Is Sign Language a Language?

[Nassira Nicola]

Let me make sure I am entirely clear on this person's perspective.

1.  If one uses ASL as a native language, one does not have sufficient
outside perspective to comment.

2.  If one does not use ASL as a native language, one is not fluent enough
in ASL to comment.

3.  If one researches ASL, or is involved with it professionally in any
capacity, one is not objective enough to comment.

4.  If one does not have a Ph.D. in linguistics, preferably with a heavy
focus of the "truth" about signed languages (I use the term here as a
parallel to "spoken languages"), one is not educated enough to comment.

And then there were none.

Also . . . if BSL were simply English, it would be insufficient to stand as
a language in its own right.  Since BSL isn't English, it is insufficient to
stand as a language in its own right.


I am, naturally, eminently unqualified to comment on this topic, since I am
not from Oxbridge ;c) ... but I should note that research into ASL phonology
(my apologies for not being up-to-date on the BSL literature, but I can't
imagine that it would be different enough to invalidate the point) has
demonstrated that it does in fact possess underlying phonetic rules.
Clearly Ms. Caswell has forgotten that phonology (the study of the
sequential timing slots of language) can be studied independent of phonetics
(the study of sound production) and that a phoneme, the smallest articulable
contrastive unit of language, exists in signed language as well.  That's why
ASL EGG and TRAIN aren't the same - phonemic contrast.


Almost makes me ashamed to have been born, raised, and for twelve years
educated in the "little hole" we call Los Angeles.  ;c)


Nassira Nicola
Harvard University Department of Linguistics ('05)
nicola at fas.harvard.edu

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Messenger : discutez en direct avec vos amis !
http://www.msn.fr/msger/default.asp