How a Dinosaur Comic Taught Me Something About ASL
By Julie Hochgesang on Tue 10 Jul 2007 |
Email This Post
Today I got an email from the sign language linguistics email list that announced a new dinosaur comic about sign language.
Spoiler alert! Look at the comic now if you want to be surprised before reading on. Not that there’s much of a plot…
So first off, I’m not really sure how I feel about dinosaur comics. They’re dead, extinct, gone. Is it fair to make fun of them when they can’t defend themselves? I’m reminded of the caveman ads for Geico.
In all seriosity, this comic shows a new direction in the awareness of sign language and perhaps shows that there’s a standard on the rise. With ASL classes becoming increasingly popular at colleges/universities and Baby ASL spreading with each play date and Fockers movies, the old myths about sign language are thankfully disappearing (albeit slowly). Thoughts like “signs are like pictures”, “sign language has no grammar”, and so on are being challenged by contemporary understanding of ASL and sign languages in general. (Although the dinosaur in the comic does say “many of the signs are really evocative”…)
The dinosaur in the comic states that nouns can be “placed” in space and then adjectives that modify them can be signed in the space the noun was placed. For example, if I signed BOY on the right and GIRL on the left. I could, according to the dinosaur, then sign SILLY on the right to describe the boy and FUNNY on the left to describe the girl.
This gives me pause. Do I actually do that? Hmm, I don’t think so. Do people I know do that? Hmm, I don’t think so. (I have to point immediately after signing the adjective to the particular space I’m referring to.) But I haven’t attended any ASL classes and I don’t know what’s being taught in those. From skimming the lesson books, I know that some of the lessons in ASL classes have become increasingly stylized. For example, instead of signing JEWELRY we are supposed to say NECKLACE, EARRINGS, BRACELETS, ET CETERA. Such “group” terms in English (e.g., furniture, amenities, vegetables, fruit) aren’t supposed to have their own signs in ASL. I don’t know anyone who agrees with that anymore (except perhaps the much older generation).
Could it be that “Standard ASL” is on the rise? With any language standard, silly stylized rules become easily etched in stone. Just take the split infinitive rule in which your fifth-grade teacher told you not to split the English infinitive. For example, you couldn’t say “to boldly go” because “to go” is an infinitive which should not be split (Thank goodness the Star Trek writers didn’t listen to their fifth grade English teachers). This contrived rule came about because Latin did not split its infinitives. Back then, Latin was considered a superior language and was among the first to have its grammar recorded. When English became more common for writing, people attempted to write grammars for English and they used Latin grammar books as their guide. And, actually, Latin couldn’t split the infinitive because the infinitive form was just one word while in English it is two. In any case, when things get written down, and whether they’re right or wrong, they have a pesky habit of sticking around and becoming the authoritative voice later in a classroom.
Is the rule that the dinosaur spouts to his dinosaur friend actually something we use? Or is it a fossilized rule being perpetuated by ASL classes and that students who take those classes are acquiring a more “standardized” version of ASL than what’s actually being used? (And no I’m not forgetting that varieties of ASL depend on different regions, gender, ages, levels of education, types of careers, and so on).
This happens with every language. The more books printed on and classes taught on languages, the more that the formal variety deviates from actual, everyday language use. This dinosaur comic may be a positive sign, proof that ASL is becoming standardized. But it’s also a sign that hearing people are learning a version of ASL that we don’t use.
You may be asking why all the fuss? Well, this topic has been discussed at considerable length for quite awhile now especially with the recent protests at Gallaudet bringing up issues about ASL at Gallaudet. Some people want ASL classes for incoming freshmen, and these classes aren’t the type of classes that warrant numbers (e.g., ASL 1, ASL 2, etc.). But the kind of ASL classes they’re talking about is teaching a more formal register that students can use for homework (e.g., a video essay on Dickens or an ASL summary about the fetal pig dissected in class). One of the things that keeps coming up, “but there’s no ’standard’ ASL!” Hmm, maybe not?
All this from a dinosaur comic!
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
53 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I’d be freaked if I were corrected by a snot-nosed high school ASL student on my ASL because it is not standardized! Yikes. Besides, I have always wondered what exactly is “academic ASL.” Anybody care to enlighten me? Mucho gracias in advance!
Funny how the strangest things can inspire a good riff. Good one, Julie.
In Dr. Gallaudet’s article, “Is the Sign Language Used to Excess in Teaching Deaf-Mutes?,” the founder of higher education of the deaf in America states: “…in the abuse of signs, and by this is meant their excessive use, may be found one of the gravest defects under which our national system of teaching the deaf is laboring…” Dr. Gallaudet concludes: “If the aphorism of Holy Writ, ‘By their fruits ye shall know them,’ may be properly applied to schools for the deaf and dumb; and if the main objective of such schools be to place their pupils in intelligent and free communication with hearing and speaking persons through the medium of written language, then it must be admitted that, with the great mass of so-called educated deaf-mutes, the great end of their school training is far from being attained.” (E. M. Gallaudet, “Is the Sign Language Used to Excess in Teaching Deaf-Mutes?,” American Annals of the Deaf, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1871, pp. 26-29.)
Bert:
I fail to see the correlation between Julie’s blog and your article excerpt from EMG. What is the point you are trying to make here?
That is the point, courtesy of Dr. E. M. Gallaudet, who had reservations about the proper place of sign language in a higher education setting and about the reversal tendencies in the “natural order” of signs. Speaking as the leader of an academic institution, Dr. Gallaudet stated: “In coming to our institutions the learning of the sign language is not their most important task.” (E. M. Gallaudet, “The American System of Deaf-Mute Instruction–Its Incidental Defects and Their Remedies,” American Annals of the Deaf, Volume 3, p. 155.
It is ambitious to quote a 34-year-old kid from 130 years ago to support your contention that a cartoon dinosaur is wrong to promote ASL.
We could also quote Dr. Gallaudet’s reservations in his “Remarks on the Combined System” that he delivered during the International Convention at Milan in 1880. He defined the system as “one which makes use of the language of natural signs to a limited degree” while also warning of “its excessive and injurious use.” (E. M. Gallaudet, “Remarks on the Combined System,” American Annals of the Deaf, Vol. 26, No. 1, 1881, pp. 56-59.
Yes, we could quote that as well. You’re really bolstering your argument here, the dinosaur has nary a fighting chance (what with the meteor showers that killed him and all).
In all seriousness, let us be reminded that deaf education, as well as the broader field of education, has undergone drastic changes since 1881 or 1871, whichever vintage year you prefer this morning. We need to remember he is a period person, not someone who walked around yesterday… he helped about a nascent specialty of education and I’m sure he wouldn’t claim to be a deaf pedagogy know-it-all today, what with generations of Gallaudet graduates and advances in research on linguistic acquisition. Since his time: Britain has descended from superpower status; the Polio vaccine was discovered; TV was invented; JFK was born, became president, and went to ashes; Man rocketed to the moon; the Internet came into existence; Shaposka went to Gallaudet; etc etc. No man speaks the unchanging gospel, not him nor me nor you.
By the way, the Pirates aren’t doing so hot. Let me alert you to the origins of the sport… Abner Doubleday invented the game on a cow pasture. He never dreamt the sport would grow into today’s proportions. Why, in 1876 it took nine balls (no jokes please) before a batter could walk to first base. Give me time enough and I’ll find you a paper on an old-timer who bemoans the state of the game today. But… it’s a brave new world, best enjoyed by those who realize day in and day out that it isn’t 1871.
To keep the focus on the subject, despite your claim of “advances in research,” deaf students and their teachers still slip unconsciously into the omissions and reversals of the “natural order” of ASL in 2007. Dr. E. M. Gallaudet, speaking in reference to the academic mission of the National Deaf-Mute College, stated: “…until the deaf-mute can think freely in conventional language and express his thoughts correctly and fluently in the same, every instance of the use, by him or to him, of the language of signs in its natural order, impedes his progress toward the great end and object of his education.” (E. M. Gallaudet, “Is the Sign Language Used to Excess in Teaching Deaf-Mutes?,” American Annals of the Deaf, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1871, p. 30.
Bert, I fail to understand the thrust of your points here. You hold up Gallaudet’s words for your own, without a strong explanation. Might as well pull out the Ubermensch from Nietzsche, since the concept is from the same period.
At least, the Ubermensch concept is more positive than the subtly destructive point you’re advancing. Sure, sign language usage at Gallaudet could be better, as I’ve seen myself, but anybody who’s experienced deaf education in other countries can tell you that despite all of our complaints about Gallaudet and other deaf schools in the USA, they work pretty damn well compared to not having a deaf school at all.
And besides, what is the “…great end and object of his education?” You seem to be implicitly saying that the great end of education is English language acquisition?
Yes, Dr. Gallaudet, the academic leader, was referring to English, the coin of the realm, when he clearly stated: “In coming to our institutions the learning of the sign language is not their most important task.” (American Annals, vol. 3, p. 155.) It explains why, in Dr. Gallaudet’s “Remarks on the Combined System,” he warned against the “excessive and injurious use” of ASL at Milan in 1880. (American Annals, vol. 26, p. 59.)
Bert,
I grew up with “g l”. I can safely say that he’s guilty of the “excessive and injurious use” of ASL. After all, it’s his first language. I’m curious as to how your worldview incorporates this tidbit.
Bert,
I grew up with “g l”. I can safely say that he’s guilty of “excessive and injurious use” of ASL. After all, it’s his first language. I’m curious as to how your worldview incorporates this tidbit.
Review the statement of the founder of higher education of the deaf in the United States: “In coming to our institutions the learning of the sign language is not their most important task.” Still curious?
(E. M. Gallaudet, “The American System of Deaf-Mute Instruction–Its Incidental Defects and Their Remedies,” American Annals of the Deaf, Volume 3, p. 155.
I don’t think learning sign language was among Glenn’s (g l) highest priorities when he first enrolled at the “institutions”.
I think you completely missed the point of my question. ASL obviously didn’t have an injurious effect on his writing. In fact, he clearly writes better than you do. You shouldn’t take offense. He writes better than most hearing people as well. How do you assimilate that into your seemingly unyielding philosophy?
Dr. Gallaudet was referring to the prelingually deaf population and to the “natural order of thought” in sign language, in which modifiers are usually placed after nouns and negatives are placed after positive statements, thus his reference to its “excessive and injurious use,” and these reversal tendencies were his primary objection to the use of the natural language of signs. Dr. Gallaudet was a seasoned educator and his reservations about the use of sign language in an institution of higher education were constantly well founded. By the way, what does this subject have to do with your friend?
Is there an echo in here? For some reason, I keep seem to be reading the same old passage over and over again in reference to Dr. Gallaudet.
Weird.
There is no echo. There are five different passages by my count and I hope you learn something because your labeling them as “weird” is indicative of a closed mind.
Bert, you’re the dictionary definition of an open mind.
Bert–Although EMG stood up for sign language at that infamous conference in Milan (which I am grateful for), your choice of his quote shows two things: 1) EMG was mistaken about the “proper place of sign language in higher education setting”, and 2) you need to update your thinking.
Using EMG’s quote classifies you as an old man (I’m guessing 70s or so) and not only that, it classifies you as someone who doesn’t want to use ASL in classroom, which is very unfortunate.
ASL does belong in classrooms. ASL does belong in business meetings. ASL does belong in homes. ASL does belong in offices. ASL belongs anywhere you want to be.
Your continued denigration of ASL does not make you a friend of Deaf culture. Shame on you.
You’re right. I am not a friend of ASL and Deaf Culture. What do you have to say about your denigration of English in the classroom, in the workplace, in the world at large, and in your sphere of influence? Dr. Gallaudet’s defense of “natural signs” at Milan was predicated on their use “to a limited degree.” (E. M. Gallaudet, “Remarks on the Combined System,” American Annals, Vol, 26, No. 1, p. 56.) By the way, I believe Dr. Gallaudet, who was a seasoned educator, was correct and right on target.
Bwahaha.
Bert, with all due respect, I don’t see Michele *ever* denigrating English. That part of your argument is without foundation.
Thanks, Julie.
Bert, as you can see, my English is flawless. I was raised in a school for the deaf and I have been signing ASL since I ws 4 years old. So I know from personal experience (and from observing others) that ASL does not by itself cause a person to have poor reading/writing English skills.
I am not sure how much you know about the state of education for deaf people, but ALL schools (be it residential, mainstream, oral, etc) spend a lot of their time and energies on teaching English to the deaf.
So I know that English is alive and well in the world of deaf education. The only reason ASL has now been brought in the limelight is that oral schools and mainstream programs have not successfully produced high numbers of deaf graduates with strong English skills. Therefore, people are trying other methods (which include Bi-Bi philsophy and using ASL as a teaching tool) in an attempt to increase the numbers of deaf students graduating with strong English skills.
I am happy to know that, to quote you, “English is alive and well in the world of deaf education.” If that were true, how do you explain the 4th grade reading levels of many Gallaudet students today? How do you explain the academic and accreditation crisis at Gallaudet University? You make it sound like your “Bi-Bi philosophy and using ASL” are working wonders. When I was a student at a residential deaf school and Gallaudet College a half century ago, I remember some deaf students who had excellent English skills like yourself. But whatever success they had in learning “the roots of connected language” was not attributable to ASL. I believe that you and your supporters are cherry picking in this argument. I am sure that Dr. Gallaudet himself knew a number of Gallaudet products with excellent English skills that enabled them to be competitive in the real world. On the other hand, Dr. Gallaudet was also aware of the majority of prelingually deaf who did not measure up to the academic demands of an institution of higher education. Dr. Gallaudet’s primary concern about the abuse of “natural signs” was justified and continues to be today. I don’t believe that you and your supporters understand where I am coming from. So when you state that I am “denigrating ASL,” I could assume that you are also denigrating English.
Sorry, Jenny…I meant “Jenny”, not Julie! (slaps my head)
Bert…
I can testify that Michele K. is right about English being alive in the deaf schools (nowadays Bi Bi method is being pursued in more deaf schools, after seeing that it WORKS.) In fact, due to my daughter having mild to moderate hearing loss and having some good English background, I did question about mainstreaming her but decided against it because her first language is ASL (she is just 6 years old.) I learned from my son’s TOD (my son is mainstreamed due to his having a strong background in English… his first language is English) said that it would be more work for TODs and public schools if the younger child is mainstreamed with little knowledge of English and strong ASL background, since most of mainstream schools do not have the programs for deaf children (with Bi Bi methods.)
Bi Bi philosophy aside, I did notice that you spend a lot of time on the history. I am not going to dwell on the history, nor use the history as an excuse for the “failures” (both real and imagined); what is important is NOW and FUTURE. We are rolling up our sleeves to do our best to see that our deaf children THRIVE in the bilingual education settings. We can salute our deaf history, being thankful for what it has taught us, and move on.
A knowledge of history is essential to comprehend that E. M. Gallaudet did not endorse bilingualism as the be-all and cure-all for prelingual deaf students and people. Yet you and your supporters are sold on ASL and “the Bi-Bi philosophy” as the proverbial wave of the future. I recall the wisdom of a historian, George Santayana, who said: “Those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat it.”
I agree that it’s important to be aware of Deaf history. But just because EMG supposedly wasn’t in favor of bilingualism (I have my doubts about that, since the concept of “bilingualism” wasn’t even around during EMG’s time!), it means that we should NEVER explore the subject of bilingualism.
You keep saying I am “denigrating English”. At first I thought you meant the English language itself. But now I see that when you say I’m “denigrating English,” you really mean I’m not in favor of oralism, mainstream or any program that doesn’t use ASL.
If that’s the case, then yes. I certainly don’t favor any school or program that would focus heavily on *AUDITORY learning* over *VISUAL learning*. Auditory learning employs the deaf student’s weakest point, which is her/his ears or hearing. Visual learning employs the deaf student’s strongest point, which is her/his eyes or vision.
Expecting a deaf student to obtain her/his education via auditory learning only sets that student up for a overall frustrating and difficult experience with education, and that is what I don’t favor. I favor COMPLETE ACCESS to education, and that is through ASL.
Belle,
“Academic ASL”? Who knows? That’s exactly the question of the moment. When I start teaching college courses, I want to give my students the option of picking whatever language they feel they can express their thoughts most accurately in. (I just violated another rule of Standard English! Stranded prepositions!) But they couldn’t do that if they don’t know how to create “paragraphs” in an ASL video essay, how to transition, how to etc… That’s not to say there aren’t ways, just that they’ve not been captured in a grammar book (or video) anywhere.
There are bits and pieces which we could categorize as “Academic ASL” for example, using the honorific pronoun. For example, instead of just pointing at a person with an extended index finger, I extend a hand with all fingers extended towards that person. That’s from the formal register, which could be used in academic ASL? Really… who knows at this point?
Language is an ever-changing animal. It changes over time, with influence from all over the globe. We will standardize ASL, then some parts becomes inconstant, and then standardize it anew. It’s all a matter of what’s “in” now. Like those LOL, ROFL, OMG, LAMMO. I cannot stand them, and it seems like they are very standardized. I’ll wait ten years…hopefully they’ll pass in five.
Yes, the fun is in watching how far ASL becomes infused into our society. Meanwhile, I’ll keep waving the ASL flag!
The dinosaurs have a comment all ready for you!
http://www.qwantz.com/archive/000640.html
I like that everybody just learns “an approximation of language”. That is approximately how I feel about it all, too.
I LOVE these comics! Hahah!
I’ve gone to the ASL classes taught at the university where I’m a student, and there has to be a new sublanguage called ‘textbook ASL’ or something! The students were programed — they seriously signed like mindless robots — straight from the textbook, chapter by chapter, by a hearing person who was a moderate signer.
Everything learned was as such:
~ me school teacher me. you work what you, qq?
- me work food-cook me.
~ me want learn cook, me. you teach cook me, qq?
UGH!
That sounds like the ABC book… so grammar-focused.
Am I the only one annoyed with the unnatural sign for “email” (resembles the sign for El Paso)? I swear a cruddy ASL teacher invented this in a vacuum and his/her students have since propagated the sign.
Still, that’s the very nature of any language: unchecked input. I’ll take it… but I have a breaking point, maybe when cartoon dinosaurs start signing Florida the way some of us sign Italy.
LOL!
I am gulity of using that sign…
Like how I sign “Red” ;-).
What would YOU do for e-mail?
Besides, isn’t the “sign” for El Paso a total violation of ASL? :)
How would I sign Email??? Honestly, I just kind of spell it and simultaneously do a directional, outward thrust… and hope nobody in close proximity walks by. : )
This might be what Mr. Shaposka was implying when he said ASL use was injurious?
LOL!!!!!!
(Cleaning my drink off my monitor)
You’re correct. You’re supposed to sign email. Also, to say “I’ll email you”, you can spell email with outward thrust. But if you wanted to say “Email me”, you can spell email in an inward direction.
I think the sign for El Paso may have started as (dominant hand) L passing (non-dominant hand) O
(L pass O)
but O is not a standard base hand, and L just feels better as the base hand (how’s that for scientific?). My understanding is that many people sign it (O pass L) instead. Base/non-dominant hand stays still, and dominant hand moves 2 or more times passed it.
Anyone else sign it this way?
I don’t know…maybe you are reading too much into the comic?
I think it’s more likely that the author/artist took a few ASL classes and misunderstood something, rather than it being something taught in ASL classes.
You have to connect the adjectives to the subjects in ASL. In ASL, when I talk about two subjects..I also point to indicate which is which.
Also, nouns aren’t in space in a meaningless pattern…the noun/subject placement is usually described visually.
And…Ty Rexes would probably hate ASL with their short arms…. :-)
BTW, find a scanner yet? ;-)
I tend to read too much in anything. Bad habit, no?
Funny you say, it’s more likely that the author/artist took a few classes. I think that could be true for a lot of people. So imagine thousands of people who took one or two ASL classes with a lousy teacher and inaccurate books… yikes!
“The noun/subject placement is usually described visually.” Would you mind elaborating? I’m not sure what you mean.
A scanner? Eh?
Hope I’m not too late to the game to respond, but anyway, it’s very common in ASL classes to show a physical representation of noun/subject placement in space. It’s to help the students visualize. I will sometimes pull up my students and have them stand besides me, and refer to them by name, and point to them. Then when they go back and sit, I keep on referring to that space, to help the students understand what is meant by referent in space.
Does that explain it?
Yes, I do understand what JJ means.
I’m just not sure that nouns themselves can actually be placed in space.
yeah, i was waiting for a joke about how it’s hard to sign with T-Rex arms.
but hey, i’m sure there are people with short arms who sign every day and it probably winds up not mattering too much.
Great blog =) I don’t know if you guys noticed but if you hover over the comic image, a small tooltip appears in firefox, indicating that there is a hidden message. For the comic linked in Julie’s blog, the message is:
“some studies have shown that teaching basic sign language to babies before they learn to talk can both accelerate spoken language acquisition AND allow the baby to communicate before its started talking, since talking is way is more demanding physically than moving your hands! THANKS SIGN LANGUAGE, NOW I WANT SOME KIDS”
to eat?
(you never know with a T. Rex :) )
Linguists will have a field day with Dinosaur Comics. Here’s another one I particularly liked: http://www.qwantz.com/archive/001025.html
Bonus points if you know what prescriptivism is off the top of your head :)
*shooting arm in air* ooh I know! I know!
do I get extra bonus points for having made a comic strip in which the villain is The Prescriptivist?
http://especiallymessily.blogs.....ngers.html
I’m not sure whether to be amused or feel totally geeky/dorky because I actually LIKED that comic strip… :)
There’s a related comment thread at the original Dinosaur Comic site:
http://www.truthandbeautybombs.....mp;start=0
I don’t know, the first thing that popped into my head when I saw the comic was that the T-Rex has short arms while spouting out his love for ASL and I was half-expecting some punchline in the end when he realizes that. Not that kind of comic I guess. ;p