From: Wayne.Silsbee@p1.f222.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Wayne Silsbee)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: ASL & English
Date: 13 Apr 92 21:01:35 GMT
Reply-To: Wayne.Silsbee@p1.f222.n105.z1.fidonet.org
Organization: FidoNet node 1:105/222.1 - N.W. Family History, Oregon City OR

Index Number: 21065

[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]

In a msg of <06 Apr 92>, James Womack writes to Wayne Silsbee:

 JW> But to call it unstructured is an insult to the people and
 JW> culture whose language it is.

Why is it an insult? Are we thinking of two different things when
we talk about "structure" of a language? Kimberly and Patrick have
both jumped on me for this view, and now I have to deal with you...
:)  Ok, here's an example of what I mean by "unstructured".

A friend of mine was describing, in ASL, his trip to Hawaii. He
really enjoyed the beaches, and especially all the bikinis! Except!
Woman ('Y' shaped hand walking along his arm). I about died
laughing. This was ASL, was it not? yet he didn't use the sign
'fat', he didn't use the sign 'walk' -- yet it was perfectly clear.
Isn't that part of the language? In English I could have said it
many ways using 'fat' or 'humongous' or 'obese' or '.....'  But I
still would have needed to stay within the confines of English.

Are visual "pictures" no more a part of ASL than hand motions are
to English, and the language is actually quite rigid
("structured"), or does ASL allow these deviations from its
confines to make ideas easier to describe?

 JW> They didn't ask you to mess with what's theirs and not yours.

Whoa! I never asked to mess with ASL. It isn't mine. I'd like to
learn it better (but have other languages more pressing at the
time), but have never had any desire to "improve" it!

 JW> Now with SEE and ASL, the people involved took the motions and
 JW> some of the handshapes of ASL and hearized it into SEE, SE,and
 JW> other MCE forms. Then had the gall to cal ASL unstructured.

Again, I don't see where there is "gall" involved. <Shaking my head>

 JW> English tends to be the odd language out when you look at
 JW> word order of other languages. We say theirs is backwards
 JW> while ignoring that ours is the one different from the so
 JW> many "theirs." English is shot with exceptions so that it has
 JW> a contradictory set of grammar and syntax rules. Other languages
 JW> tend to rather consistent with grammar, gender references, and
 JW> meanings.

Absolutely. English has to be one of the most difficult (and
STUPIDEST) languages around. No argument here.

 JW> If one really wants to call language unstructured, English is
 JW> a prime candidate for it.

That's funny. With all these rules upon rules upon rules upon
rules, and yet you would call English "unstructured". That is
precisely why I call English "stuctured". See, I knew we had a
definition problem here. Shall we call a truce? But please answer
my questions above if you have any insight on them.

 JW> absurdity is just incredible. And it persists. But now, its beginning to
 JW> anger Deaf people. Very much.

...I still don't understand it... :-(

TTYL

Wayne

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!105!222.1!Wayne.Silsbee
Internet: Wayne.Silsbee@p1.f222.n105.z1.fidonet.org