Comments on: What’s Going On Here? http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/ Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:32:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: doh http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21638 doh Sat, 07 Oct 2006 17:03:26 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21638 Sarah, I share the same thought with you about the changes of languages. ASL variation is the results of the constant changes in the language of any existing community. The changes take place in all aspects of language that the speakers or signers may not realize. For example, the English spoken in the Shakespeare’s original version is different from the English spoken today. While on the contrary, ASL originally came from French Sign Language (FSL). Here we called American Sign Language. The ASL structure/grammar is similar to FSL. The changes of ASL already have occurred over time since Laurent Clerc introduced it to America. That makes me wonder where the original ASL is. Sarah, I share the same thought with you about the changes of languages. ASL variation is the results of the constant changes in the language of any existing community. The changes take place in all aspects of language that the speakers or signers may not realize. For example, the English spoken in the Shakespeare’s original version is different from the English spoken today. While on the contrary, ASL originally came from French Sign Language (FSL). Here we called American Sign Language. The ASL structure/grammar is similar to FSL. The changes of ASL already have occurred over time since Laurent Clerc introduced it to America. That makes me wonder where the original ASL is.

]]> By: regina http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21529 regina Sat, 07 Oct 2006 03:42:02 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21529 Rock on Malfoy! Rock on Malfoy!

]]> By: A question http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21515 A question Sat, 07 Oct 2006 02:18:18 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21515 I've been disturbed by the use of the phrase "pure/pristine ASL" and it took me a few days to figure out why. People don't talk about "pure English". People use "proper" or "improper" English. This implies rules of the language are either being followed or they are not. Maybe if we discussed ASL in the same manner there would be less confusion and more boundaries and rules for us to compare to "improper ASL." It wouldn't matter who was doing the signing- DoD, DoH, Hearing of hearing. The language would be analyze by the same standard of linguistic rules in any situation: everyday use, music video, or a formal presentation. I’ve been disturbed by the use of the phrase “pure/pristine ASL” and it took me a few days to figure out why. People don’t talk about “pure English”. People use “proper” or “improper” English. This implies rules of the language are either being followed or they are not. Maybe if we discussed ASL in the same manner there would be less confusion and more boundaries and rules for us to compare to “improper ASL.” It wouldn’t matter who was doing the signing- DoD, DoH, Hearing of hearing. The language would be analyze by the same standard of linguistic rules in any situation: everyday use, music video, or a formal presentation.

]]> By: regina http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21458 regina Fri, 06 Oct 2006 21:50:17 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21458 Julie answered your questions. And as a perfect example: Dr. Paul Dudis. He's read not only by Deaf scholars but hearing scholars studying spoken languages as well. Julie answered your questions. And as a perfect example: Dr. Paul Dudis.
He’s read not only by Deaf scholars but hearing scholars studying spoken languages as well.

]]> By: RLM http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21450 RLM Fri, 06 Oct 2006 20:29:01 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21450 Movies have their own cinematic languages without too many clutters on the visual image themselves. That's what the worthy aspect of ASL ought to be all about logical visual meanings without any awkward intrusion(s) like the impractical signs from "elevator" or "woman" in the so-called mangled language application. Several questions are why the European sign languages haven't been largely influenced by any particular written language of their own, except France. How??? Their sign languages are mostly composed of iconic symbols and meanings without being affected by the written or spoken language(s). Of course, Europe is much smaller with countless countries around them as compared to the United States. Movies have their own cinematic languages without too many clutters on the visual image themselves.

That’s what the worthy aspect of ASL ought to be all about logical visual meanings without any awkward intrusion(s) like the impractical signs from “elevator” or “woman” in the so-called mangled language application.

Several questions are why the European sign languages haven’t been largely influenced by any particular written language of their own, except France. How??? Their sign languages are mostly composed of iconic symbols and meanings without being affected by the written or spoken language(s).

Of course, Europe is much smaller with countless countries around them as compared to the United States.

]]> By: Bob A http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21432 Bob A Fri, 06 Oct 2006 17:53:54 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21432 Boy, reading this stirred up many things within about ASL, whether its pure or what? And, if it's a conglomerate of other languages due to globalization, blah, blah, blah. First off, spoken language and sign language do NOT mix. We have a conglomerate of foreign and national sign vocabulary, and that’s fine because they fit. The British sign for elevator (person standing on platform -B palm up, moving up and down twice for noun, once up/down for verb) can fit easily here much better than the ‘E’ sign for elevator based on the spoken English word, for example. Now, the word 'pure' doesn't make sense. The fitting word would be 'proper'. We have been preached from the first day of class to even today, to speak and write proper English. Now, for anyone signing proper ASL would be the person who, obviously, wasn't having his or her mind running in subtle English mode while signing. You can tell if the person has the mind leaning way too much toward the English side while signing fluently--but spiked or laced with the English grammar. Initialized signs oftentimes unconsciously policed our mind along the English track. Take 'elevator', for example. It unconsciously keep you thinking E-L-E-V-A-T-O-R rather than the BSL's eleavtor--seeing a person rising up and down on a platform, something that's hard wired to ASL's aesthetic function. Those who sign with very little initialized sign are living the proper ASL grammar, my opinion. And, when you consider how often English sneaked into the ASL grammar versus ASL sneaking into the English grammar, which of the two is the snuck champ? English. So, naturally the resistance rose within myself, being that I love English and its heritage, England, etc etc and etc; I also have the equal but separate love for ASL. I do not want to see the two mixed because they are two different things--aural and visual. The resistances of those who appreciate 'pure' ASL really are trying to say 'proper' ASL inasmuch as we have been preached to write proper English all our lives. If we readily accept the criticism of our English, why can't we also readily accept the criticism of our ASL? And last, English once was a quagmire of varying languages that finally became one and proper thing; and that created fine repercussions of humor, slang, and what not because English became properly taught everywhere. ASL has not yet been properly taught so we are still a bag of trail mix. It's time to treat ASL properly. Boy, reading this stirred up many things within about ASL, whether its pure or what? And, if it’s a conglomerate of other languages due to globalization, blah, blah, blah. First off, spoken language and sign language do NOT mix. We have a conglomerate of foreign and national sign vocabulary, and that’s fine because they fit. The British sign for elevator (person standing on platform -B palm up, moving up and down twice for noun, once up/down for verb) can fit easily here much better than the ‘E’ sign for elevator based on the spoken English word, for example. Now, the word ‘pure’ doesn’t make sense. The fitting word would be ‘proper’. We have been preached from the first day of class to even today, to speak and write proper English. Now, for anyone signing proper ASL would be the person who, obviously, wasn’t having his or her mind running in subtle English mode while signing. You can tell if the person has the mind leaning way too much toward the English side while signing fluently–but spiked or laced with the English grammar. Initialized signs oftentimes unconsciously policed our mind along the English track. Take ‘elevator’, for example. It unconsciously keep you thinking E-L-E-V-A-T-O-R rather than the BSL’s eleavtor–seeing a person rising up and down on a platform, something that’s hard wired to ASL’s aesthetic function. Those who sign with very little initialized sign are living the proper ASL grammar, my opinion. And, when you consider how often English sneaked into the ASL grammar versus ASL sneaking into the English grammar, which of the two is the snuck champ? English. So, naturally the resistance rose within myself, being that I love English and its heritage, England, etc etc and etc; I also have the equal but separate love for ASL. I do not want to see the two mixed because they are two different things–aural and visual. The resistances of those who appreciate ‘pure’ ASL really are trying to say ‘proper’ ASL inasmuch as we have been preached to write proper English all our lives. If we readily accept the criticism of our English, why can’t we also readily accept the criticism of our ASL? And last, English once was a quagmire of varying languages that finally became one and proper thing; and that created fine repercussions of humor, slang, and what not because English became properly taught everywhere. ASL has not yet been properly taught so we are still a bag of trail mix. It’s time to treat ASL properly.

]]> By: Carl Schroeder http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21306 Carl Schroeder Fri, 06 Oct 2006 01:40:14 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21306 Pure gold is soft. So is ASL. No there is no such pure language, be it ASL or English or Dutch. I don't even know if Greek and Latin were at all pure. Any language is in itself exclusive. It only expands when it has a clash with another language. Language is changing and so do we change. Mahalo! Pure gold is soft. So is ASL. No there is no such pure language, be it ASL or English or Dutch. I don’t even know if Greek and Latin were at all pure. Any language is in itself exclusive. It only expands when it has a clash with another language. Language is changing and so do we change. Mahalo!

]]> By: doh http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21286 doh Thu, 05 Oct 2006 23:37:21 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21286 Oh Thanks for clarifying it for Julie. I will do my research. Thanks. Oh Thanks for clarifying it for Julie. I will do my research. Thanks.

]]> By: julie hochgesang http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21269 julie hochgesang Thu, 05 Oct 2006 22:09:22 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21269 It certainly seems so. A study of language attitudes, not just at Gallaudet or in the immediate surrounding areas, but in the entire United States would benefit us greatly. How to go about undertaking such a study seems quite difficult in terms of logistics. But it's an important question. I keep thinking about Deaf people who aren't in the cities or haven't attended colleges. What do they think? I'm sure the answers would be entirely different. But then again, that's just my guess. It certainly seems so. A study of language attitudes, not just at Gallaudet or in the immediate surrounding areas, but in the entire United States would benefit us greatly. How to go about undertaking such a study seems quite difficult in terms of logistics. But it’s an important question. I keep thinking about Deaf people who aren’t in the cities or haven’t attended colleges. What do they think? I’m sure the answers would be entirely different. But then again, that’s just my guess.

]]> By: Someone from the back http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21244 Someone from the back Thu, 05 Oct 2006 20:17:22 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/julie-hochgesang/2006-10-02/whats-going-on-here/#comment-21244 You're welcome. And thank you for bringing up a sensitive topic in this accessible forum! Recalling "Language attitudes" by Sarah Burns, Patrick Matthews and Evelyn Nolan-Conroy in _The Sociolinguistics of Sign Languages_ ed. Ceil Lucas, I can't help but think that linguists should re-evaluate the attitudes towards ASL. In the past, it used to be that signed English was more favored than ASL by deaf people, when ASL had not yet claimed its heralded fame, because signed English was supposedly a hallmark of higher education, cognition and intelligence. Now it seems that the tables are turning. What do you think? You’re welcome. And thank you for bringing up a sensitive topic in this accessible forum!

Recalling “Language attitudes” by Sarah Burns, Patrick Matthews and Evelyn Nolan-Conroy in _The Sociolinguistics of Sign Languages_ ed. Ceil Lucas, I can’t help but think that linguists should re-evaluate the attitudes towards ASL. In the past, it used to be that signed English was more favored than ASL by deaf people, when ASL had not yet claimed its heralded fame, because signed English was supposedly a hallmark of higher education, cognition and intelligence.

Now it seems that the tables are turning. What do you think?

]]>