<html>
<font size=3>Folks,<br>
<br>
I'm not defending the perpetrator of all this nonsense, but I think the
discussion has lost its way. What this person clearly does not understand
is that learning one language (e.g. BSL or ASL) can lead to learning a
second (or third or fourth) language more efficiently than learning no
language at all or learning bits and pieces of a language while waiting
to become fluent in speechreading and then to categorize speech sounds
(with or without aids or implants) into appropriate perceptual categories
for the spoken language being learned. It's even policy in some schools
(cf. Guyot Institute for the Deaf in the Netherlands). In short, despite
40 years of research showing superior performance for early ASL users and
a plethora of native deaf ASL learners who have Ph.D.s who now hold
university professorships or upper level administrative positions, the
woman is clearly unaware of what she doesn't know and presumably would be
enormously embarrassed were she to discover how blatant that gap is. My
suggestion for the proper response in situations like this is 'deluge by
publication'. I would be happy to send her my recent publications on sign
bilingualism and deafness, and then send her a test to see if she read
it.<br>
<br>
Ronnie<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
At 08:24 PM 05/10/2003 , Nassira Nicola wrote:<br>
>Let me make sure I am entirely clear on this person's
perspective.<br>
><br>
>1. If one uses ASL as a native language, one does not have
sufficient<br>
>outside perspective to comment.<br>
><br>
>2. If one does not use ASL as a native language, one is not
fluent enough<br>
>in ASL to comment.<br>
><br>
>3. If one researches ASL, or is involved with it professionally
in any<br>
>capacity, one is not objective enough to comment.<br>
><br>
>4. If one does not have a Ph.D. in linguistics, preferably with
a heavy<br>
>focus of the "truth" about signed languages (I use the term
here as a<br>
>parallel to "spoken languages"), one is not educated enough
to comment.<br>
><br>
>And then there were none.<br>
><br>
>Also . . . if BSL were simply English, it would be insufficient to
stand as<br>
>a language in its own right. Since BSL isn't English, it is
insufficient to<br>
>stand as a language in its own right.<br>
><br>
><br>
>I am, naturally, eminently unqualified to comment on this topic,
since I am<br>
>not from Oxbridge ;c) ... but I should note that research into ASL
phonology<br>
>(my apologies for not being up-to-date on the BSL literature, but I
can't<br>
>imagine that it would be different enough to invalidate the point)
has<br>
>demonstrated that it does in fact possess underlying phonetic
rules.<br>
>Clearly Ms. Caswell has forgotten that phonology (the study of
the<br>
>sequential timing slots of language) can be studied independent of
phonetics<br>
>(the study of sound production) and that a phoneme, the smallest
articulable<br>
>contrastive unit of language, exists in signed language as
well. That's why<br>
>ASL EGG and TRAIN aren't the same - phonemic contrast.<br>
><br>
><br>
>Almost makes me ashamed to have been born, raised, and for twelve
years<br>
>educated in the "little hole" we call Los Angeles.
;c)<br>
><br>
><br>
>Nassira Nicola<br>
>Harvard University Department of Linguistics ('05)<br>
>nicola@fas.harvard.edu<br>
><br>
>_________________________________________________________________<br>
>MSN Messenger : discutez en direct avec vos amis !<br>
><a href="http://www.msn.fr/msger/default.asp" eudora="autourl">http://www.msn.fr/msger/default.asp</a><br>
</font><br>
<font size=3>Ronnie B. Wilbur, Ph.D.<br>
Professor and Chair,
Linguistics<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><br>
Heavilon Hall<br>
500 Oval Drive <br>
West Lafayette, IN 47907-2038 <br>
wilbur@purdue.edu <br>
ph: 765-494-3822; tty 765-494-9266<br>
fax:765-494-0771</font></html>