use of sign language in Jordan

[Kathy H.]

I seem to be missing the connection between our two posts.  
 
I merely asked questions to consider what it was that made the difference in the study that has been the topic of discussion on this list.  
 
Kathy


Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:30:46 +0200From: gerard.meijssen at gmail.comTo: slling-l at majordomo.valenciacc.eduSubject: Re: [SLLING-L] use of sign language in JordanHoi,You say "learning to write first in one's strongest language of course will transfer to writing in another language". For people that sign as a first language the first language to learn to write in is obviously in a script that supports sign languages. SignWriting is the only kid on the block. The notion that registering a sing language in another way does not make sense. Because what is the point? Do you want to invent an alternative first in order to know if it makes sense to use an existing script ? To me this is equivalent to have kids learn to read and write IPA in stead of for instance the Latin script because, it is "obvious" that IPA is easier to learn based on how people pronounce their spoken language. Would you suggest that when research proves that it is easier for kids to learn IPA that we are going to change the way we teach written language ? I am sure that when the Bard had written in IPA, it would be impossible to read him in this day and age because the sound of English is likely to have changed beyond recognition. When you suggest that alternatives to SignWriting should be studied, you do not provide alternatives that are actually used or usable as a script. I expect that in 700 years time people will study how SignWriting has drifted away over time from its one to one link between the signing and the writing. SignWriting is used, and is able to register signed languages it seems to me that this is what provides the basis for the observed improvement in academic achievement in the study. Thanks,     Gerard
On 9/26/07, Kathy H. <kaylynnkathy at hotmail.com> wrote: 


Gerard wrote:It is not important what sign language people use, my understanding of the relevance of the study is that the step from whatever sign language WITH SignWriting to learn the dominant written language is a lot easier and effective then [sic] learning the written dominant language only knowing sign language. What sign language is used is not the issue because SignWriting is a script and can essentially be used in combination with any sign language. My response: Learning to write first in one's strongest language of course will transfer to writing in another language.  One learns what writing is about:  Languages have parts; there is an association between the written form and the signed/spoken form; not everything is encoded.  The concept of writing will transfer to any language.   I'm not sure that it's SignWriting per se that was responsible for the effect rather than just becoming familiar with some type of written form on paper and its association with the language.   Would line drawings have had the same effect?  Would more abstract representations have had the same effect?Does the degree of phonetic detail vs. contrastive information make a difference? There is still much work to do in this area.  The studies that are being done give us directions for further research. Kathy
_________________________________________________________________
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger 
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/slling-l/attachments/20070926/8153d4fb/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
SLLING-L mailing list
SLLING-L at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
http://majordomo.valenciacc.edu/mailman/listinfo/slling-l