Is Sign Language a Language?

[Ronnie Wilbur]

Folks,

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.

Ronnie





At 08:24 PM 05/10/2003 , Nassira Nicola wrote:
>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

Ronnie B. Wilbur, Ph.D.
Professor and Chair, Linguistics
Heavilon Hall
500 Oval Drive
West Lafayette, IN 47907-2038
wilbur at purdue.edu
ph: 765-494-3822; tty 765-494-9266
fax:765-494-0771
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/slling-l/attachments/20030510/afe6279c/attachment.htm>