What you don’t know about Sign Language

Apache Pow Wow

What you don’t know about Sign Language

By Colton Cunningham

November 10, 2011

Sign language is universal; it is the only language that is completely
performed. Patterns in fiction can be observed in real world examples, and
the struggle sign language has endured is a prime case of that.

“When I was born deaf, my parents wanted me to learn orally, but at that
time they were involved in the deaf community, so I went to the deaf club
and I kept picking up sign language, so they permitted me to learn sign
language when I was about 2 years old,” said Laura Hill, a professor at
Tyler Junior College.

The deaf formally received teaching in the 18th century, however it was more
driven toward integration rather than acceptance. The theory behind this
thought process is oralism, which seeks to teach the deaf through lip
reading and spoken language. The year was 1867 and the Clark School for the
Deaf opened in Massachusetts, this facility believed it was easier to train
the deaf orally through mimicking mouth shapes and breathing patterns
instead of through sign language. Focused mainly on integrating the deaf
into the hearing community, the Oralist side of the spectrum does not allow
any form of sign language in the classroom.

“American Sign Language is a foreign language,” said Professor McKinzie,
Department Chair – Sign Language Interpreting, explaining the difference
between ASL and the Enlgish language being signed. “The true language for
the deaf is ASL.”

Like everything, there is always another side to the story, the Manualism
viewpoint. Manualism practices education for the deaf through the use of
sign language as the primary means of communication. William Stokoe, an
English professor from Gallaudet University, was the first major lobbyist
for the Manualistic thought process. In 1955, he observed signing being
done in his classroom and instantly became fascinated. He published the
book “Seeing Language in Sign” which goes into depth on the reasons why ASL
is a legitimate language.

He published the book “Seeing Language in Sign” which goes into depth on the
reasons why ASL is a legitimate language.

“‘Seeing Language in Sign’ traces the process that Stokoe followed to prove
scientifically and unequivocally that American Sign Language (ASL) meets the
full criteria of linguistics phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics and
use of language to be classified a fully developed language,” according to
gallaudet.edu.

Lite ideals of Freudian theory can be to film, comics, literature, and
in-turn to real world examples. Things like pens and guns would be phallic
symbols, better described as performative; while cameras and paper would be
yannic or representational. Why are photographers always portrayed as
feminine or a feminized man? Why does anyone with a gun suddenly appear
much more masculine? Why after most shootings do they find the shooters have
suffered from extensive sexual frustrations?

This thought process could be applied to the “Oralist vs. Manualist” debate.
The oralist thought process is very representational in its’ core, while
the manualist way of doing things is without a doubt extremely performative.
Signing must be performed, and it seems in this case the deaf’s opinion was
finally heard.

Source:

http://www.tjcnewspaper.com/what-you-don-t-know-about-sign-language-1.2695750#.TsVmlbKseM0