The three people are:
1) Dr. Brenda Brueggemann, a deaf person who was the interim Acting Chair of the Gallaudet University Board of Trustees and chair of the ASL Department at Ohio State University chose to use her voice that day as the Commencement Speaker at the 2006 Gallaudet University graduation ceremony. But you have to read her story on why she used her voice before jumping to conclusions and make any further wrong assumptions.
2) Mike McConnell, a hard of hearing person who graduated from Gallaudet University in 1991 was one of the several panel members at Gallaudet University's first ever vlogging/blogging conference in 2007 that was televised live in front of an internet audience and the audience that were physically present. I already explained why I chose to use my voice that day.
3) Tim Riker, a Deaf person who is the chapter president of California Association of the Deaf decided to use his voice (English) at the committee meeting in the California Assembly building on June 23, 2010 in the effort to raise ASL by pleading and making a case through voice (English). Although Tim Riker has not yet offered his reason on why he chose to use his voice that day.
All of them are deaf.
In all three situations there were professional ASL interpreters available. In two situations there were real time captioners available at Gallaudet University's graduation ceremony where Dr. Brueggemann did her speech and at Gallaudet University's vlog/blog conference. In all three situations each of the person had their own personal reason for their decision to use his or her voice. It didn't matter if you think it was a "wrong" decision to do. What's important is that they had that right to choose between ASL or voice when it was made available. They all chose voice for a variety of reasons. And that should be the end of it. People should just simply respect their choices instead of going all nutso for not signing or go into some deep analysis to arrive at four different conclusions (that were never the correct ones) as to why the person did not use his or her voice is a waste of time and frankly quite inappropriate and none of their business.
So, kudos to Dr. Brueggemann and Tim Riker for paving the way when it comes to choices (I can't really kudos myself can I?) and not be afraid to use his or her voice instead of signing in ASL! And that, yes, deaf people can talk!
Dr. Brueggemann eloquently said four years ago,
"there also does need to be some flexibility and respect for all abilities and kinds of language and communication."Amen. And that's true in this day and age. So true.
As for for my blog title, "Use of voice is way, way better than ASL." It's all about personal choices and not whether voice (English) is the better language and/or modality than ASL. It's just a preference.
Can you guys finally calm down now?
17 comments:
"there also does need to be some flexibility and respect for all abilities and kinds of language and communication."
Amen. And that's true in this day and age. So true."
Amen! So true!
Kudos to KokonutPundit for SPEAKING OUT!
Sometimes it's just faster to get your message across using voice, especially if you sense that the interpreter is not properly translating your message and the audience is predominantly hearing. If they can't understand what I'm saying, well, they can just interrupt and ask questions for clarification.
Way to go for setting it straight.
When someone shows up in any deaf/hoh event and speak instead of signing, it should be noted that a person chose to be in that environment - it should speak for itself. Someone who has a dislike for the deaf/hoh community wouldn't be there in the first place regardless of what mode of communication/language one uses.
Important piece of advice: Don't judge too quickly.
There are tendencies of terps to wait until a deaf person is done signing one sentence for them to quickly translate it. However that is a big mistake to do because the majority of people do NOT use pure ASL!! ASL in English order is not pure ASL. Therefore, it would be smart for terps to confer with the signer to get a feel of what sign language the signer uses. Sign language in general is any signs that a deaf person uses without getting into technicality of what is and what isn't a language. ;)
I tend to speak rather than let the terps sign for me, cuz they always mess up and mis-translate what I sign.
I'm fortunate that I can speak for myself but am sadden to see many terps tend to misrepresent the signers. This is dangerous, especially in court, for one.
I know, Mike.
Whenever I concentrate on my writing skills for my project, I hate letting any person to interrupt me with my work. ASL have caused my brain screwing up for a little bit, then, get back to my normal brain function where I am working on my project. ASL is killing me! Pfft!
I rather to use my SEE for my children's sake. Thankfully, they are talent in writing skills. My older child is now taking Latin 2 and I won't let her to take an ASL class at school at all. Sorry to say it but English comes first!
Do you have any idea how many deaf people cannot speak too well? You are one of very rare that can speak fluently, but there are thousand and thousand, even million cannot speak, so therefore they prefer/choose using BEAUTIFUL America Sign Language.
I think you are insulting those people that cannot speak too well.
Sad!
Anonymous, read what I wrote at the end:
As for for my blog title, "Use of voice is way, way better than ASL." It's all about personal choices and not whether voice (English) is the better language and/or modality than ASL. It's just a preference.
Not everybody signs. Most of the people with hearing loss use their voice instead.
If it makes you feel any better at the height of the campus scandal in 2006 while I was defending my student teaching experience for my degree from Gallaudet in front of the Education Department. I also choose to use my voice to do so. I used ASL for the answering/question session but the actual defense I used my voice. Imagine defending an education degree from Gallaudet University orally. Im sure I was the FIRST to ever do so.
I received a few funny looks from my peers and a
few of the EDU professors but It was a success...
-Bobby W.
I've said this dozens of times before, and will say it here again now, for those who maybe didn't get it the first time. As a Deaf person who uses ASL primarily, if I choose to use my voice, AND if other D/d/hh people are included in the communication (for example, by having interpreters or real-time captioning)...
... it does NOT, repeat, NOT, mean that I disrespect ASL or think that ASL is a lesser language than English. It's just my communication choice. If other deaf people prefer to use SEE or ASL, as long as my communication needs are considered, I'm perfectly fine with it.
I *get* that ASL has not received the recognition and respect it deserves from users of spoken language. Nonetheless, a D/d/hh person's communication preferences should be respected, regardless.
Conversely, I *don't* approve of communicators in any language using it to exclude others from access to language. That's just plain rude.
is that so hard to understand?
I cannot see why anyone would find issue with using whatever means you have to communicate, why would we make it harder by refusing to talk if we can ? Deaf politics who needs it.... refusing to communicate if you can DOH ! No wonder their access is a mess.
A deafmommy left a comment at KokonutPundit's posting titled, "Why did CAD chapter president use his voice at AB2072 hearing":
[deafmommy]:
"If you want to speak and not use ASL, then why are you in our community?"
Tim Riker SPOKE and did not use ASL.
Tim Riker wants to harm the deaf community?
Tim Riker is a colonized deaf person?
Tim Riker is a deficit thinker?
Dr. DonG's recent post stated:
"when YOU spread any kind of linguicism against ASL, YOU are spitting in the face of those Deaf people who gave YOU the gift of ASL. And worse, you are spitting in the face of those Deaf people who came before you who cherished, supported, and passed on ASL so YOU could have that gift, too."
http://www.deafhooddiscourses.com/?cat=68
Tim Riker SPOKE and did NOT use ASL in SPEAKING before the California Senators.
Tim Riker spit in the face of Dr. DonG?
Tim Riker spit in the face of every deaf educator?
Tim Riker caused linguicism to harm ASL?
Tim Riker must ask and pray for forgiveness from Dr. DonG?
DonG will probably try and spin that to justify Riker's use of his voice. For me, I say kudos to Riker in using his voice while on a forum to help elevate the importance of speaking with your voice. And this was done on live streaming tv over the internet in front of probably thousands of people watching the event. Now, it's forever recorded that oralism was put on a pedestal that day by the chapter president of CAD no less.
Yay!
First, I want to make it clear that every language needs to be respected, whether it's American Sign Language (ASL), English, Spanish or some other language. To deny any language the equal respect it deserves is called linguicism.
Next, this blog is offensive to Deaf people and my name was used without my permission. I don't see anyone pointing out that Assembly Member Tony Mendoza or any of the other Hispanic legislators spoke English rather than Spanish in the Capitol. If someone wrote an article celebrating that a Hispanic person chose to speak English rather than Spanish in a specific situation, wouldn't that be an insult to Hispanic people who speak Spanish?
I want to note that I am multilingual and select the most appropriate language for each situation. My first languages are both ASL and English and I have my family who used ASL with me and my bilingual education at Maryland School for the Deaf to thank for having multiple languages at my disposal.
The fact that I spoke English during the California Senate Health Hearing was because the primary audience I was speaking to were the Senators who voted on this bill-- all of whom speak English. However, the most comfortable language for me in most situations is and will always be ASL.
I was a little disappointed with one of the supporters of AB 2072 who testified because his voice was unintelligible. If he had known ASL and used an interpreter, perhaps the audience would have understood everything he said and Senator Alquist wouldn't have interrupted him several times.
Maybe his parents were misinformed or information about ASL was withheld by the audiologists, physicians, and his private oral school. I can see why they would withhold or distort this information; it would negatively impact their cash flow. We can't turn back time to correct this egregious mistake, but it's not too late to learn ASL and there are many in the Deaf community who will welcome and support him. There are many with that background who have done that and they were among those who fought the hardest against AB 2072.
I believe having a strong foundation and immersion in two different languages provided me the versatility I needed for various settings. However, how well I speak does not define who I am or my success. I know many very gifted, educated and successful Deaf people who use ASL to communicate and they don't hear or speak at all. I have nothing but respect for them and their contributions.
Tim Riker
First, I want to make it clear that every language needs to be respected, whether it's American Sign Language (ASL), English, Spanish or some other language. To deny any language the equal respect it deserves is called linguicism.
Next, this blog is offensive and my name was used without my permission. I don't see anyone pointing out that Assembly Member Tony Mendoza or any of the other Hispanic legislators spoke English rather than Spanish in the Capitol. If someone wrote an article celebrating that a Hispanic person chose to speak English rather than Spanish in a specific situation, wouldn't that be an insult to Hispanic people who speak Spanish?
I want to note that I am multilingual and select the most appropriate language for each situation. My first languages are both ASL and English and I have my family who used ASL with me and my bilingual education at Maryland School for the Deaf to thank for having multiple languages at my disposal.
The fact that I spoke English during the California Senate Health Hearing was because the primary audience I was speaking to were the Senators who voted on this bill-- all of whom speak English. However, the most comfortable language for me in most situations is and will always be ASL.
I was a little disappointed with one of the supporters of AB 2072 who testified because his voice was unintelligible. If he had known ASL and used an interpreter, perhaps the audience would have understood everything he said and Senator Alquist wouldn't have interrupted him several times.
Maybe his parents were misinformed or information about ASL was withheld by the audiologists, physicians, and his private oral school. I can see why they would withhold or distort this information; it would negatively impact their cash flow. We can't turn back time to correct this egregious mistake, but it's not too late to learn ASL and there are many in the Deaf community who will welcome and support him. There are many with that background who have done that and they were among those who fought the hardest against AB 2072.
I believe having a strong foundation and immersion in two different languages provided me the versatility I needed for various settings. However, how well I speak does not define who I am or my success. I know many very gifted, educated and successful Deaf people who use ASL to communicate and they don't hear or speak at all. I have nothing but respect for them and their contributions.
Tim Riker
First, I want to make it clear that every language needs to be respected, whether it's American Sign Language (ASL), English, Spanish or some other language. To deny any language the equal respect it deserves is called linguicism.
Next, this blog is offensive and my name was used without my permission. I don't see anyone pointing out that Assembly Member Tony Mendoza or any of the other Hispanic legislators spoke English rather than Spanish in the Capitol. If someone wrote an article celebrating that a Hispanic person chose to speak English rather than Spanish in a specific situation, wouldn't that be an insult to Hispanic people who speak Spanish?
I want to note that I am multilingual and select the most appropriate language for each situation. My first languages are both ASL and English and I have my family who used ASL with me and my bilingual education at Maryland School for the Deaf to thank for having multiple languages at my disposal.
The fact that I spoke English during the California Senate Health Hearing was because the primary audience I was speaking to were the Senators who voted on this bill-- all of whom speak English. However, the most comfortable language for me in most situations is and will always be ASL.
I was a little disappointed with one of the supporters of AB 2072 who testified because his voice was unintelligible. If he had known ASL and used an interpreter, perhaps the audience would have understood everything he said and Senator Alquist wouldn't have interrupted him several times.
Maybe his parents were misinformed or information about ASL was withheld by the audiologists, physicians, and his private oral school. I can see why they would withhold or distort this information; it would negatively impact their cash flow. We can't turn back time to correct this egregious mistake, but it's not too late to learn ASL and there are many in the Deaf community who will welcome and support him. There are many with that background who have done that and they were among those who fought the hardest against AB 2072.
Tim Riker
I had discussed with the people involved with the CDNIAS coalition regarding whether I should speak or sign during the hearing. I had their support to speak.
Both ASL and spoken English were at my disposal because of my bilingual education while growing up.
The general rule is to first consider the main audience when selecting which language to use. Then if you are able to use that language directly and fluently then use it. If not, then use an interpreter. This applies to any situation and any language.
When someone who is fluent in Spanish decides to speak English to a predominantly Spanish speaking audience, then of course that would be considered very offensive. My audience was predominantly English speaking and my choice was appropriate for that situation.
Tim Riker
Tim Riker wrote:
"First, I want to make it clear that every language needs to be respected, whether it's American Sign Language (ASL), English, Spanish or some other language. To deny any language the equal respect it deserves is called linguicism."
English = spoken language
ASL = physical language
Both are LANGUAGES (spoken, signed)
Tim Riker wrote: "To deny any language the equal respect it deserves is called linguicism."
Tim Riker wrote: "I don't see anyone pointing out that Assembly Member Tony Mendoza or any of the other Hispanic legislators spoke English rather than Spanish in the Capitol."
Tim Riker wrote: "When someone who is fluent in Spanish decides to speak English to a predominantly Spanish speaking audience, then of course that would be considered very offensive."
Does Tim Riker assume ALL Hispanics must be fluent in "SPANISH"? Did Tim Riker profile Hispanic people?
Is Tim Riker racist?
Tim Riker wrote: "Next, this blog is offensive to Deaf people and my name was used without my permission."
Tim Riker is a public figure who spoke in front of the public's public: the California Senate. Tim Riker's name is newsworthy of discussion because Tim Riker unwittingly praised and offered support for oral/aural modalities by virtue of the fact he SPOKE; it is also newsworthy considering Tim Riker's organization (CAD) frequently harasses oral deaf people and their organizations, makes outlandish claims about audiologists, and perpetuates linguicism upon those with less-than-perfect speech skills.
Tim Riker wrote:
"was a little disappointed with one of the supporters of AB 2072 who testified because his voice was unintelligible."
Tim Riker perpetuates linguicism?
Tim Riker is a hypocrite?
Post a Comment