AW: [sw-l] Deaf opposition to SW

Sat Aug 6 20:07:27 UTC 2005

Hi Shane - 

please -- !! 

what was your information about anybody who has been "SO BENT" ... on
finding fault with SignWriting

What can be thought of ... being fault with SignWriting  except people try
to avoid the experience to become illiterate 
if they are confronted with the concept that there is a perfect writing
system for everyday purpose ... 

Stefan;-) 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
[mailto:owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu] Im Auftrag von Shane Gilchrist
Ó hEorpa
Gesendet: Samstag, 6. August 2005 21:50
An: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
Betreff: RE: [sw-l] Deaf opposition to SW

"so bent" - it’s a negative term that means that someone is very insisting
on something - the positive term is "they are so willing" ;-) - ain't
languages amazing at times? 

For instance, Schroeder was so bent on introducing his "welfare state"
reform :-) - or Merkel is so bent on not letting Turkey join the EU (as im a
big fan of Turkey

Shane

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu [mailto:owner-sw-
> l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu] On Behalf Of Stefan Wöhrmann
> Sent: 06 August 2005 19:59
> To: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
> Subject: AW: [sw-l] Deaf opposition to SW
> 
> Hi Shane,
> 
> "some deaf participants there were SO BENT on finding fault with
> SignWriting" -
> 
> What do you mean? Did I miss something? Can you explain ??
> 
> My English is not good enough -- "were SO BENT "  ?????
> 
> What did these participants (whoever) suggest??
> 
> Stefan ;-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
> [mailto:owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu] Im Auftrag von Shane
> Gilchrist
> Ó hEorpa
> Gesendet: Samstag, 6. August 2005 18:33
> An: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
> Betreff: RE: [sw-l] Deaf opposition to SW
> 
> James,
> 
> It was very interesting at the ESWO conference - some deaf participants
> there were SO BENT on finding fault with SignWriting - Stefan said that
> the
> ESWO conference is discussing and developing SignWriting in an European
> context - we will have a very long fight ahead, trying to get the system
> accepted - but I do think SW will be accepted in Northern Ireland very
> soon
> - but we need to ask a trainer to come over and train my people how to do
> it
> - I know they will do it shall they be given the right teacher.
> 
> Shane of Belfast
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu [mailto:owner-sw-
> > l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu] On Behalf Of James Shepard-Kegl, Esq.
> > Sent: 06 August 2005 15:22
> > To: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
> > Subject: Re: [sw-l] Deaf opposition to SW
> >
> > Sandy,
> >
> > Perhaps you might ask whether English should be written.  Of course, the
> > response would be a bemused look at such a silly question.  Why?
> Because
> > everyone knows that English is written -- why my grandparents wrote it
> > (and
> > for those of us who can trace back to colonial America (not me) their
> > grandparents, too.)  Why, English was always written (maybe not quite
> > true,
> > but who cares), always will be....
> >
> > It occurs to me that if Deaf schoolchildren learned SignWriting without
> > realizing that their school curriculum was somewhat unique in that
> > respect,
> > well ... those children might also react in a with a quizzical, bemused
> > look
> > to the question of whether a sign language should have a written form.
> >
> > Old habits die hard.  And new points of view only become much later to
> be
> > regarded as obvious truths.
> >
> > -- James
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > on 8/6/05 6:39 AM, Sandy Fleming at sandy at scotstext.org wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Adam, Val and List!
> > >
> > > I've had a few discussions of SignWriting with Deaf people and
> signing,
> > > hearing parents of Deaf children.
> > >
> > > I invariably find myself running straight into arguments against
> writing
> > > sign languages - nearly everyone objects to the idea to start with -
> but
> > > for those involved in Deaf culture I've discovered that one argument
> in
> > > favour of writing sign languages always works, and that's the equality
> > > argument. Recently I was trying to put the case for SignWriting to a
> > > hearing woman who is learning BSL because she has a Deaf child who has
> > > just started at a full-BSL school. She shot down every argument for
> > > having SignWriting in the school, but once I started talking about it
> in
> > > terms of equality she started agreeing with me and even wondered if
> the
> > > teachers at the school might be interested.
> > >
> > > Why should the Deaf write their languages? ...because the Hearing
> write
> > > _their_ languages. It's about equality.
> > >
> > > But written sign language doesn't capture the full aspect of the
> > > language ...but neither does written oral language. It's about
> equality.
> > >
> > > But Deaf people can record their language on video nowadays ...so
> would
> > > the Heaing put up with having to use a tape recorder all the time?
> It's
> > > about equality.
> > >
> > > But really, what's wrong with video? ...it's only one medium. Oral
> > > languages work in all mediums, so should sign languages. It's about
> > > equality.
> > >
> > > But Deaf children can learn from books in English ...so would it be
> > > better if English people learned from books in Chinese? It's about
> > equality.
> > >
> > > ...and so on!
> > >
> > > I'm not saying that any of this is a new idea, just that I've found
> that
> > > equality issues as an argument really work where other arguments fail.
> I
> > > should emphasise the importance of actually using the word or sign
> > > "equality" in such arguments! People support equality.
> > >
> > > Sandy
> > >
> > > Valerie Sutton wrote:
> > >
> > >> SignWriting List
> > >> July 20, 2005
> > >>
> > >> On Jul 20, 2005, at 10:42 AM, Adam Frost wrote:
> > >> I have actually done a research on this topic for a paper in school.
> > >> I found that most Deaf didn't like the idea of SW not mainly because
> > >> they feel that it can't capture the full aspect of the language
> > >> (although it is a strong argument that some have), but that SW would
> > >> cause hearing people to have a lessened view of ASL as a language,
> > >> and it would also separate Deaf from hearing people even more. I
> > >> personally don't agree with any of that (of course, or I wouldn't be
> > >> here now would I. LOL!)
> > >> -----------------
> > >>
> > >> Adam and Everyone -
> > >>
> > >> They are talking out of ignorance, Adam! I believe it is a weak
> > >> argument. They obviously have not tried to learn SignWriting, and
> > >> they are against the new idea, without really learning it first. We
> > >> can write sooo much detail and capture the nuances of ASL far more
> > >> than either the IPA or written English captures spoken English...and
> > >> we are not hurting ASL to write it, only enhancing it...
> > >>
> > >> The only criticism that I care about, are from those people who
> > >> really have taken the time to learn and use SignWriting - your
> > >> opinions matter because you know what you are talking about...but
> > >> anyone can criticize something they do not know, to avoid having to
> > >> take the trouble of learning it...There are still people who talk
> > >> against using computers, afterall, and it has been decades since
> > >> computers have come into everyday life here -
> > >>
> > >> And I know some smokers, who still argue there is no proof that it
> > >> can hurt your health...so some people do not like change and they are
> > >> afraid of it...
> > >>
> > >> An article to read about this issue...
> > >>
> > >> http://signwriting.org/about/questions/quest021.html
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Val ;-)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 