Chapter 36: The Pressure to Speak

I wonder if it is universally accepted that too much time is spent on speech in Deaf curriculum and if anyone has not only suggested changing the curriculum  but actually drawn up new ideas.  The more I read, the more I wonder why it is a skill they insist on teaching instead of one they present the option of teaching since so few Deaf individuals choose to use it once they get out of school.   I don't understand why anyone would be rude to a Deaf individual who did choose to speak.  After the section about Marlee Matlin, I watched some video-clips of her on youtube.  

"Matlin has always used her voice, enjoys doing so, feels confident enough to take speaking roles, and stays in training...'If Marlee can talk so nicely, why can't you?'"--pg. 210-211, p. 4

What I found was not what I had expected to find after reading the quote.  I watched four video clips about Marlee Matlin; two were interviews, one was her Oscar acceptance speech, and one was a scene from Desperate House Wives.  In both of the interviews and in the Oscar speech, Matlin only signed (all three times with male interpreters, which was kind of confusing).  In the Desperate House Wives scene she spoke about half of the time and had her daughter on the show interpret for the the other half.  Her speech was still obviously that of a Deaf person.  The way they presented her in the book made me expect someone who would always use her voice and whose voice would sound like that of a hearing person.

I wonder if Bernard Bragg's mom got annoyed at him for drilling her until she could make the "k" sound.  That type of behavior (insisting on perfection) sounds an awful lot like how the authors described the speech pathologists of the old days.

Chapter 35: Different Classifications

Different labels for people with varying degrees of hearing loss and varying means of preferred communication is not something I had thought about before.  The category of "hearing-in-the-head" surprised me.

"Strictly oral-deaf people who don't know how to sign, refuse to learn even the rudiments, and may have a political bias against the Deaf community."--pg. 207, p. 2

Disliking others who are in their position of not being able to hear and stubbornly refusing to learn an easier way for them to communicate seems like it would make life difficult and lonely.

I am surprised they did not press hearing people not using their voices around Deaf people more, but simply noted that some do not.  In class we have been taught that it is quite inconsiderate to speak when Deaf people are present because it makes it where they cannot understand the conversation.

Chapter 34: Deaf Speech

I was surprised to learn that pretty much all Deaf people can speak up to a certain point.

"Virtually all deaf adults have had a heavy dose of speech and auditory training...Oral training is part of the TC curriculum."--pg. 202, p. 3

I do not think I would have had the patience to learn to speak if I was Deaf.  I am surprised it is a required part of the curriculum since a significant portion of the deaf community seems to prefer to not use speech.  I think it would take a lot of courage to use speech being Deaf without being subconscious about what people might think of your speech.  I think it would be rude to ask someone to use speech more in your workplace if ASL is there chosen means of communication.  The person who wrote in seems to feel like the coworker needs to meet him half-way; he learned some signs, so he thinks the coworker should use some English.  Just hire a translator and focus on your job instead of trying to change your coworker.

Chapter 33: The Trouble with Speech Pathologists

Before taking ASL I, I did not know that there was disagreement as to whether or not Deaf people should be taught to sign.  I had also always assumed that speech pathologists were for children who had trouble speaking clearly for reasons other than hearing loss.  I can understand now why Deaf individuals would resent people who think that speech is superior to signing and especially people who inflict physical punishments on students who do not pronounce sounds correctly.  It seems as though the authors must have had negative experiences with speech pathologist and other such professionals as they spend quite a bit more of the chapter focusing on the negative than the positive attributes of people who go into these professions.

I wonder why some people think speech is superior to signing.  In the story of the graduate student who was working with a graduate speech pathologist student to compensate for his or her hearing and speech-skill loss, the student he or she was working with did not approve of Deaf children signing.

"...I noticed that she had a look of grim disapproval on her face.  She was actually frowning!...All she could say was, 'They should be using more speech.'"--pg. 198, p. 4 and 5

Why would she care how a group of people she will never have to interact with communicate with each other, especially when no one involved in the conversation would have been able to hear speech anyway?  I do not understand why people cannot mind their own business instead of trying to push their opinions on aspects of life they cannot relate to on others who actually understand those aspects of life.

Chapter 32: Speechreading

I know a woman who is Deaf but is very confident with speaking as well as speechreading.  Before I knew any sign language I thought it was very cool that she could do that and since I had talked to her before I knew she was Deaf, I never did anything weird and exaggerated while talking to her.  I have seen her one since I started ASL I and I wasn't sure what to do.  She is so confident in speechreading that I wasn't sure if it would offend her if I attempted to sign to her.  Because I was embarrassed by my indecision I didn't make as much eye contact as usual which I now know after reading this chapter was a bad idea.

"People who nervously...take frequent furtive glances to the side, breaking eye contact, drive us crazy."--pg. 193, p. 1

 I find it strange that before knowing anything about ASL or Deaf culture I was completely comfortable communicating with her, but now I am not sure what to do and embarrassed.  I suppose I should just ask her which she would prefer next time I see her.  One of my mom's cousins is Deaf and he only uses speechreading.  I have only seen him once but I remember being very impressed that he could understand people just from the shape of their mouths.  I now know that is more than just lipreading; associational cues are used, as well.

Chapter 31: More Resources

This is the first I have heard of a hearing child with Deaf parents having issues with English, though it makes perfect sense.

"The little boy speaks okay, but sometimes he reverts to an English version of the ASL sentence structure."--pg. 187, p. 1

I wonder if this is typical and how long it takes for such children to reach the English-speaking level of their peers.  I knew a girl in middle school and high school with Deaf parents and she spoke normally.  My mom had her little sister in first grade and she spoke normally, as well.

The authors sure do like listing off resources.  I notice that all of the materials they listed were published between the late 80's and early 2000's.  Were the 90's an important time for Deaf research?

Quiz: Chapters 16-30

I answered all of the questions correctly.  I think this information stuck with me because most of it had some sort of emotional/opinionated aspect to it as road blocks to Deaf people's maximum potential were really highlighted in this section.

Chapter 30: Reading Sources on Deaf Topics

I am not sure how to respond to this chapter as it was mainly facts.  I have not looked for reading material on Deaf topics; I will have to look into some of the suggested sources.  I do not know anything about the legal agencies in my community who support the Deaf community.  I guess I have some research to do!

Chapter 29: Pros and Cons of Deaf Residential Schools

I can see pros and cons of Deaf residential schools.  As great as the pros are (qualified teachers and a community of peers with which children can communicate), if I was a parent of a Deaf child, the cons would win for me and I would look into Charter schools.  Childhood is about more than education.  A parent-child relationship should be more than financial support and occasional in-person encounters.  I would not want to send my children to any type of boarding school whether it was a residential school for the deaf or a prep school.  I think it is more than just what the parents want.

"They believe that they can offer their children something that no dorm parent or teacher can.  They want their children coming home to them every afternoon; they want to talk with them directly about their everyday concerns and monitor their homework; they want to tuck them into bed at night."--pg. 178, p. 1

It's not a mere "want," it's a need.  Parents raise their children, it is what makes them "parents" as opposed to sperm donors and surrogates.  That's just my opinion on the matter.  If it was an option, I would look into moving to a city with a residential school for the Deaf that my child could attend during the day.  If that wasn't an option, I would stick to Charter schools.  

Chapter 28: Deaf Schooling in the Old Days and Now

I went to middle school and high school with a Deaf girl who was being mainstreamed in the public school system.  She had two ASL-using friends:  one met her in elementary school and took ASL classes during her lunch periods and could use ASL comfortably by middle school; the other friend had Deaf parents.  Her friends would interpret for her during lunch and such when she interacted with other students and she had an interpreter who went to all of her classes with her.  I'm pretty sure her usual interpreter knew what she was doing as she gave off an aura of confidence and was the same woman who taught the Deaf girl's friend ASL. Occasionally she would have other interpreters who seemed very unqualified.  I remember once at a school play a woman who looked very stressed and confused attempting to finger-spell everything being said.  I am not sure how much the Deaf girl got out of the public school system, but I know the only people she ever directly communicated with were her two friends and her usual interpreter.

I like the idea of the Charter schools.  The issue with Charter schools, however, is that they require lots of parent support and interaction, and apparently the parents of the Deaf just do not care for the most part (I am thinking about how they often let their children go without language until they start school and how they do not make an effort to learn to sign themselves most of the time).  The original Deaf schools before the take-over of oralism (which I cannot understand the reason for it happening in the first place) seemed to work well based on the chapter with the exception of how time-consuming they were.  After comparing this chapter and my personal experience, I am of the opinion that mainstreaming is probably not the best choice, but that a Charter school-like option should be available to Deaf children with uncaring parents.

Chapter 27: Closed Captioning vs. Closed Interpreting

If the trend in closed captioning changed to a trend in TV interpreters, I do not see how it would effect hearing people who were not using closed captioning in the first place.  Just as you can turn closed captioning on and off, why wouldn't you be able to turn the little interpreter in the corner on and off?  I think having both options of closed captioning and closed interpreting would be great.  I cannot think of any reasons why other hearing people would not also support it.

"Some deaf people prefer interpreters on TV.  A few programs, notably Christian and Catholic-oriented ones, feature them in fairly unobtrusive oval 'inserts' in the lower right-hand corner of the screen."--pg. 165, p. 2

On youtube there is a closed captioning feature that is provided purely by technology.  If people do not speak very clearly, the captions are mangled nonsense.  It is amusing but I can imagine it would be very frustrating if you were trying to use the closed captioning for constructive purposes.

I think it would be a good idea for select showings of all movies in movie theatres to have captions.  This way if you find captions distracting you can attend a showing without them, and if you want the captions you have options of captioned showings to choose from.

Chapter 26: Deaf Distaste for Reading

For me, I think that reading with my parents when I was little is what groomed me to enjoy reading.  Most Deaf children do not get this (I am still curious as to how it is possible to read to Deaf children).  If Deaf children are only exposed to reading and writing in educational settings, it makes sense that they wouldn't want to do it for fun, especially if they do not have a proficient grasp on it due to not enough time spent on it and "drilling" methods.

"If they never get beyond 'bad, mad, pad, and dad' or drills in sentence diagrams, they won't stick around to luxuriate in the delights of Jane Austen or Shakespeare.  Why bother?"--pg. 159, p. 4

I can see where it would make sense that reading is one thing that Deaf people and hearing people experience in the same way...if they had the same English backgrounds, and they do not.  I do not understand why anyone would think not being able to hear would make someone less intelligent.

I would say that literacy therapy is more important than speech therapy.  Once grasped, reading is something that Deaf people would be able to do without struggle due to not being able to hear.  Speech, however, will never match the level of hearing people.  Unless a Deaf person has an individual interest in learning how to speak, I do not see a reason to make them attempt it.  It seems like it would be very frustrating, especially if you have no desire to learn the skill.

I think there is a fine line of political correctness in every aspect of life and the story of the Deaf man on page 161 is walking rather close to it.  It is almost as if he is asking for separate but equal--which has been ruled as inherently unequal in regards to race in 1954 and Massachusetts marriage terminology in 2004--and I am glad that the authors point out that this man's view is not universal for the Deaf community.  I personally think that qualified teachers with positive attitudes should teach, regardless of their status as Deaf or hearing.

Chapter 25: Why Deaf People Have Trouble with English

I agree with all that was covered in this chapter.  I think it is awful that some parents let their children go without language until they start school.  I can see where it would be difficult to motivate a Deaf student to work harder on English as it is not fair; hearing people have it much easier in that department.  I do not think the difference in fairness is something that can be changed.  Working with Deaf children very early seems like the way to go to prevent language delays,

"As far as preventing the "language gap" goes, the best remedy is action.  Get language to the child immediately, provide a language-enriched environment at home, and foster early reading and writing skills before the child starts school."--pg. 154, p. 3

but that would require parent motivation which mysteriously is not there the majority of the time.  Perhaps when doctors diagnose a child as deaf they should be required to give the parents a long speech putting them in their place and outlining their responsibilities for raising a Deaf child.  I would like more information on how to read to a Deaf child.  Would you sign in SEE instead of ASL?

Chapter 24: Why Deaf People are Wary

I understand why Deaf people feel they should hold the majority of jobs that involve the Deaf community as that is logical and I do not understand why a hearing person would think that they would be more qualified to do such things.  I am curious about what jobs Deaf people are prohibited from having, however.

"Deaf people, after all,, are still barred from many positions."--pg. 148, p. 2

It seems like, with the assistance of interpreters, Deaf people could do any job.  Which brings me to my wondering about why Deaf people would resent interpreters.  I suppose this is a job that Deaf people cannot fulfill, unless they are also oralists.  Interpreters make money yes, but I do not understand why that is bad.  They are providing a service.  Perhaps creating a test that interpreters would have to pass (and it is hard for me to believe that there is not already one out there) in order to be licensed would take away negative impressions of interpreters as it would make sure all of them are qualified and possessing positive attitudes.

Chapter 23: Educational Interrogations by Deaf People

I find it interesting that one of the first things the authors mention as to why Deaf people question hearing people who sign is that there is some paranoia as to whether or not the hearing person is trying to get in a position of power in the Deaf community and manipulate its members.

"Our experiences have taught us to be wary of certain hearing people who are skillful signers.  Some of them think they're about deaf folks; they use their skill to gain cachet in the Deaf community, and manipulate deaf people to satisfy their own craving for power."--pg. 143, p. 3

This seems far-fetched to me but I suppose this must happen on occasion for them to have mentioned it.  I will have to research more about cases where this sort of thing has happened.  As for the reason for questioning hearing people relating to the grape-vine of information about ASL education, I do not think this is gossip for the most part.  I would say that most people who want to discuss your ASL educational background do truly want to give you advice on how to further your education.  Grudges were mentioned, however (pg. 145, p. 1), but I would think you would be able to sense if a Deaf person is a bit of a busy-body just as you can sense if a hearing person is a busy-body.

I would say I have patience with foreigners who are not fluent in English.  I hosted an exchange student from Switzerland my senior year of high school and though she was pretty much fluent upon arrival, it still did not bother me when she occasionally did not know how to express something and I would try to help her.  I would imagine that as long as a hearing person shows interest and effort in ASL, Deaf people would be patient with them.

Chapter 22: Watching and Approaching ASL Users in Public

This is not a topic I had thought about before.  I suppose someone eyedropping on a conversation would be much more obvious than someone eavesdropping on a conversation since the first requires your visual attention.  I think that whether or not eyedropping is rude depends on what the conversation is about.  If it is something private I think it would be most polite to look away.  According to the text ASL users know that it is very difficult to have a private conversation in public, though.

"For all practical purposes, there is no such thing as a "private" ASL conversation in public--that is, within eyeshot of other people.  What two Deaf people are discussing is out in the open for everyone else to see."--pg. 139, p. 3

 Since the ASL conversations we might see in public will most likely be on topics that are not private, I think it is fine to watch if your reasons for watching are purely because of your interest in the language.  I also think common sense should be used when deciding whether or not to attempt to join a conversation, just as we use common sense when deciding whether or not to engage hearing strangers in conversation.

I do not have a name sign but I think it is nifty that they are given by peers instead of parents.  I wonder if Deaf parents give their children name signs or wait for other Deaf friends their children will develop to do the honors.

I imagine it would be frustrating to not have a form of whispering.  Using a jacket as a "sign-shield" (pg. 140, p. 1) sounds cumbersome and it seems like it would be much less subtle than whispering.  This is definitely a down side to purely visual communication.

Chapter 21: Will Deaf People Sign With Hearing People They Do Not Know?

The information provided in this chapter seems rather contradictory to information I had been given previously.  I have been told before that Deaf people appreciate it when Hearing people make efforts to use ASL and that they are, for the most part, more than happy to help beginners improve with ASL.  This chapter, however, made it seem like you should only interact with them in certain situations and not take it to heart if they do not want to sign with you...rather conflicting messages.  I can certainly see where it would be interpreted as insulting to be treated as if you cannot do anything on your own.  I suppose it is just a tricky situation.  The only opportunities I have had to interact with Deaf people in public (not at a deaf event) were before I had started taking ASL.  I work as a host at Cracker Barrel and a group of four Deaf people came in once.  When I greeted them they all started signing the same thing, what I now know to be WE DEAF WE.  At the time I did not understand what they were saying.  We just gestured and smiled to communicate and we did just fine without someone interpreting.  The Deaf people I have communicated with since beginning to learn ASL at Deaf Culture Events seemed more than happy to help me increase my vocabulary and communication skills.  I would say it is mostly a matter of context and the personality of the Deaf individual.  

Chapter 20: Should ASL Count as a Foreign Language?

Well I certainly think it should; I'm taking it for my foreign language.  The only argument of the list presented (ASL is not a language; ASL is not foreign; ASL has no culture; ASL has no literature) that I think has any worth is the ASL has no literature argument simply because it is the only argument on that list which is remotely true.  I think the writers' claims that it could eventually develop a written form are a little far-fetched.  If the deaf community deviated from English as their system to communicate through writing and reading, they would completely seal themselves off from communicating with the English-speaking world, and that is a rather lonely idea as there is not exactly a plentiful number of ASL users to communicate with.  There is also the point that it is simply easier to not change things and continue to read and write in English.  I think it is silly to say that it does not count as a foreign language simply because there is no widely-used written form, however.  Not having to include literature in the curriculum gives more time to more thoroughly learn the key interactive communication components to the language.

Chapter 19: The Evolution of Total Communication

Total Communication started out as a compromise by Gallaudet so that children could learn ASL with the option of picking up Oral skills.  The term has been adopted by supporters of the oral method, however, and bent to mean learning the oral method with a little bit of ASL thrown in.  Simultaneous Communication is signing while speaking which typically ends up being very sloppy as far as the sign part goes.  Bilingual-Bicultural is a method where ASL is used to teach English.  Again we have many opinions on the many variations of Sign Language.  It must be a horrible feeling to have to pick a path for your deaf child when you know very little about what would be best for them with so many options and so many different opinions as to what is best.  Perhaps on the primary education level it would be best if there were not so many choices to ensure that all deaf children have a good foundation to build off of with whichever variation and style they choose to use.  Parents of deaf children should be educated on the pros and cons of each approach at the very least.

Chapter 18: The Sign Language Spectrum

I found the idea of Sign Language as a spectrum quite interesting.

"Think of a broad arc.  On the right are the 'pure ASL' users; on the left, the 'pure English' users.  Pidgin Sign English, which borrows features from both ASL and English, would be situated in the middle of the arc, a bit towards the right.  Signed English would be a bit more towards the left.  But both are distinct from ASL."--pg. 123, p. 2

 I would hope that I fall maybe slightly to the left of "pure ASL;" that is what I am aiming for, anyway.  I do not know which of the signs in my vocabulary are derived from Signed English and which are considered pure ASL, so I cannot say which categories of signs I use more, but I do my best to use the ASL syntax.  I am starting to get slightly overwhelmed by the growing number of variations on Sign Language that are being discussed.  I find it amazing that people who use different variations can still communicate with each other.  It's almost like the specific variation you use is part of your style and is flexible to change as opposed to spoken languages where even though accents and dialects may differ, there is not really a spectrum or continuum from one language to another; you have to completely learn a new spoken language from scratch.  I wonder if there is anything more to ASL purists thinking all who sign should use pure ASL other than just superiority, manifest destiny-type attitudes.  I could see in an academic setting being a stickler for ASL, but out in the world that just seems snooty.

Chapter 17: "Pidgin" Sign Language

At first I was annoyed that people have to make things so complicated by not just learning the correct sentence structure of ASL.  A line from the text made me think differently, however:

"Since ASL is an extraordinarily flexible language, ASL users readily understand signers who use Signed English or PSE..."--pg. 121, p. 1

ASL is different from spoken languages in that it is much more flexible, and this code switching is something that should be taken advantage of.  Snootily insisting on only using the correct form of ASL prevents communication that could otherwise be had, and deaf people cannot afford in most cases to be picky about who they can communicate with.  In a mindset of using a language in daily life over in a academic setting, being able to communicate is more important than communicating correctly.  I do find it interesting, however, that some signers are annoyed by the misuse of ILY but not by the--to put it crudely--butchering of their language.  Perhaps they think that people who use PSE are trying harder than those who merely flash ILY.  PSE is a mixture of English word order and ASL word order at least, unlike Manually Coded English.  

I have never seen or heard Pidgin forms of other languages, but now I am rather curious.  I wonder if using a mixture of Spanish and English counts as a Pidgin form or not; the degrees of Spanish and English in these mixes vary.  They also seem to involve a lot of speaking louder, as if that will help make things more clear.  I wonder if there is a lot of frustration expressed in PSE.

Chapter 16: Learning ASL From Home

The opening letter made me slightly sad.  I don't like thinking about people losing anything they have come to depend on.  I wonder if it would be worse to lose your hearing or to be born deaf; I suppose there is no real way to compare the two.  Even if Theordora Scrivner manages to learn ASL or "Pidgin Sign English" in isolation, what good will it do when it gets to the point where sign is her only means of communication?  Yes she will have the means to communicate, but who with?  If she cannot find a person fluent in ASL to practice with, who will she sign with once she has learned it?  It must be quite challenging for deaf people to find a community with those they can communicate with.  It is probably worth it for Theordora to move to a more urbanized area with more deaf people if she is not overly set in her home.  If she stays where she is, she will probably become very lonely unless she lives with people who will be dedicated to learn ASL alongside her.

I agree with what the authors said about learning from books and illustrations.

"We've watched hearing children and adults teaching themselves signs from illustrations.  They usually get it wrong."--pg. 116, p. 3

I find it very frustrating to attempt to learn signs from pictures.  I am very pro-video.  

Quiz: Chapters 1-15

I got 8/10 questions correct.  5 I just was not sure about (All sign languages have the same basic structure--the subject comes first.  False).  I knew that signed English did not have that structure, but I also do not think signed English is an actual language on its own.  I was not sure if it was a trick question or not as in ASL, time trumps subject/topic.  10 I missed (The "ILY" sign has been in widespread use since World War II.  False).  I believe it has been in widespread use since Carter used it, but I do not know when he was president.  I will try to retain more information for the next quiz.

Chapter 15: More on Fingerspelling and Why Hearing Children Should Learn It

I agree that everyone should learn fingerspelling, though I found some of their examples rather comical.  For example,

(Referring to those within sight but not within sound and the usefulness of fingerspelling) "This, of course, depends on the angle of vision, eyesight, and distance.  If you're both equipped with binoculars, you can read each other's fingerspelling across a considerable distance."--pg. 109, p. 5

I do not know a single person who carries around binoculars with them on a regular basis.  Anyway, I found many of the examples to be quite useful.  Underwater I have not tried but that makes perfect sense.  As for fingerspelling in inappropriate situations, my little brother and I use that all the time.  I learned the manual alphabet when I was 12 and taught it to my brother who was at the time 7.  We fingerspell in Church and at other no-talking semi-fancy events, and our mother has completely given up on trying to get us to stop.  Since I have started taking ASL I, I have gotten a lot better at reading his fingerspelling.  Before now he was always better than me.  I'm not sure if that is because he learned it younger or if it was just a difference in abilities.

I think all children should learn to sign beyond just fingerspelling.  I also think they should start learning right away, not just in preschool-first grade.  Babies can sign-babble earlier than they can speech-babble, so there's the benefit of being able to communicate with your children earlier.  This would also let those who have to sign be less isolated.  Even though ASL is a different language from English, since it uses English writing and reading it seems like the two languages are intertwined enough that it makes sense to know both.

Chapter 14: Fingerspelling

I had not previously thought about doing actual hand and finer exercises to improve fingerspelling; I had previously been under the impression that practice was the only way to get better.  A suggestion not listed in the book for how to improve clarity and speed for finger spelling that I have heard is to finger spell signs you see on a road trip.  The area of fingerspelling that seems like it would be the most difficult to practice would be receptive for me.  Perhaps I shall try googling some samples of fingerspelling to practice reception, but a real partner does seem like it would be best.  I shall dedicate more of my lab time to practicing fingerspelling.  I think my biggest issue with fingerspelling is getting into the mindset of it.  At first I will be very bad at forming the letters I want and might get hung up on one letter I miss during reception and then miss all of the others, too.  If I practice more throughout the day, perhaps this will be reduced.

"Skilled ASL users fingerspell sparingly, but at a characteristically ''lightning' pace."--pg. 107, p. 5

This is what frustrates me the most, I think.  I am always told whether it is from the book or from experienced signers that clarity is more important than speed, yet they sure seem proud of their speed.   It kind of reminds me of typing.  Perhaps I shall try to think of it that way and see if it helps.  Typing quickly is impressive, yet typing at a moderate pace while hitting the correct keys is much more useful than typing quickly and making many mistakes.  Eye contact is something else that brings me to a loss.  How can one concentrate simply through peripheral vision, especially if the person signing is not mouthing the word?  I hope I get better at making eye contact with people who are fingerspelling.

Chapter 13: ILY

I found this chapter very amusing.  Everyone is annoyed by ignorance of their culture, and I can defiantly understand why over-use of ILY could greatly annoy some deaf people if they are in a bad mood.  It seems like it would be interpreted as an attempt to bridge a communication gap by open-minded, optimistic deaf people.  I liked the stories in this chapter, especially the one about the little girl who knew the ILY sign from Sesame Street.

"When she saw the couple standing by their car bravely flashing the ILY, she cried, 'Daddy, stop!  Those people are deaf, and they need help!'"--Linda Bove, pg. 102, p. 1

I personally think it's a pretty amazing things that one sign can gain trust and bring such different people together.  I feel bad for those who are bitter for the "cheapening" of the sign.  The English words "I love you" are considered to be overused by some, yet the majority of people still say it without flashing and receiving bitter looks.  The authors seem to understand both sides of the issue.

As for ILY becoming "commercialized" by Carter's use of it and perhaps Sesame Street:  I like to think of it as broadening education or communication, not just a "cheapening" of something sincere.  Perhaps it would be best if some of the ASL culture that goes with the sign also be "commercialized" to calm the sour wrath of deaf people irked by the ignorant masses.

Chapter 12: ASL Resources and Signing Size

I am rather confused by what Tammy Kirk meant by "bigger signs" and why she thinks size of signs impact her ability to help people using ASL, and it seems like the authors are rather confused, as well.  I think their list of resources would be helpful for anyone, though.  I had not previously thought about looking in an average book store but now that I think about it, it would not surprise me at all if there is an ASL for Dummies book or other such helpful resources.  I personally use ASLpro.com for my extra resource along with asking people who know ASL what a certain sign is.  I like these sources because they are easy to access and free.  Even though I find ASL books interesting, I do not think I would personally choose a book as my number-one source as they do not show the signs in action and books tend to be expensive.  I think I use the recommended signing space for the most part.  I"ll pay more attention from now on to make sure I am being accurate and clear.

Chapter 11: Respecting Other Cultures and their Preferred Signs

I can see where alerting people who are not native signers to offensive signs is important.  I know that certain terms in English are offensive because of my interactions with a variety of people using the language; for those who do not communicate in a language on a regular basis (such as ASL-as-a-second-language people), remembering which signs are acceptable and which are not acceptable is confusing.  I do not understand how certain terms come to be interpreted as offensive and others stay acceptable.  I would have thought by now that in the English language, any racial label referring to color would be considered offensive (as they are inaccurate, anyway; I have never met someone who was truly "white" or truly "black") but they are both deemed acceptable for the most part.  Other things in the English language that are considered offensive I do not understand the reasoning for.

"The term 'Oriental,' denoting persons from the Asian-Pacific nations and cultures, has lately come under fire as being patronizing and inaccurate."--pg. 94, p. 5

This I do not understand at all.  I do think it is very important to respect groups of people by avoiding terms they find offensive, though, even if the reasoning behind the offense is a mystery.  Keeping straight which signs are offensive and which signs are acceptable will be challenging for me.  I shall have to put extra effort into this.

Chapters 8, 9, and 10: Round-about Learning, Cross-Culture Variations in Humor, and Visual Accents

While reading chapter eight I could not stop thinking about the roles of hearing parents of deaf children in their children's language acquisition.  Of the options given for how deaf children learn ASL (learn from deaf parents or learn from deaf children when they enter school), no option was given of hearing parents teaching their deaf children ASL.  Surely the majority of hearing parents with deaf children want what is best for their children and would research and discover that ASL is the best option.  This chapter seemed to portray that all hearing people are against the use of ASL and either prefer oral methods (in the case of the teachers) or do not give their children much of a language foundation at all (in the case of the parents).  I cannot accept that this is truly the way things are in the current time, though I have no real-world experience with hearing parents with deaf children under school age to make any sort of connection.  This is an issue I would like to learn more about.

Variations on humor  cross-culturally is something I had not previously thought about though it makes sense.  I find it rather sad that in order to truly appreciate the humor of a language you really need to know it natively.  I am glad they included the letter to the editor by David Anthony with his sarcastic English puns and annoyance at the Deaf being treated like a subclass of human.  Deaf culture and ASL are completely native to him I would assume as he says that both of his parents are "true self born Deaf" which I think gives his perspective both strength and weakness.  He obviously understands the plight of the Deaf, but he has not experienced the plight of Deaf children with hearing parents.  I thought the reply was quite effective and polite.  The description of fake and real ASL humor was interesting, but experiencing it first-hand would help.  I suppose I'll never truly understand it, though, just as David Anthony has much to be desired in the area of English puns. 

I would imagine that accents in a visual language would cause more confusion than accents in a speaking language based on the examples of "birthday," "soon," and "outside" which appeared to be completely different signs more so than a slight difference in shape or motion (numbers 16-19) or some parallel to speaking pronunciation.  At least different accents of ASL are easier to understand that different accents of other visual languages.  I would like to see more examples of ASL accents in conversation form. 

Chapters 6 and 7: Sentence Structure and Written Form

I am getting the impression that hearing people learning ASL are determined to connect ASL to some sort of speaking language, whether it be English or French, so they have something to relate to and grasp hold of instead of just letting ASL be its own independent language.  It's not English, okay.  So it must be like French, then!  No.  People are uncomfortable with what they do not understand, and the idea of a purely visual, independent language is quite foreign and not the least bit understood among most hearing people.  Yes ASL has influences of other languages, but all languages do.  I wish we could just accept that we need to let go of our English-habit-assumptions and be sponges to soak up the ways of ASL and not insist on making connections.  I suppose that is only human, though.  I have never been good at labeling the different parts of sentence structure in English, so I am not sure how to approach glossing.  I think I shall learn more effectively through examples than through trying to comprehend that ASL sentence structure is OSV where as English sentence structure is typically MSVO...none of that means anything to me.  So I for one shall do my best to be a sponge and just try to soak up sentence structure so I don't have to think about it so much.  

As far as learning goes, I rather like that ASL does not have a written form.  When I was attempting to learn Spanish in high school, we simply read lists of Spanish vocabulary and examined grammar charts.  We very rarely spoke Spanish and we never had to prove that we could comprehend it.  With ASL, watching and communicating and not having the excuse of "oh, I'll just write this down and work on remembering it later" (and never actually looking back over it) is not an option.  We have to grasp the moment of exposure and if we forget, figure out a way to see the sign again.  It is a much more effective learning process.  I need to work on glossing as I have not experimented with it very much as of yet.  

Chapters 3, 4, and 5: Curing Ignorance, Good Intentions, and Great Britain

I can't help but wonder at times if the authors are exaggerating some things.  Apparently it is a common misconception to think that Braille and ASL are one in the same.  I don't understand how enough people would be ridiculous enough to lob together two such vastly different sensory disabilities into one category and believe that a system that is completely visual doubles as a reading tool for those with no visual capabilities.  The authors also say that the blind community has our attention more than the deaf community as the blind are more noticeable than the deaf in the opinion of the authors.  Perhaps this is true for the majority, I do not know, but for me this is not true.  Blind people speak the same language as the run-of-the-mill community and not all service dogs are for blind people.  I am much more likely to notice deaf people using sign language than a blind person being led through a crowd by a friend.  I did find it interesting that blind and deaf people can communicate with each other through Morse Code, though.  

The authors seem rather touchy on the misconception of the origin of FSL.  They seem to regard the Abbe de l'Epee as a well-meaning little man who completely missed the point of the French deaf community's language.  They are thankful that he recognized that signing was the best way for the deaf to communicate, but seem rather irked by his meddlesome grammar additions.  

I find it interesting that New Zealand and Australia use BSL when  they are quite some distance away from the British Isles and, based on its description, BSL seems cumbersome when compared to ASL, FSL, and Spanish finger spelling.  I wonder why BSL had such opposition in the 1900s.  They mention repeatedly the evils of the Oralism method and how physical punishments were often used with such methods.  I have mixed feelings about Oralism.  I understand their opposition to a method that represses a preferred method, as Oralism repressed signing, but what if signing was never repressed and the two systems were simply two peacefully co-existing options?  I have met three deaf individuals who read lips and speak English when with people who cannot communicate with ASL and who use ASL when with people who understand it, and they seem to be relatively happy with their lot in life.  If deaf individuals are already bilingual in that they sign with ASL and read and write with English, it seems like knowing both ASL and Oralism would be quite useful and practical in life, just as my class learning ASL will be useful and practical in life.  Everyone likes to be reached out to, especially when it is apparent that the reaching out took effort.  When I have come across deaf individuals who could speak English, I was impressed and thought things along the lines of "wow, that's dedication" just as the deaf communities of both the U.S. and England cherished Princess Diana for going out of her way to learn to communicate in BSL.  

Chapters 1 and 2: Origins of ASL and Worldly Variations

When I signed up for ASL I, I assumed it was based off of English.  I find it quite interesting that it has more French influences.  I also had never realized that the ability of deaf people to both sign ASL and write English makes them bilingual.  I can't imagine what it would be like to grow up without a language as many children did before schools for the deaf.  It was only briefly mentioned in chapter 1 that gorillas can learn and communicate with ASL, but that along side thinking about how frustrating it must have been for deaf children to not have a language makes me wonder if it is almost as cruel not to give gorilla children language as it seems cruel not to give human children a language.  A couple of years ago I read the book Congo by Michael Crichton.  In it there was a gorilla named Amy who communicated with ASL.  While in the Congo she left the group of researchers she was with.  Later she was seen with a baby gorilla who could sign.  I know this is fiction but I wonder if ASL would take off and be passed from mother to child with gorillas if enough gorillas in a certain area were taught ASL.  Perhaps that would just be forcing our culture on them though, as we have tried to force our culture on humans with different cultures before.  I would like to learn more about gorillas and ASL and the different positions of those who think it is beneficial to gorillas and those who think it is forcing our culture on a society that doesn't need or want our help.  Are we even teaching it to them in the first place for their sake though, or are we doing it to study brain patters or something for the benefit of humans?  I kinda doubt we would be doing something to help a different species without getting something out of it for ourselves.  Otherwise, who would fund it?  Humans are so selfish.  Not only do we only look out for our own species, but we often narrow it even more to those of our species who we can relate to.  Before the concern of people like Cogswell and Gallaudet, the majority of Americans were content to sit by while deaf children were institutionalized, trapped forever in their own minds except for "home signs" that were not recognized by those who did not know them well or who didn't care enough to take the time to try to understand them.  The majority does not understand what it is like to be deaf, so the majority labeled the deaf as inferior and even signing as inferior to speech when it started to become more widely used.  Even those who had deaf children and did not want to institutionalize them only looked out for the interest of their own children, hiring tutors or sending them over seas to a fancy school that did not want to let its methods be widely known without making a profit.  There are so few people who are truly exceptional, people who will act for the good of others in situations they cannot really understand and spark a change in societal norms.

At first it rather annoyed me that ASL is not a universal language, and especially that British sign language is so different when American and British spoken languages are the same.  I suppose it comes down to culture again, though.  Maintaining the culture of a region is important, but as the world becomes a smaller place through technology and trade, the development of more forms of universal communication would be very practical.  It greatly impressed me the relative ease with which Gestuno is apparently picked up by deaf individuals.  I wonder if learning it for international communication would be simpler than trying to get everyone to learn English or Mandarin or whatever languages the leading super powers speak.