as discreet without disclosing any real personal details. Just the facts. This particular person isn't fluent in ASL. Amazingly enough, this person is teaching his/her child to sign and it's not even deaf. This person holds a strong opinion that ASL is not a language, instead he see it as a tool.
Sound familiar to you, doesn't it?
Amy Cohen Efron, a well-known vlogger/blogger once covered this subject regarding the public opinions of teaching sign language to a hearing baby and a deaf baby. It's titled, 'The Greatest Irony', one of the best vlogs with a powerful message. The reason why I'm making a reference to Amy's vlog is to prove the existence of the irony as brought up in her vlog. The irony is, No.1 Person refuse to acknowledge ASL as a true language yet s/he is teaching his/her child who is hearing to sign.
Person No. 1,As you can see, s/he is putting down the language of the deaf in a disdaining manner. How do one come to be so self-righteous about what define a language? Someone who became deaf later in life and face difficulties in learning the language that the bitterness toward the deaf community builds up over the years? Or is that person just plainly full of hot air?
A language is, by definition, SPOKEN. Duh.
Hot air is more likely it. Though, I don't mean any offense to the owner but it's certainly the impression I get from him/her. I can't help it if my opinion is found to be offensive but that's the way I feel when I read these kinds of comments. I was born deaf and I am fluent in both ASL and English. How can ASL be easily dismissed as a language? Especially when my friends and I grew up with ASL. If it weren’t for both ASL and English, I wouldn't be where I am today. Would I have made it to where I am today if I wasn't fluent in both?
Highly unlikely.
Ignorance can hurt and it does hurt.
Person No. 2,
I guess it is safe to say that ASL is a visual language.
Person No. 2 is taking the safe side and calling it a visual language. ASL is a visual language, not a spoken language. So yes, the person got it right.
Person No. 1,
"Visual" and "Language" are contradictory terms - hence this topic.
ASL is beautiful to watch, and useful for those who can't or won't learn true languages, but is only a useful tool, not a language.
S/he just did it again; he put down the language in a disdaining manner. Useful tool? It's like having a Frenchman saying English is a useful tool. The truth is, English and ASL are two different languages, whether you like it or not.
Honestly, do we really need people who aren't anywhere near fluency in a particular language to tell us that it isn't a language?
Now, I have to warn all of you. Please refrain from trying to guess the name of the forum or the people responsible for making these comments. The two authors responsible for the excerpts, if you wish to come forward and share your opinions on the subject, feel free. The reason why I took this public is because I feel that the forum isn't quite the place to discuss the subject because the forum is lacking in members fluent in ASL. So, take this as a way of seeing how the others feel about ASL rather than limiting the discussion to the forum where a large number of members look down on ASL as a language.
The thing is, a language does not have to be speech-based. It's a fact established by a large number of linguists. It can be argued to be just an opinion, but it is an established fact no matter how you try to put it.
In fact, the government of Ontario in Canada just passed a bill which would recongize ASL as an official language in the province of Ontario.
RECOGNITION OF SIGN LANGUAGE
AS AN OFFICIAL LANGUAGE ACT, 2007 /
LOI DE 2007 RECONNAISSANT
LA LANGUE DES SIGNES
COMME LANGUE OFFICIELLE
Mr. Parsons moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 213, An Act to recognize sign language as an official language in Ontario / Projet de loi 213, Loi visant à reconnaître la langue des signes comme langue officielle e n Ontario.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
Would the member like to make a short statement?
Mr. Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward–Hastings): Many of our fellow citizens who are deaf, deafened or hard of hearing at times experience difficulty accessing public services. This bill, if passed, would recognize sign language as an official language in Ontario in the courts, in education and in the Legislative Assembly.
This is quite a big moment for the deaf communities all across Ontario because this means we will be fully entitled to ASL interpreters in a courtroom, doctor's office, public schools and more. In Canada, we have two official languages, English and French.
In my honest opinion, ASL is a true language.
Now, feel free to express your opinions on the subject. Please keep it on topic. Remember, don't get personal with each other here. Opinions is just that, opinions.
UPDATE: Ben Vess posted a blog entry as a response to this blog entry. It's an excellent read. Click here to read it. It's titled, 'ASL is a Language: An Essay'.
UPDATE II: The blogger from MM's Blogalog wrote a lengthy response and posted it on his blog. Click here to read it. It's titled 'Sign Under Threat?'.
UPDATE III: Ben Vess recently posted an e-mail letter from a linguist he wrote to. Dr. Noam Chomsky, a linguist has confirmed the fact that ASL is a language along with several other sign languages around the world. Click here to read more.
4/23/2007 5:47 PM
Great post as usual, Banjo! It never seizes to amaze me how completely uneducated some people are. Rather than debating this issue, I would like to quote one of my favorite linguists, David Crystal:
"...The fact of the matter is that every culture which has been investigated, no matter how 'primitive' it may have been in cultural terms, turns out to have fully developed language, with a complexity comparable to those of the so-called 'civilized' nations. Anthropologically speaking, the human race can be said to have evolved from primitive to civilized states, but there is no sign of language having gone through the same kind of evolution. There are no 'bronze age' or 'stone age' languages, nor have any language types been discovered which correlate with recognized anthropological groups (pastoral, nomadic, etc.). All languages have complex grammar: there may be relative simplicity in one respect (e.g. no word-endings), but there seems always to be relative complexity in another (e.g. word-position)."
From The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, 2nd edition
While this section doesn't specifically raise the issue of signed languages, I will ask this: If no human population has ever been found who speaks a "primitive language", then why would signing populations be any different?
4/23/2007 6:25 PM
hey there
i'd like to see that forum..
maybe i should go read some works of Stokoe and see how he shaped his arguments for ASL
Der Sankt
4/23/2007 7:12 PM
Well I dunno. It's the considered opinion of the entire academic linguistic community that ASL is a bona fide language. That's been generally accepted for well over 30 years.
If these yahoos are going to go with what they "think" and "feel" and "gosh, language is, like, you know, SPOKEN," I'm not sure what can be done with such a flagrant display of stupidity.
I'm assuming the standard tactic of disgorging a mile long list of academic and book references wouldn't quite fly here?
[As a related note, I was just looking at the book A Journey into the Deaf-World and the third comment caught my eye.
If this is typical of the sort of person teaching our deaf children, God help us all.]
4/23/2007 7:41 PM
Hey Banjo,
I get the same sorts of responses. I'm an interpreting student and people are always telling me "oh that's great you want to help deaf people." I try to explain that no, it actually is a REAL LANGUAGE with a lot of hard work - a real skill, not a charity. I went to this interpreter workshop about ASL Prosody, and was telling a friend of mine about it. She said "Oh, wow, that's almost like learning a language." I said..."Uh...it IS a language."
NO RESPECT. Whatever, we know. I'm sorry, but any language that can change the meaning by biting your lip, or shifting your eyebrows, or incorporates negation INTO a word, is a very complex freakin' language. You guys shouldn't have had to fight so long for it. Those hearing people are very ignorant.
4/23/2007 7:46 PM
Okay, wait, I'm sorry. This is Anonymous from the post above, anyway another story popped into my mind. When I was in high school we had to do a community service project, and one girl in my class decided she was going to read books to deaf children. I told her that she couldn't possibly learn enough ASL to do that in a couple of months, but she was so confident she could. This is the sort of attitude we face - from teachers, from laypeople, from some prospective interpreters! I know I'm not deaf, and probably am arrogant to lump myself into the "we," sorry if it offends anyone.
I met this woman at a deaf event, and she couldn't sign her way out of a paper bag, but said she worked as an interpreter. I said "oh wow, well you must know everything then!" and she said "No, it's not very important, it's just a fifth grade resource room." My eyebrows shot up into my hairline. There is very little respect for ASL as a language, and Deaf people as a cultural minority. Spread the word!
-- K.R.
4/23/2007 7:47 PM
Hey Banjo,
I sure would like to get into that forum but second thought tells me that I could be wasting a lot of energy just focusing on one person's opinion.
I grew up orally and have the ability to speak verbally at the same speed as a hearing person and can fool the hearing world that I am a hearing person. The reason why I am saying this is that before I learned ASL, I did not think ASL was a bona fide language and thought that was just a coded type of communication which was why I thought that deaf could not be intellectual as I was.
This is how I understood why hearing people could not be comprehended that the deaf people are intelligent because of their using sign language as a communicative method.
After I was able to achieve the level of communication skills using ASL, I was able to "see" how the language(ASL) was flowing between two deaf people.
This is something that hearing people are not able to "see" the language flow and be comprehensible to accept ASL as a bona fide language.
When I dream at night, I could not tell if I was using ASL or verbally speaking during sleeping, but knew that it was the same intellectual speed/amount of data flow.
Banjo, me thinking that deaf could not be as intellectual as I was,.... I was damned that there were zillions of Deaf people far more intelligent than myself.
Maybe me was nitwit, but now understood!.....And a strong ASL(Bilingual) advocator for deaf children.
John F. Egbert
4/23/2007 9:08 PM
Well, if ASL is NOT a language, there have been alot of fake credits given to plenty of college graduates these days.
I think your friend is using the "shock jock" type of journalism and striving to save a dying forum by posting outlandish statements.
Lantana
Lantana's Latitude
4/24/2007 4:01 AM
Stick to the subject, people.
I just had to delete a personal attack toward a commenter here and it was off the topic too as well.
An act of provocation toward anybody here will not be tolerated.
4/24/2007 11:22 AM
Probably a good example that United Kingdom and US/CAN speak pretty same language however, ASL (US/CAN) and BSL (UK) are way different. Obviously, it's different language on own. I thought that's funny I mention long time ago on compare languag.
4/24/2007 11:40 AM
Banjo,
Aww, thank you for the link. Last night I sent an email to Noam Chomsky and posted the emails on my blog this morning.
I think I nailed it with this one, yes?
Der Sankt
4/24/2007 12:58 PM
You definitely nailed it. :-)
4/24/2007 6:56 PM
I've had to delete two comments. The problem here is, you were already warned.
To quote myself...
"Now, I have to warn all of you. Please refrain from trying to guess the name of the forum or the people responsible for making these comments. The two authors responsible for the excerpts, if you wish to come forward and share your opinions on the subject, feel free."
Post the names and the link, and I will delete it again, no matter how many times you try to. It'll get deleted. It serves no purpose to name names at the moment.
4/24/2007 9:19 PM
That has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard. The human brain GENERATES language. ASL can quite literally be nothing ELSE but a fully formed language. The human mind demands it. Saying that ASL isn't a language is like saying that Deaf people aren't fully human or that there is a subgroup of humans someplace that don't respire oxygen or that bends their legs forward at the knee.
The human mind, if given a social milieu, will create language. Period.