FW: 10.174, Disc: Sign Language & Cochlear Implants

[Greftegreff, Irene]

Martin Haspelmath posted a summary to LINGUIST of the
responses to his post. I asked his permission to forward
the summary to SLLING-L as well.

NO COMMENTS TO ME PERSONALLY, PLEASE.

Irene Greftegreff




- - -  From Martin Haspelmath:

> Here comes my summary:
>
> Last week I posted a query on the effect of cochlear implant (CI)
> technology on the use of sign language. My question originated in a
> recent article in the German newsmagazine DER SPIEGEL, which portrayed
> CI technology as a real alternative to sign language and argued against
> the use of sign in deaf education.
>
> I got lots of replies which are almost unanimous in most respects. This
> is of course a highly politicized matter, and I was surprised to hear no
> opposing voices -- maybe they are not to be found among linguists. The
> most important points of the respondents were the following:
>
> -- CI technology is not sufficiently developed at present that one can
> say that CI users hear in the same way hearing people -- it seems to be
> more a simulation of hearing. Children with CIs need a lot of teaching
> and speech therapy in order to acquire spoken language, so the CI does
> not allow effortless acquisition of spoken language.
>
> -- There is no evidence whatsoever that knowledge of sign language
> interferes with the acquisition of spoken language, and thus there is no
> reason to deprive CI children of sign language input. On the contrary,
> CI children need a language they feel at ease with to cope with
> potential problems of using the CI.
>
> -- CI technology is opposed by many Deaf organizations, because they see
> it as another attempt of hearing people to marginalize the Deaf and to
> make deafness appear as a defect. It is also noted that the hearing aid
> industry benefits from CIs, so there are economic interests here as
> well.
>
> -- Deaf organizations generally oppose CIs, especially for young
> children who were born deaf.
>
> -- Only the rich can afford CIs, which again means that there is no
> great impact on sign language (however, this seems to be true only for
> countries with no health care system like the US -- the situation in
> most European countries seems to be different)
>
> -- Sign languages are important for our understanding of language, and
> they are "worth keeping around".
>
> I found this latter argument problematic -- of course, sign languages
> are good for linguists, but that is no reason to "keep them around".
> Similarly, we wouldn't tell speakers of Sorbian (an endangered Slavic
> language in Germany) to continue speaking Sorbian just because it would
> be a pity for linguists if this language became extinct. The people
> themselves have to decide.
>
> Several respondents admitted that if CI technology improves
> significantly in the coming decades, the situation might change, and
> sign language may indeed become endangered at some point -- but everyone
> was skeptical.
>
> I was wondering to what extent the situation in the US is perhaps
> different from the situation in other countries, e.g. in Europe. In the
> US, there are many ethnic subcultures, so there is a positive model for
> a separate Deaf culture. Europeans may have greater problems identifying
> fully with a self-contained Deaf community, so maybe this means that
> people will be more ready to rely on CIs even at this relatively early
> point in the development of the technology. But this may be a wrong
> impression.
>
> The following people responded to my query -- thanks to all of them:
> James Fidelholtz, Tracy Mansfield, Frank Bechter, Rachel Lagunoff,
> Donald Grushkin, B. Wald, Nancy Frishberg, Lawrence Crowell, Joerg
> Keller, Irene Greftegreff, Lakshmi Fjord, Bernard Comrie, Coln Whiteley,
> Inge Zwitserlood, Peter Daniels, Andy Kaplan-Myrth, Paul Chapin, Nan
> Decker, Harlan Lane, Bernd Rehling, Francois Grosjean, Robin Battison,
> Roland Ilenborg, Ed Watts
>
> Some references:
>
> Lane, Harlan.  1984.  When the Mind Hears: A History of the Deaf.  New
> York: Random House.
>
> Lane, Harlan.  1992.  The Mask of Benevolence: Disabling the Deaf
> Community.  New York: Vintage.  (Original hardcover Alfred A. Knopf.)
>
> Lane, Harlan, Hoffmeister, Robert & Bahan, Ben.  1996.  A Journey into
> the
> Deaf-World.  San Diego: DawnSignPress.
>
> Padden, Carol & Humphries, Tom.  1988.  Deaf in America: Voices from a
> Culture.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard Unviversity Press.
>
> Sacks, Oliver: Seeing voices
>
> Van Cleve, John Vickery & Crouch, Barry A.  1989.  A Place of Their Own:
>
> Creating the Deaf Community in America.  Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet
> University Press.
>
> The article in DER SPIEGEL which prompted my posting, together with a
> highly critical commentary, can be found at
> http://www.taubenschlag.de/kolumnen/spiegel/grammatik.htm.
>
> Martin Haspelmath
> --
> Dr. Martin Haspelmath (haspelmath at eva.mpg.de)
> Max-Planck-Institut fuer evolutionaere Anthropologie, Inselstr. 22
> D-04103 Leipzig (Tel. (MPI) +49-341-9952 307, (priv.) +49-341-980 1616)
>
>