Can you spot the video difference?

Can you spot the differences between these three videos? Maybe the irony? Before you complain, think first. Keep it clean...and nice. That's my only request.





The last video talks about this guy in a screenshot which can be found here.

Enjoy.

The Extinction of Keresan Pueblo Indian Sign Language among Deaf Indians?

In 2007 I first published a blog questioning whether the "forced" use of ASL and the adoption of American deaf culture had some impact on deaf Indians their use of their own native Indian Sign Language (ISL) causing ISL to fall out to disuse like the Keresan Pueblo Indian Sign Language (KPISL) and ultimately having them removed from their own Indian culture and customs once they were placed in deaf residential schools. 

Keresan Pueblo Indian Sign Language (KPISL) is a means of communication developed and used among many of the residents of this one New Mexico pueblo. It is one of many North American Indian sign languages found in the United States, and one of two in Southwestern United States that have been studied and documented—the other being Navajo (Davis & Suppala, 1995). A literature review suggests that signed languages were also used among Apaches and Hopis (West, 1960). KPISL is believed to have developed on one pueblo by family members in order to communicate with their offspring, siblings, and relatives who were deaf (Kelley, 2001). It is not at all uncommon for deaf children and their family members to invent a home-based sign system for such a purpose. However, KPISL does not fit the framework for home-based sign systems set forth by researchers such as Frishberg (1987) who states that home signs do not have a consistent meaning-symbol relationship, do not pass on from generation to generation, are not shared by one large group, and are not considered the same over a community of signers. KPISL was passed on from one family’s eldest brothers and sisters to their hearing and deaf siblings, nephews, and nieces. KPISL is also used among non-family members living on the pueblo. It has been found to function in two significant ways: (a) as an alternative to spoken language for hearing tribal members and (b) as a primary or first language for deaf tribal members.

For the KPISL it was considered a first language for deaf Pueblo tribal members. But the sad irony as I have pointed out several times in my blogs concerning the topic of ISL is that the adoptive use of ASL and the adoption of an American deaf culture helped cause the disuse of the KPISL among deaf Indians. Not necessarily the primary cause but certainly bears some culpability. This is especially true with English and its American customs and culture helping along the demise of KPISL/ISL.  However, deaf schools of the past and recent past never made any attempt to help accommodate or preserve KPISL or ISL among deaf Indians attending deaf schools. Instead they were inducted and indoctrinated into the "Deaf World" and its American deaf customs using ASL. In the end after graduation they were forced to choose between ISL or ASL.

Both KPISL and PISL have become endangered languages. KPISL is not much used among the pueblo’s younger generation owing to their learning school English, ASL, or signs that follow the spoken English word order. Before the 1990s, American Indian Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing tribal members usually left home to attend a residential school for the deaf located far away (Baker, 1997; Lane, Hoffmeister, & Bahan, 1996). At the school, there was usually no formal instruction of American Indian or American Indian culture and signs; only Deaf culture and ASL were taught, leading many American Indian students to join the “Deaf World.” After graduation, the students had to make difficult decisions about where and how to establish themselves: on the pueblos with hearing families and friends, in urban areas with other Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing people, or in border towns with limited access to both groups.

The extinction of a language happens when they fall out of disuse because of a dominant language and culture:

If a language (spoken or otherwise) is not utilized or passed down from one generation to the next, then the devastating result would be language extinction. Accompanying the loss of a native language is the loss of the traditions, culture, and perhaps even a loss of life. Language extinction, also referred to as total language death, is defined as occurring, “when there are no speakers of a given language idiom remaining in a population where the idiom was previously used (i.e. when all native speakers die). Language death may affect any language idiom, including (so-called) dialects and languages.” 

The death(?) of KPISL and its culture is an example of how a language failed due to the lack of it being maintained and passed on down to the next generation of KPISL users.  Deaf Indians using KPISL went to deaf schools who were forced to adopt ASL and its American deaf culture which led to the lack of maintenance of their own ISL and culture that spanned generations in their own tribe.

During a study conducted in the Spring 2000 by the University of Texas at Austin, a previously undiscovered form of sign language was uncovered. Walter Kelley and Tony McGregor, two doctoral candidates from the University write, “The signs, Keresan Pueblo Indian Sign Language (KPISL), are used by some of the pueblo’s Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing individuals. This newly discovered language, an idiosyncratic home sign language, was developed perhaps by family members in order to communicate with their offspring, siblings and relatives who have a hearing loss. The signs appear to have evolved in the same way as spoken language, progressing gradually from the representational to the symbolic, from the picture to the symbol, but still remaining primarily representational or ideographic (Frishberg, 1987). Today, many individuals in the pueblo use it while communicating with others inside the small village” (Kelley,1998). However, the potential for collision with ASL lies in the fact that without regular usage or due to the integration of American ASL in schools, KPISL is now becoming a dying language. Kelley and McGregor go on to reveal, “Unfortunately, the signs are not used among the younger Pueblo Indian generation due to their learning in school American Sign Language (ASL) used by American Deaf individuals or Seeing Exact English 2 (SEE 2), a methodology of using signs following the spoken English word order. In addition, KPISL was used at a nearby pueblo but it is no longer seen” (Kelley, 1998).

So, in retrospect some of those deaf schools that use ASL were responsible in more ways than one for the inevitable language death of deaf Indians' ISL, in this case KPISL.

The purpose and use of KPISL were different than that of the PISL.

KPISL didn’t originate for the same purposes as the well known Plains Indian Sign Language (PISL), which was primarily developed to facilitate intertribal communication between the American Indian tribes that spoke different languages in the Plains region of the present United States and Canada—a region extending from what is now the state of Texas northward to Canada and, at its widest point, stretching from Arizona through Oklahoma (Taylor, 1978). Signs were used during hunting and trading among the different tribes and were also used for storytelling and a variety of ceremonies. Plains tribes known to use signed language included the Cheyenne, Comanche, Kiowa, and Sioux. Signed languages were also used as a means of communication by the Iroquois in the state of New York, the Cherokee in the Southeastern United States, the Eskimos in Alaska, and the Mayan in Mexico (Johnson, 1994; Scott, 1931; West, 1960).

The question now lies on how many deaf Indians with their own ISL who were indoctrinated into deaf schools forced to learn another language (ASL) and American deaf customs, culture and language (English) and forgo or diminish their own Indian Sign Language, custom and culture? Much the same way when thousands of hearing Lakota Indian children who were forced into American schools at boarding houses to learn and adopt American customs, language and culture.

They were not tall, muscular braves, armed with bows and tomahawks that emerged from this train. Instead, what greeted the crowd were frightened children wrapped in blankets. They were tired, cold, and frightened by the crowd of strange white people that stared at them. There were eighty two boys and girls that arrived at Carlisle that night.


These were the first of many Indian students that would learn how to be “civilized” at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School. What these students didn’t know was that they were about to have a burden placed upon them. Aside from trying to learn a new language and culture, they would be tasked with bringing everything they learned back to their reservations and teaching their people the White Man's ways. In order to do this, the instructors at Carlisle used gender, in particular the females, to "civilize" the Indians. 

NAD (National Association of the Deaf) was established in 1880 in support of using ASL and had a huge role and influence to help incorporate ASL in deaf schools since its inception.  The irony is that during those years when deaf schools incorporated ASL, deaf Indians were indoctrinated into their deaf culture, ASL and American way of life (English language, customs and culture) at deaf residential schools at the expense of their own native sign language, customs and culture. Just like the deaf Keresan Pueblo Indians. This is the equivalent of hearing Indian children of the past being sent to American boarding schools to learn another language (English), American customs and culture at the expense of losing their own native language, customs and culture. But the scale and impact of this among deaf Indians going to deaf residential schools are unknown. Certainly not at the scale and breadth like the Carlisle Indian Industrial School for hearing Indian children who were forcibly placed into. And that it was the English language and western (American) culture that ultimately put their own native Indian language and culture at risk.

Many deaf Indian children were sent to deaf residential schools just as many hearing Indian children were sent to Indian residential schools.

Since the late 1800s, social, cultural and historical factors have caused the number of native users of traditional American Indian sign language to dramatically decrease along with the decline of native languages and cultures, came the loss of signed language that was once a widely used alternate to spoken language, and a traditional way of storytelling.  The role of a signed lingua franca has been replaced by English, which means that fewer hearing Indians are learning the traditional ways of signing. The decline of sign language among native groups also contributes to the marginalization and isolation of tribal members who are Deaf (see Goff-Paris & Wood 2002 and Miller 2004 to read more about the experiences of Native American Indians who are Deaf) (page 51).

.
.

 By the turn of the 20th century, however, a dramatic decline in sign language use among native groups was evident, largely due to its replacement by English as a lingua franca. The documentary evidence suggests that the use of a signed lingua franca continued well into the early 20th century. However, during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in the United States and Canada (mainly in Northwestern and Southwestern regions) residential Indian schools were established by state, provincial, and federal governments; and by religious organizations in some cases. It become common practice for Indian children and adolescents to be systematically removed from their families and placed in these residential educational institutions. The official educational policy during this period was "cultural and linguistic assimilation." This translated into loss of many native ways, including the loss of native language and culture for many Indian children. Indian children were taught English only and in most cases were forbidden to follow or practice their cultural traditions (page 60).

Similarities do exist between many deaf Indian children who had their culture and their own language (e.g KPISL/ISL) who were sent off to deaf residential schools to learn a new language (ASL and English) and culture (American culture) to that of hearing Indian children who already had their own culture and own Indian language who were forcibly sent off to Indian schools to learn another language (English) and adopt American culture and customs. Just like the before and after picture seen above of a hearing Indian boy.

All this brings me to a recent blog I did on why NAD and other deaf schools have not apologized for helping with some of the eradication of deaf Indians' own ISL when deaf Indian children were forced to choose their language and culture and with no effort to help them preserve and maintain their own ISL identity and culture. And most importantly I also already asked whether an apology is really necessary despite the fact that we will never know the full impact on the placement of deaf Indian children in deaf residential schools that use ASL have had on their ISL and culture. We may never know on how many similar tribes like the Keresan Pueblo who had their deaf Indians lose their native sign language and part of their culture to ASL and American culture and customs at deaf residential schools of time's past. For all intent and purposes the KPISL could be technically extinct at this time until further research can ascertain that KPISL is still alive and that deaf KP Indians are still using it. 

Accountability goes both ways, folks. 

Sign Write

The title "sign write" is as best as I can describe a situation and it has to do with an observation I noticed in a discussion forum on a deaf-related topic. There was a hearing parent (of a deaf child) who actually wrote somewhat haltingly in English as if it was done in a signing format. This hearing parent was a new member with English as the native language. So, it's not like it was a 2nd language or anything like that. I thought about using "deaf talk" but that's not right and does it reflect appropriately what I'm trying to get at here.  And so, "sign write" is as close as I can describe correctly this situation about a hearing parent. 

In later threads that parent wrote in a fashion that was grammatically smoother and stayed like that ever since. And so I have this question and I'm wondering about this. Has anyone ever witnessed anything like that before? A new hearing parent in a forum attended by mostly deaf and hard of hearing members to write English in an almost a haltingly manner like "sign write"?

I'm thinking that this parent had this misconception about the forum members' English fluency and thought it was necessary to write in such a way. Your thoughts?

Swim or pee at your own risk

Ah, summer has arrived! Temperature warming up this morning and should reach into the upper 70s today with sunny skies. After many months of cloudiness and rain this is welcome news. And as each week passes with more sunshine and increasing temperature until before you know it the temperatures are into the 90s. And this means what? Time to hit my new found and very popular swimming hole on the East Fork Lewis River that's an almost an hour's drive (depending on the traffic) south which is so much better than going to a public swimming pool. All that reminds me of what public swimming pools were like in the past. And the latest round of elitism that's been hitting the golf courses.  What is it nowadays? An open society or a closed one? A "members only" or a place regardless of signing, speaking or hearing ability status?

I think there are plenty of room for people who have communication preferences regardless of hearing loss status in a community of deaf and hard of hearing people.  Focusing on whether people are "Deaf center" enough or not fosters elitism. This can get confused with pride. And to put into perspective for those who "qualify" would be allowed to go to a public swimming pool only that it is not so public to begin with. Might as well put up a sign that says this if one has to go to a rest room:

Just to be fair these things have gone the other way around, too.

At least there wouldn't be any misunderstanding on whose Deaf over those who are deaf and hard of hearing ("not so Deaf"), right?  But if you want to swim at a public swimming pool or need to pee at a public rest room there should not be a sign that discriminates in such a fashion, right?

I certainly hope so.

Global Microbrand

There is a new concept in the business world called "global microbrand" that was coined several years back. For those not familiar with the phrase it basically means in a niche market you have a brand that sells all over the world but not yet at the tipping point on being able to produce in massive quantity the product being sold. There are some deaf-owned businesses that does this on their own designing, making and selling their own technology products. sComm is one of those very few businesses that does that. And by saying "very few" it's a true statement around here. sComm has a global microbrand called the "UbiDuo" which has been sold worldwide and it continues to grow. No matter how small or big this niche market is as long as there is big enough interest in a product there's money to be made and profited. In this case the UbiDuo has been proven to be a money maker ever since the first year it debuted.

sComm began as a company in 2002 and debut the UbiDuo communication device on April 22, 2006 at DeafNation. Jason Curry, who is deaf and the CEO of sComm, never looked back once his product took off that year and saw sales rise each year. It has been 5 years since the opening day when the UbiDuo was made available to the public. Most new businesses do not survive past 5 years and go out of business. But sComm is nothing but normal as a business in an economy that has been suffering for the last few years. In fact, in a depressed economy sComm is actually thriving because people are quickly finding out the value of 100% accessible communication of the English language. 

Looking back 5 years ago the year when UbiDuo first exploded into the conscious minds of many deaf people you had your naysayers and detractors on this new technology, a soon to be global microbrand. You had your deaf techno geeks and so called "experts" who derided and made fun of the Ubiduo and the CEO of sComm for making that communication device seeing it as "worthless" and not "doable."  This was a product I recognized several years back seeing it as potentially a valuable communication device for deaf people. A niche market I knew that Jason Curry, the CEO, could easily help fill not just in the United States but worldwide for deaf users who know English. And that's a lot of people my friends. Not really so "niche-y" if you think about it.

I first heard about the upcoming communication device back in 2004 from Jason Curry, CEO of sComm. Even the people at NIH was impressed with Jason's vision that his company was awarded a $1.3 million dollar grant in February of 2005 to help fund the Phase II of sComm's product that would enable face-to-face communication betweeen deaf and hearing people, and between people in other communication-challenged situations.

Again, you had those deaf self-appointed techno-geeks and so called "experts" on technology and communication laugh at Jason's vision and product only to be proven wrong year after year after year.  Jason easily made fools of those so called "experts" in the world of micro branding. The superb quality that goes behind every Ubiduo stands on its own. I've seen it with my own eyes which validated my strong belief that Jason's vision was right on the mark that this communication device can help deaf people communicate effortlessly with hearing people. And that alone could potentially help a deaf person's own career as well with the ability to effortlessly interact with hearing people.

But in a world of deaf people who rely on sign language to communicate where some have been resistant and one-minded that they must have interpreters  24/7 available to them in order to communicate with their hearing peers, friends, co-workers, supervisors or bosses, that idea simply will not work in all cases. Not everybody can have the luxury on having a personal interpreter shadow you all day long like Marlee Matlin's own personal interpreter.  Don't get me wrong, having an interpreter is quite important in many cases but having or demanding an interpreter in nearly every single situation doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the world of business where English is king. Most of your co-workers, supervisors, clients and customers are hearing people who use English to communicate on a daily basis whether on paper or by voice. It makes good business sense to interact with hearing people using English on a daily basis.

Let me ask you this question.

What would you say about a deaf worker who worked as a greeter at Sam's Club for 12 years without having any other responsibilities or promotion? What would you say upon learning about a deaf worker who obtained a piece of communication technology called the "UbiDuo" that allowed him access to hearing customers and because of that technology he was promoted three times and now supervises 20 hearing people in a space of a few years? How much would you pay for that piece of technology that would allow you to interact and communicate with hearing people where signing isn't involved nor required?

Before you answer that there's a sobering reality what many culturally deaf people do not realize in the world of business.  In the United States in one federal agency with 37 deaf employees it had to spend $2.7 million dollars a year on interpreting fees alone.  On average that turns out to be $73,000 per year for each deaf person. In a time of budget cuts, downsizing and rising unemployment rates the bottom line has become quite apparent for all federal agencies, state government agencies and companies in lean times all over the world, and not just in the United States. There are efforts underway by companies and such to find ways to help control their cost , especially among those who are not so "English-impaired" and can communicate using English instead of acting like helpless people who don't know a lick of English and demand sign language interpreters in every possible or impossible scenarios.

Deaf people have a choice. Either they take the reign and show what they're capable of by showing their independence on their capability to interact with hearing people. Or become overly dependent on interpreters when their English is sufficient to communicate in the first place in face to face scenarios. If you can chat online, use the email, use the TTY, go on discussion forums over the internet and type everything in English, then certainly you have the capability to use the UbiDuo instead of using interpreters as a crutch.  Either you can stand up and speak for yourself in your own words or have a third person do the speaking for you all the time. The choice is really yours to make.

Having a fit over "Deaf Trash"

After seeing Barry's video "Deaf Trash" I can't help but think the people who are upset are just probably are so laser-focused on the words "deaf trash" rather than on what Barry discussed in his video. Much the same way on how some tended to focus on the words "ASL failed" rather than the discussion behind it and instead got all upset over those two words.

Now, I'm just thinking here. Bear with me.

Are some people upset because they think they are indeed "deaf trash" in their own minds and felt they were somehow "targeted"?  If they're confident about themselves then there would be no reason to get upset over those words since it would have no bearing on them or of no importance. Perhaps this is a case of people who are simply "context-impaired"?  Barry targeted no one single individual in that video and yet what did some some people do? The run over to Tayler Mayer, the owner of DVTV, and cry about Barry's latest video and demand that he be banned despite the fact that Barry broke no rules in DVTV.  Tayler Mayer knows this. In fact, Tayler had to resort to a video explaining again that members of DVTV have the power to block anyone they want and that DVTV is actually better in terms of being "safer" than YouTube. All this goes to show that Barry has not violated any of DVTV's R-list. Feeling hurt or upset when you weren't personally targeted doesn't count. People have the option to block Barry or anybody else in DVTV. It's easy.

Here's the conundrum.

If people claim to have no interest in Barry's videos then why do they continue to watch his videos on DVTV and continue to complain to Tayler Mayer? Makes no sense. I've a mind that they simply like to whine and complain all the time for whatever reason is simply beyond me.

Barry is a deaf person, he knows that and certainly I understood completely the context on what Barry said, for example, about "deafless" which was simply to mock all the new invented words out there such as the a-wordism.  Words like that are simply not in the dictionary. It was also to point out that the word "deaf" is not all that overly important, either. Much the same way he explained in context and concept in a video on the word "ageless" of an 80 year old man still actively hiking, biking, running or swimming. The 80 year old man knows he's old but that doesn't stop him. Same way with "deafless." Though he does admit he's deaf, too.  Get it? Many don't.

Yet Barry's videos gets the number one spot on the average number of views to each of his videos (60 videos) with OhBuckaroo (24 videos), Barry's son, coming in a 2nd place. All that makes me wonder about the people who don't like Barry and his videos do not make the effort to simply block him on DVTV.  Sure, there will be disagreements. That is to be expected. People can disagree and state their arguments in a good way. Nothing wrong with that. That's what makes debating great.  But run over to Tayler Mayer to complain about Barry's videos doesn't make it all very "adult like." Staging an effort to "walk out" of DVTV over Barry's videos isn't a good thing either but they're free to do what they want in voicing their displeasure. But I think it's rather a dumb thing to do when one can always use DVTV's block feature. The first walk out was a dismal failure. That didn't stop DVTV from its goal on making it as "safe" as possible for all members.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I do understand. The problem here is that members continue to watch in DVTV knowing they have the full power to block out vloggers for whatever reasons instead of demanding the owner of DVTV to ban certain vloggers they don't like. They are an adult. They need to act like one and use the block feature in DVTV.

Oh, btw, happy 4th birthday DVTV. It all began four years ago on May 7th. It is still running strong despite to continual whining.

Barry continues to make a big impact on the deaf community. His message continues to reach out even to the hearing community and the people who don't know sign or know very little with the help of his subtitling efforts in YouTube. He continues to evolve as a person who is a part of the deaf and hard of hearing community, and yes, even the culturally deaf community as well. Love him or hate him, he belong to no one.  His journey is his own personal journey and that no one can tell him what he can or cannot do.

A public relation message to the deaf and hh community

Success is relative....

For a hard of hearing or deaf person the word "success" is relative, each to his or her own on what exactly that means when it comes to communication whether it's signing, speaking or writing. What I don't do is begrudge my parents who had very little information to go on in the 1960s when it came to exposure to signing or sign language, and not necessarily ASL per se but signing in general. Information was extremely hard to come by on education and communication for deaf and hard of hearing children. Parents of those days either had to research on their own to get the necessary information or went with the flow on what educators and some in the community had to say and take them as authoritative. We know better now.  It's night and day when compared to the information and knowledge of the 1960s to that of today, especially when cochlear implant and hearing aid technology are at an advanced stage.

For me, I do consider myself an "oral success" which includes both the speaking and listening skills. I am perhaps one of the few rare breed out there to discuss this publicly. I'm sure there are many more of them out there like me. I know. I've met them before. But what is "success" then? Well, to me, it's the ability to communicate and listen successfully. Though the listening part varies depending on the environment I'm in, of course. Between using a phone versus listening in a crowded room with everybody talking is like night and day sometimes. But then again technology continues to improve where one day a "smart" hearing aid will have the ability to screen out unwanted background noise and focus on the voice near me instead. Yet, success is relative.

Here's a short piece of my mother's letter she wrote to me in 2002 before she had internet connection (i.e  email). It's a short reflective piece out of a two page letter she wrote to me about my past and what she had to do to get the education for me and the amount  work she put into to help develop my speech and listening skill where educators have told her and many others that we deaf and hard of hearing people would be a lost cause and that we wouldn't be able to progress above the 5th grade level in our lifetime.

I know it is hard on little deaf children whose parents will not or can not sign. I also know that the parents who really tried and spent a lot of time with the kids had a lot of success. If I were to do it over, I would combine signs and lip reading and speech. Because as I look back and remember, we did use our version of signs for words like “no,” “yes,” “baby,” “love,” “up,” “milk,” “eat,” and many others that I have long forgotten.

All in all, the school boards, the teachers, the books, did not give a lot of encouragement about the education and successful adult livelihood for the deaf community. I am proud that you can make them all eat their words now.

And eat their words they have and I will continue to remind them of that. Which is why I consider my mother my hero because without her I wouldn't be where I am today. But I do not hate my parents when at times I could not understand them when I was younger. I cannot spend time begrudging the past and I don't have anything to begrudge against my parents, either. They are human beings, too. And I still love them.

ASL vs Signed English Video Music of "Do I"

Here's a video of a song that is signed using the ASL version versus the SEE/English (signed English word order) version. The music is "Do I" by Luke Bryan signed by Allyballybabe. Here is what she has to say between the two signed versions.

I wanted to show the differences between ASL and SEE/English. There is a HUGEEEE difference, and hopefully this helps to see that. SEE and English SL are NOT languages. ASL, however, IS a language! Enjoy!

When searching for YouTube vids, be sure to take notice of if it is REALLY ASL, or if it's SEE/English that is mislabeled.. There are LOTS of SEE/English YouTubers out there. If you're wanting TRUE ASL, take caution..

Click on YouTube to get to her site containing the lyrics in English and in ASL gloss.

I agree. There is a stark difference. Just like that female astronaut who signed in PSE/SE/SEE (i.e. English word order) and certainly not in ASL. And thus no one can claim that first ASL was signed in outer space. Nearly 75% of those who answered my poll agreed that the female astronaut signed in an English word order format whether it's PSE, SEE, or SE. The point is that the majority saw the astronaut signed in English, not ASL which has a markedly different grammar and syntax than English. So, it's the signed English word order (whether it's PSE, SE, or SEE) that made into outer space. American Sign Language (ASL) never made it into outerspace but sign language did. So, don't call it ASL but sign language. It may be awhile til a true ASL signing astronaut will be seen from outer space. Meanwhile, let's celebrate the fact that sign language made its first debut in outer space in 2010!

Huzzah!

The Discombobulated ASL Body

Broken ASL? Perfect ASL? SEE, SE, and PSE are not (modes of) communication by David? Perfect ASL?

Calling PSE or English order signing as ASL where Patti said that "ASL has even made it into outerspace" by a female astronaut signing inside a space ship to mother Earth?

But the astronaut is signing in Signed English (SE) but not in ASL according to Dianrez and Boutcher.

Yet SE, according to, um, experts say it's not a language, so it cannot be ASL though it falls under the same category as PSE and SEE as signing in English word order.

But not surprisingly we have a poll result of over 75% of the participants saying that the female astronaut signs mostly in some form of English word order whether it's PSE, SE, or SEE and not strictly in ASL.

Don admits to signing in PSE (or at least he acknowledged he signs heavily in signed English word order) and not strictly in ASL although as professor he "teaches" ASL. But he hasn't accepted the challenge to strictly sign in ASL in a video demonstration? 

Right now it seems to me that most signers regularly use English word order in their signing as part of their visual language of communication rather than strictly in ASL. Perhaps those who took the survey poll might be confused as thinking their signing is in ASL but in reality uses more English word order (e.g. PSE, SE, SEE) than they care to admit and perhaps their signing actually fall under the category as either SE, SEE or even PSE? Perhaps like David or Don, for example?

People seriously need to make up their minds instead of making things up along the way in the effort to tout ASL as the all encompassing signing umbrella by those who sign in SE, PSE or even SEE just so they can put a few more notches on their ASL bedpost and call those signing as "ASL." All of sudden it appears we're seeing these incestuous relationships happening among many culturally deaf people in their exhaustive efforts to label just about any signing, part and parcel, as "ASL."

Here's a clue.

Just don't call any English word order signing as "ASL" if you're adamant of calling them as "not a language." Just call it sign language instead. Now, when you sign ask yourself, "Am I really signing strictly in ASL or am I just fooling myself here calling it as ASL?"

Folks, can you say, "discombobulated"?

Barb Digi and Professionalism

Barb Digi publicly resigned from the DBC in a YouTube notification to viewers a few days ago after only a few years in the organization. Despite the numerous controversies regarding the organization she made a point about pursuing an area with greater professionalism in her video if you read the transcript at the end. I agree. Professionalism is key to maintaining and keeping one's own integrity. I've noticed that she has tried to keep Deaf politics out of the way and focus on exemplifying on the positive on how signing can help babies, deaf or hearing, to communicate more effectively with parents.



The simplest approach is to show the positive side of signing (not necessarily "ASL" but signing in general) to parents of deaf and hard of hearing children and leave it at that. I produced a video showing an example of how a simple YouTube of my 1 year old hearing daughter signing at her 1st birthday celebration can carry more weight on delivering a simple message...communication can be understood between a one year old baby and adults.  That simple video message alone carries more weight than for highly visible members connected to an organization to go on a rampage, attacking people and other organizations because their views do not agree with that of DBC.  Once you employ yourself in an organization, what you do or say reflects on the organization's standard of professionalism. Once you abuse that then that organization loses its integrity because of the strong association with an organization and presents a very negative image of that organization. Leaders of any organizations must have a goal in mind on ensuring absolute professionalism. Once you lose that professionalism then any message or goal in an organization would lost or damaged.

Parents simply need to be informed and with that information they can make an informed decision. The parents still hold the trump card because they are the ones who make that crucial decision whether going for a cochlear implant or a hearing, using cued speech, SEE, ASL, SE, PSE, SimCom, or oral-auditory approaches. Even the decision to employ the help from John Tracy Clinic, AGBell or NAD. The key understanding here is that it is ultimately the parents' decision for their deaf or hh child on what they feel is best. The decision does not rest with the DBC. Not Gallaudet University. Not NAD. Not AGBell. Not John Tracy Clinic. They do not own babies with hearing loss. All they can do is provide the necessary information so parents can make an informed decision. Politics will simply turn parents off. That's what professionalism is all about. Informing parents and not let politics get in the way by harassing people for their decision or opinions on other mode of communication or educational approaches that people think are good.  By publicly going after people for having a different opinion or approach would push any message about signing for babies out of the window. I think Barb Digi understands that. So does Amy E. Cohen.

And with that, I sincerely wish Barb Digi all the luck and successes in her professionalism goal and new opportunities in helping parents understand the value of signing for all babies. Politics is not the answer. A simple positive message is the answer. Step into that mud puddle of politics, then you risk tainting your own professionalism and an organization's  own standard.

Good luck, Barb. I mean it.

A Poll: Do you sign mostly in PSE, SEE or ASL?

Note: Poll is not a scientific survey.

ASL, PSE or SEE on the rise?

Let's ask ourselves honestly here. People are saying that ASL is on the rise. Sure, but to what extent compared to PSE or even SEE? Which ones of the signing format would be on the rise in a much bigger way? In short, which ones are the popular signing format used the most? Before I continue let's watch a video of an astronaut signing in space last year.



Now, is that astronaut signing in a SEE, PSE fashion or completely in ASL? (note: you will have to go to the original YouTube page to see the closed captioned part by clicking on the YouTube screen here).

Next, let's watch Gnarly Dorkette's video she made 2 years ago of her signing explaining CDI's role and requirement when it comes to English understanding and competency, PSE, SEE, and ASL.



Now, is her signing done in an ASL, PSE or SEE format?(note, click on the YouTube video to see her transcript of her signing).

Next, let's watch a video of a person demonstrating the four different ways of signing the same Billy Goat story using SEE, Signed English, PSE and ASL so you can see the evolving differences where it goes from following in English word order and grammar to a completely different grammar structure in ASL.



Now, having seen all the videos, which I hope you sincerely did watch and review them all, what would you consider the astronaut's signed input be like? And ask yourself if her signing accurately portrays how most signers tend to sign in. And, if so, then wouldn't her signing format be the one that's on the rise and be deserved special recognition?

If you call the astronaut's mode of signing as PSE then you cannot call the astronaut's signing as "ASL," right? But if you call her signing as "ASL" then it goes against conventional wisdom according to the Billy Gruff story signing examples because her signing was done in English word order and grammar.

So, which ones is it that's on the rise when it comes to signing?

Have fun.

Does Section 504 and ICED prevent "ASL at all times" at Gallaudet University?

Gallaudet University is an institution on higher learning and is supposedly home where communication accessibility reigns supreme.  However, students who go to Gallaudet University are not necessarily fluent in signing or even ASL.  Many do benefit from the use of their hearing aids or cochlear implants enabling them to speak and listen. But students new to Gallaudet University must contend with the fierce indoctrination of ASL. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if previous students left Gallaudet University because they were harassed for not being "Deaf enough" or that they feel they couldn't "fit in" which was how Charles Wirick probably felt.

For many students and staff on the campus of Gallaudet University the politics of being Deaf means that ASL should be the only means of communication on the campus of Gallaudet University for all students. That's what Ruiz is favoring in the Buff and Blue newspaper. But here's where it gets sticky with president Hurwitz.  He recently celebrated the new ICED resolution on the global call to "accept and respect all languages and all forms of communication." Which is good or is it? But then it gets compounded with Federal laws covering communication accessibility.

According to Section 504, and since Gallaudet University is a recipient of federal financial assistance as a post secondary institution which has an obligation to ensure accessibility to students with disabilities, including those with hearing loss and the need for communication accessibility.

An important responsibility of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability against students with disabilities. OCR receives numerous complaints and inquiries in the area of elementary and secondary education involving Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 794 (Section 504). Most of these concern identification of students who are protected by Section 504 and the means to obtain an appropriate education for such students.

Section 504 is a federal law designed to protect the rights of individuals with disabilities in programs and activities that receive Federal financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Education (ED). Section 504 provides: "No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance . . . ."

OCR enforces Section 504 in programs and activities that receive Federal financial assistance from ED. Recipients of this Federal financial assistance include public school districts, institutions of higher education, and other state and local education agencies. The regulations implementing Section 504 in the context of educational institutions appear at 34 C.F.R. Part 104.

Services you should be able to request at Gallaudet University:

* American Sign Language Interpreter
* Signed English Interpreter (SEE-Signing Exact English or PSE-Pidgin Sign English)
* FM Systems and Conference Microphones
* Voice interpreter
* CART
* Remote Captioning
* Cued Speech Transiliterator
* I-Communicator
* Typewell/C-Print
* Professional or Volunteer Notetakers

Even though Gallaudet University obviously supports ASL many are calling for the exclusive use of ASL for all or ASL at all times. That'd be if only the educational institution in question was a private educational institution that receive no federal funding then it wouldn't fall under the rules of Section 504.  But since Gallaudet University receive annual federal funding for as long as it has been opened it must abide by Section 504 laws.  Section 504 gives the power over to students who may request communication accessibility other than ASL.

That's a stark but humbling reality there.

Since president Hurwitz supports the new ICED resolution which does call for pluralism and to "accept and respect all languages and all forms of communication," and that Gallaudet University must follow the laws under Section 504, it would be interesting to see how president Hurwitz can reconcile these things in the midst of a call for "ASL at all times" along with changing campus demographics seeing more hearing students while competing with other universities and colleges on recruiting and retaining deaf and hard of hearing students.

Maybe Gallaudet University is slowly losing it's recognition as a Deaf Mecca?

Anybody want a HUG? (click on it!)

Why did CAD chapter president use his voice at AB2072 hearing?

I've waited to see if anybody had actually objected to Tim Riker, the chapter president of the California Association of the Deaf (Sacramento chapter), who used his voice at the AB2072 Senate Health Hearing on June 23, 2010 instead of signing in ASL as seen in the Calchannel.com (June 23) along with a partial transcript below on what he said which starts at 31 minutes and 40 seconds into the video:

Tim: Good afternoon, my name is Tim Arthur (actually, it's Tim Riker), I’m the president of the California Association of the Deaf, Sacramento chapter. I graduated from Georgetown University, and this fall, because of all this, I’m looking forward to starting my masters’ in public policy. We are opposed to the bill as it is currently written, but we’d like to see an amendment that would work for the best interest of deaf children and the parents. First of all, I wanted to thank you for the positive changes to the current mark up language of the bill, and it means progress, but the language of the bill still needs a little bit more work to make it so that we can really put the focus on the deaf children and getting the parents access to the information that they need. I wanted to point to a 2003 state senate resolution number 20, it formally apologized for the outrageous attempt to *socially engineer people out of *existence. The regional version of Mendoza’s AB 2072 bill leads us towards a slippery slope of *eugenics. So the proposed amendment is a very good step in the right direction. It is fair, if we have a few changes to the amendment. The proposed amendment by the health committee, it still threatens the fundamental values of a deaf education and language development, by giving audiologists the power to discriminate information for which they are not trained or licensed. The audiologists’ training gives them the buyer that’s inherently unacceptable, if the audiologist ought to have a role, it must only be to identify that child is deaf, as soon as possible, and then refer the parent to an appropriate professional or entity with a focus on the educational aspect of raising a deaf child. That needs to be determined by the panel of people who are, represented by people involved with the...

How come no outrage from people in the Deaf community for Time to use his voice when the issue was about getting ASL into the spotlight? With Tim Rikier's refusal to sign and use of his voice, was it to try and appear more "intelligent" and more "educated" hoping that linguicism would prevail on the part of the committee looking favorably at Tim's pleas and be impressed with him?

A) When a Deaf person is able to speak English with his voice, or write excellent English, he gets lauded as intelligent and well educated. This person is considered successful in life.

B) When a Deaf uses ASL (no matter how fluently), but writes mediocre English, and cannot speak English, he is considered intellectually inferior, ill-educated, and guaranteed to fail in life.

On linguicism:

SCENARIOS:

Two persons are talking. During the course of this conversation, one of the persons is assessing the other’s wealth, quality of education, status in society based on the other person’s use/choice of language or dialect.

A) If the other person shows an excellent command of English, the assessor assumes he is quite well-educated, possibly from a wealthy family, which then indicates an elevated status in society.
B) If that other person shows poor command of the English language, or uses another language, the assessor assumes that he’s ill-educated, poor, possibly from a ghetto and therefore from the lower classes in society.

What I don't understand is that since Tim Riker is deep within the world of Deaf culture and community as chapter president of CAD he uses his voice.... instead of signing using his proud and preferred language, American Sign Language. I kind of wondered what exactly was Tim's strategy in doing that. What was his goal to use his voice that day as chapter president of CAD? There were voice interpreters there that day and would have interpretted his signing yet he choose to use his voice that day, on live tv, in front of thousands of Deaf people tuning into the AB2072 soap opera. Not one single outcry from a Deaf person, community or group objecting or asking why he used his voice instead. Not one (as far as I can tell so far).

Why the silence? Is this another example of hypocrisy at work?

Now, I'm in favor of a person in choosing how one prefer to communicate. I won't discriminate anybody for doing that. It's really none of my business. There were ASL interpreters available for both voice and ASL translation at the meeting it wouldn't matter to me. I am not opposed to Tim or anybody else who choose to use his/her voice or sign. I'm just noticing the obvious disconnect between what Deaf people say about using voice over ASL when it comes to choice. And it's usually a negative one.

Now, when I choose to use my voice at Gallaudet University's first ever blog/vlog conference where it had ASL and voice interpreters, and real time captioners available for the live internet audience, I had gotten a few grumbling complaints and objections from some Deaf people saying what I did was rude and so on. And of all places on the sacred grounds of Gallaudet University did I dare use my voice in front of Deaf people. Oh well.

What I'm presenting here or trying to say is not about the complaints per se although I am wondering about that too but it's the irony in seeing a chapter president of CAD who is Deaf use his voice in front of thousands on live streaming tv (which is now recorded for history) in order to elevate the status and use of ASL. Did he unwittingly lowered the status of ASL as not important and choose to use his voice instead? Did he unwittingly elevated the use of voice over ASL that day? Those are the interesting questions I have here.

ADDENDUM: If you have no objection (I don't) to Tim Riker's using his voice then you should have no objections to Brenda Brueggemann, who is deaf and knows ASL, using her voice at Gallaudet University's 2006 graduation commencement speech?

ADDENDUM #2: In a blog called Random Thoughts and Musings by Moi blogger discussed the Breuggemann's use of her voice and agrees strongly that she shouldn't have used her voice and that it was plainly wrong. Oh really?

People in our community are free to choose what language they want to use in various situations - I absolutely agree with that. Dr. Brueggemann's choice, however, went far beyond the bounds of diversity and was, in my view, a grave offense. I took great affront at her choice that day...

Too bad this blogger doesn't know the true reason why Brueggemann decided to use her voice in an email exchange that Brueggemann and I had at the time. I wonder how this blogger feels about Tim Riker's use of his voice being that he's a chapter president of CAD? In both situations both had ASL interpreters at the time with the exception of Gallaudet University that had both an ASL interpreter and real time captioner for the large video screen at the graduation ceremony.

Related blog - Voice is way, way better than ASL!

Forcing the hand or not?

I want to make a clarification to “Earofmyheart.com” or “LZupp” over at YouTube (see transcript of her video at her blogsite) concerning the supposed “forcing” of people into doing what they do not want to do. In this case, it’d be the Deaf Village’s guideline requiring that all videos or vlogs submitted need to be captioned, subtitled or at the very least include a transcript. No one is being forced against his or her will when it comes to having a text version for a submitted video. Either the person shares a similar philosophy or goal as Deaf Village or he does not. A person has a choice on whether he wants his video to be accessible to more people over the internet or he does not. And if so, then the person will take the time to ensure that access to the rest of the deaf, hh and hearing population be made possible to those who may know little or do not know signing or the visual communication. This text requirement also extends to those who speak in their videos as well since not all deaf, hh or hearing understand or hear every spoken word. Also, not all videos are made the same and thus quality differs. Deaf Village wants to ensure and guarantee those who do visit DV will know that linked videos will either have captions, subtitles or transcripts.