X-Envelope-to: DEAF-L@SIUCVMB.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"DEAF-L%SIUCVMB.BITNET@vaxf.colorado.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: CAREY_B
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.deaf-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 13:32:00 -0700
From:         "Bryce Carey, CNS,
              Admin. Sys. Group" <CAREY_B@CUBLDR.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject:      Re: D/deaf

From:   carey_b@cubldr.colorado.edu

On the subject of using an appropriate name to describe
what people attempt to denote by the D/deaf distinction I wrote:

>> Indeed, the intent of the D/deaf distinction is an attempt to
>> identify people who belong to a select (and I might add, socially
>> insular) cultural group that communicates mainly thru sign language.
>> It seems to me that the proper nomenclature for such a group SHOULD
>> denominate their most distinctive marking, namely the use of
>> sign as a primary mode of communication.

Annie replies:

>I agree. That's an interesting point.  Perhaps something like "Sign
>Community" would be more accurate than "Deaf Community."  It might
>better include SODAs and CODAs who are part of the Deaf community, but
>are not necessarily deaf.  The D/d distinction seems pretty ingrained
>at this point (though not necessarily unchangeable, if someone were
>really invested in working on changing it).  Some people have
>preoposed the word "sighted."  I definitely disagree with using this
>word, since I am sighted, too, but not deaf.  "Sighted" is already
>used by blind (and sighted) people to indicate people who are not blind.

The trouble with the expression "Deaf Community" is that it suggests
that the fact of deafness creates a community. If one says that
"so-and-so is French" it often evokes images and prejudices in the
minds of people who have ideas of what a French person is like.

The same thing happens with the expression "so and so is deaf."

Now if you want to create a positive image to identify people
who use sign language you should divorce it from the negative images
that already exist in the minds of hearing people when they think of
becoming or being deaf.

It is far easier to create a new image in the public mind than to erase
an old one.

New ideas are easiest to accept when they are not too different from
older concepts. In Western cultures, and in particular in English,
the accepted way to create new words has been by derivation from Latin
and Greek. Therefore we could suggest an educated term to represent
users of sign language and have a fair expectation of respectful
acceptance. For example, the term "Telephone" was recently invented
from the Greek terms 'tele' far off-distant and 'phon' speech.

As it happens, there is a little used word in the dictionary that nicely
describes users of sign language, and in a highly positive way, also.
That term is:
                 Logographers

What Logographers do is communicate by means of logograms.

Logograms are signs that represent entire words or concepts.

I am aware that there is a term "manualists" that is also used to
represent signers, but unfortunately our aristocratic Western culture
tends to demean people who work with their hands.

Therefore, 'manualists' has too many old negative images attached.
On the other hand, the root "logo" meaning "Word, thought" is viewed
with respect in our culture as part of words like "logic" "Logos".

So, I would suggest that people think along these lines if they
wish to create a positive image for the use of sign language.

-Bryce
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU