2 ms·

Why would you compare an entire language to a single technique like that? There is no "the problem" with ASL any more than there is "the problem" with english o

Why would you compare an entire language to a single technique like that? There is no "the problem" with ASL any more than there is "the problem" with english or any other language. Yes communicating across the barrier can be a challenge but that's just the nature of having more than one language in use.

TehShrike 4y ago
Only being able to see ASL is different from speaking a different language – it's still English. Not being able to hear is more like not being able to read. It's the same language you already know, but you're missing out on one of the primary ways people use it.
- elliekelly 4y ago
  No, ASL is not English. ASL is a complete and distinct natural language in its own right.
- giraffe_lady 4y ago
  Oh you should definitely look it up then because this is completely incorrect. Sign languages are fully distinct languages with their own histories and influences. For example the sign languages spoken in the US and in the UK have different ancestries and are not mutually comprehensible, despite both countries using english as spoken languages.
- metal_am 4y ago
  ASL is based on French, so the structure is completely different.
  - giraffe_lady 4y ago
    ASL is not based on french either. It's related to LSF, the sign language used in france, but that also isn't based on french. The modern sign languages emerged among deaf populations and have completely different grammar and morphology from the spoken languages of the cultures surrounding their origins.
    - metal_am 4y ago
      Thank you for correcting me. That's a deep rabbit hole
      - TRiG_Ireland 4y ago
        Spoken languages are linear. Sign languages are not. The grammar is very different. Sign languages have multiple articulators: two hands, face, eye gaze direction, shoulders, trunk. These can all work together to show multiple things at the same time. Spoken languages can really do only one thing at a time (with a few minor suprasegmentals such as tone). You can construct a signed version of a spoken language, which may be useful for things like quoting book titles and other cases where you need to represent the exact words of a spoken language in signed form, but it's not common to use that for everyday communication, because the hands move a lot slower than the small muscles of the mouth and throat. (Linguistics is a fascination of mine. Sign language linguistics are especially interesting.)
generalizations 4y ago
> that's just the nature of having more than one language in use Well, yeah. I guess my point is that ASL is pretty much a foreign language. I'd compare it to the situation with the english language worldwide - since english is the lingua franca, so to speak, many countries around the world teach it as a second language. If you don't learn english, then (generally speaking) you're at a disadvantage because you can only communicate with a subset of your population. I'm not saying there's a problem with deaf people, any more than there's a problem with anyone else who simply doesn't happen to know the languages of some of the people around them.

TehShrike 4y ago

Only being able to see ASL is different from speaking a different language – it's still English. Not being able to hear is more like not being able to read. It's the same language you already know, but you're missing out on one of the primary ways people use it.

elliekelly 4y ago
No, ASL is not English. ASL is a complete and distinct natural language in its own right.
giraffe_lady 4y ago
Oh you should definitely look it up then because this is completely incorrect. Sign languages are fully distinct languages with their own histories and influences. For example the sign languages spoken in the US and in the UK have different ancestries and are not mutually comprehensible, despite both countries using english as spoken languages.
metal_am 4y ago
ASL is based on French, so the structure is completely different.
- giraffe_lady 4y ago
  ASL is not based on french either. It's related to LSF, the sign language used in france, but that also isn't based on french. The modern sign languages emerged among deaf populations and have completely different grammar and morphology from the spoken languages of the cultures surrounding their origins.
  - metal_am 4y ago
    Thank you for correcting me. That's a deep rabbit hole
    - TRiG_Ireland 4y ago
      Spoken languages are linear. Sign languages are not. The grammar is very different. Sign languages have multiple articulators: two hands, face, eye gaze direction, shoulders, trunk. These can all work together to show multiple things at the same time. Spoken languages can really do only one thing at a time (with a few minor suprasegmentals such as tone). You can construct a signed version of a spoken language, which may be useful for things like quoting book titles and other cases where you need to represent the exact words of a spoken language in signed form, but it's not common to use that for everyday communication, because the hands move a lot slower than the small muscles of the mouth and throat. (Linguistics is a fascination of mine. Sign language linguistics are especially interesting.)

generalizations 4y ago

> that's just the nature of having more than one language in use Well, yeah. I guess my point is that ASL is pretty much a foreign language. I'd compare it to the situation with the english language worldwide - since english is the lingua franca, so to speak, many countries around the world teach it as a second language. If you don't learn english, then (generally speaking) you're at a disadvantage because you can only communicate with a subset of your population. I'm not saying there's a problem with deaf people, any more than there's a problem with anyone else who simply doesn't happen to know the languages of some of the people around them.