3 ms·
A person that can hear.
by mosen 5y ago
A person that can hear.
- DoneWithAllThat 5y agoSo then someone who isn’t deaf? Why not just say that?
- michaelpb 5y agoAre you asking for writing tips? I'm not OP, but for one "someone who isn't deaf" is 4 words and has a complex structure while "hearing person" is 2 words and has a simple structure, and thus is more effective writing. It seems strange to me to suggest more complicated structures to replace simpler ones! Is there another reason to use the more complicated structure?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- xeromal 5y agoDeaf person is also 2 words. lol
- dylan604 5y agoYes, but they were not stating they were a 'deaf person' they would be saying 'not a deaf person' which is back to 4 words. "Hearing person" is still only 2 words. The things that get nitpicked on this site confound me to the level of not being able to look away from the train wreck.
- RavingGoat 5y agoCan you see or are you nonblind?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- dylan604 5y agoI'm a seeing person to be sure.
- apeace 5y agoYes, someone who isn't deaf. "Hearing" or "hearing person" is the vernacular used in the deaf community. It can be important to establish depending on the context. In this case I wanted to make it clear that I was learning ASL despite not being deaf.
- aksss 5y agoBecause in America we change words like socks for fear that yesterday's word has become a term of opprobrium in the common vernacular. We change to a new word, wait until someone feels offended at new word, and change that. Descriptions of "hearing" and "sighted" will eventually be passe too for not being inclusive enough. Being hip to the change serves as a social signal in the US about how "in touch" (sorry, congruent?) you are with the non-abled demographic, and/or a surrogate to some for advertising intelligence. Gotta keep up!