Marie's+Research+Paper

Marie's home page Marie Dobson Mrs. Knight AP English 2 December 2009 The Evolution of American Sign Language Sign language has been around for nearly four centuries, evolving naturally, it has become one of the fastest growing and one of the most controversial languages in use today. With sign language comes a whole new culture and a whole new way to look at the world. In the sixteenth century, Geronimo Cardano, a physician from northern Italy, claimed that deaf people could “be taught to understand written combinations of symbols by associating them with the thing they represented” (The Perigree Visual Dictionary of Signing). By 1620, the first book about sign language was published by Juan Pablo de Bonet. The book contained manual signs of the alphabet and gave information about how to teach a deaf person to sign and understand sign. The first school for the deaf was finally opened in Paris in 1775 by Abbe Charles Michel de L’Epee. He taught deaf people how to communicate with each other and with hearing individuals. His concept was that signs should rely on images, because vision is a deaf person’s strongest sense. (Cokely 5) He used gestures, hand signs, and finger spelling to teach his students to communicate. Abbes formed this language by using signs that he had seen being used by a group of deaf individuals in Paris. Then he created the rest of the language to form a version of spoken French. Abbes started to build the bridge between the hearing and non hearing worlds. Sign Language in America was not as common as in France, but it would soon catch up. In 1814, Thomas Gaulldete traveled to Europe to better understand sign language, which was not yet fully established in America. While in England, he met a man named Roche Ambroise Sicard who taught at a sign language school in England. After many months of studying Gaulldete returned home from England with Lauren Clerc, a sign language professor from the school in Paris. Soon Gaulldete had the first sign language school up and running in America, with Clerc as the primary instructor. He appropriately named the school Gaulldete University in Hartford, Connecticut. Soon, sign language schools began popping up all over the country. Eventually there were 22 schools up and running by the year 1863, focusing purely on deaf individuals. Although history states that sign language in America was mostly introduced by Gaulldete and Clerc, some historians and linguistic experts contradict that statement. The statement that American sign language came from solely French sign language is disputed by the fact that the languages are very different. “Only about 60% of the signs in ASL seem to be related to signs in FSL” (Linguistics at Gaulldete University). Natural language changes during the last 160 years do not account for a difference of 40%, thus making it less likely that ASL descended for FSL alone (Cokely 2). The only logical explanation would be that FSL evolved from forms of sign not native to France, and when brought to American also taught using languages from around the world, not just French. Many historians believed that sign language was first introduced in American by Gaulldete University, but research shows that’s not the case. “By 1817, deaf individuals on Martha’s Vineyard had been actively participating in the social and political activities of that island for well over a century”. (Cokely 2). Before Martha’s Vineyard, it is believed that sign language was actually was the first form of language ever used. Historians believe that caveman’s first form of language was in fact a gestural language (Cokely 2). Sign Language, like any other language was not invented, it evolved naturally by deaf people and those who used the gestural language. That is why there is no universal sign language. Its different any where you go in the world. British Sign Language is completely different from French Sign Language. Even if a deaf New Yorker were to relocate to Washington, he would be exposed to hundreds of signs he has never seen before. (University of Pennsylvania) In the 1800s, a reported 2,000 to 6,000 deaf people were living in America. Today there are between 550,000 to one million people in the United States alone who are deaf. About 90% of them were not born deaf. The majority these individuals use sign language as their preferred choice of language, even those who were not born deaf and do have the ability to talk. The use of sign language creates a tie to the deaf world and the deaf community. Not only those who are deaf use sign language: many schools across America now teach sign language as a “foreign” language. With the instruction of sign language to hearing individuals, it helps to unite the deaf community with the hearing community. After studying sign language, many people move on to becoming interpreters for deaf individuals. Parents of deaf children are also educating themselves in the language. Children of deaf adults are educating themselves as well. For a deaf individual, it is very frustrating to have to attempt to communicate with someone who does not have any form of hearing loss, and does not know sign language. Many people are under the belief that a deaf person can read lips and that they should be able to fit into a hearing world with the ability to read lips. The truth is that only about 30% of spoken English words are visible on the lips. Many words appear to be the exact same on the lips such as “sane” and “insane”. Even small differences such as this prefix can lead to huge misunderstandings and a gap in that communication method. Although some deaf people are highly skilled at picking out certain words and reading the differences, the majority of deaf individuals do not have that ability. (Drury University) They rely on their sign, just as we rely on our English when speaking to someone from another country. Because of the separation between the deaf and hearing worlds, deaf individuals feel a very strong tie to the deaf community. To them, it is like their church, or a club. It is a place where they are not discriminated against. People fully understand and comprehend their situation, and they do not judge them because they are going through the same thing. The deaf community also provides deaf individuals with a sense of family and moral support. With the teaching of sign language and deaf culture, the deaf community isn’t growing, but rather the understanding of it. Meaning there is not necessarily becoming an increase of deafness, but the deaf community is reaching out to the hearing world and allowing them to learn about their culture. One example is the instruction of sign language to hearing students. Students are not only taught the language, but also the history. Students are taught about the advantages and disadvantages of being deaf. Hearing individuals haven’t always been so generously allowed a peek inside a deaf person's world. Previously, deaf people have felt somewhat protective of themselves and their community, not wanting to share any of it with the hearing community. At a 1977 conference for the National Synopsis on Sign Language Research and Teaching, Barbara Kannapell stated that: “It is important to understand that ASL is the only thing we have that belongs to deaf people completely. It is the only thing that has grown out of the deaf group. Maybe we are afraid to share our language with hearing people. Maybe our group identity will disappear once hearing people know ASL. Also, will hearing people dominate deaf people more then before if they learn ASL?” (Cokely 3). When I interviewed a deaf professor at the University of Wyoming, he was taken aback by how radical that statement was. The professor, Todd Corbett, was born deaf. He said that he did not feel the same way that Kannapell did, but rather thought that it was intriguing that hearing people were so interested in this world that they had no part of. Corbett allowed me the opportunity to get an inside opinion from a member of the deaf community and I very shocked by his outlook and attitude. I imagined that a deaf person would want to be able to hear, they would want to be normal and not have any disadvantages, but Corbett felt completely opposite. “I don’t think I’m disabled. I can't hear. That’s is. I’m no different from anyone else.” When asked if given the opportunity to hear, would he, and he said absolutely not. Todd said that he felt his disability was the way that society looked at deaf people. According to Corbett, “[Society] pities the deaf, and they shouldn’t. I have my arms, legs, torso, I have no reason to be pitied or to pity myself.” Corbett grew up with two parents who were not deaf, and they themselves had to teach themselves sign language. Growing up he attended a school where teachers did not know how to teach deaf kids, so he transferred to a school with deaf instructors. After school he attended Gaulldete University and said for the first time he felt comfortable. “I was surrounded by my peers, not in the sense that they are the people around me, but rather the people who understand me and my situation and that was comforting.” (Corbett) Now, not only are people becoming more educated on sign language, but there have also been advancements in technology to help communication. In the 1960s, the TTY machine (telecommunication device for the deaf) gave deaf people the opportunity to communicate via phone. The machine “rings” by a serious of flashing lights, or more recently a vibrating wristband that resembles a watch. The machine resembles a computer; it has a keyboard consisting of about twenty to thirty character keys. When the user types in his message it is converted and transported over regular telephone lines and is then displayed on the other user's screen, or it gets printed out. These are widely used by four million users world wide with severe hearing or speech impairments. Before the TTY, the deaf were isolated from a hearing person's world without any means of telecommunication. Life without a telephone posed as a problem because the deaf would have to deliver their messages personally, which was inconvenient. Later, message relay centers where invented to allow TTY users to connect to any phone in the world. All users have to do is call a toll free number and relay their message to an operator and then they transport the message to a user via TTY. Today, devices such as cell phones, texting, instant messaging make using the TTY less common. One of the most significant advances in the deaf community was the invention of the cochlear implant. With the cochlear implant, hundreds of thousands of deaf individuals were given the opportunity to hear for the first time. A cochlear implant is an “implanted hearing device, designed to provide useful hearing sensations to a person with profound or severe nerve deafness by electronically stimulating nerves inside the inner ear” (Food and Drug Administration). The cochlear implant has two main components: a microphone that is worn on the outside of your body, typically right behind your ear and the device processes and transmits sounds. The second component is an implanted receiver that contains the electronic circuits that receive signals from the external system and send electrical currents to the inner ear. (Food and Drug Administration) The devices are equipped with magnets that hold the external system on top of the implanted internal system. The implant also comes with a larger device that can be worn in a pocket, belt pouch or harness that allows them to adjust sound levels. Cochlear implants are perfect for people who get little or no benefit from hearing aids. Even if one was born with sever nerve deafness, the cochlear implant gives them an opportunity to hear for the first time. There are many factors in determining the success of the implant The success rate of the implant is not the same for everyone. Patients that have only recently become deaf have higher success rates than those who have been deaf for a long time. Age also plays a factor in success. If a patient received the cochlear implant at a very young age, they do better than older patients who have been deaf for a long time. A cochlear implant user has the highest success rate, however, if they are quick learners and have a dedicated learning support group behind them. The health and structure of their cochlea- (number of nerve cells or spiral ganglion) that they have left, the intelligent of the receiver also affect the implants effectiveness. The implant processes sound through a very complicated process. The cochlear implant receives sound from the outside world, processes it and sends electrical currents to the auditory nerve. When the auditory nerve receives the currents, it become activated which sends a signal to the brain. The brain learns to recognize these signals and the person experiences “hearing”. Although the result isn’t the same a as hearing individual hears, the implant somewhat simulates natural hearing. (Food and Drug Administration) There are two different types of implants. Scientist believe that the inner ear responds to sound in two separate ways. One theory is that the cochlea's response differs from where the implant is located on its length, and another theory believes that the cochlea responds to the timing of the sound. To test this theory, researchers created implants that separated the sounds transmitted to the internal implant. For example they sent lower pitches to the area of the cochlea that was more responsive to lower pitches. They sent higher pictures to the area where the cochlea was more responsive to higher pitches. To test the timing theories, researchers created implants that make sound signals into pulses to see if the cochlea would respond better to the sound or the pulses. (Food and Drug Administration) Although the invention of the cochlear implant has changed the deaf world, the device is a huge controversy among the hearing and deaf worlds. Many people think that if given the opportunity to hear, why wouldn’t someone want to get the surgery? However most of the people that think this, are hearing people. When I asked Todd Corbett his thoughts about the cochlear implant he felt that it was life changing technology, but he still wouldn’t want it. “Society hasn’t necessarily become more aware of the deaf, but rather how to fix us. I’m fine being deaf, I wouldn’t want to be hearing if even given the choice.” When talking to other deaf individuals, they too agreed that they wouldn’t want the implant, they said that would be like asking a hearing person if they wanted to be deaf. Why would they want to be deaf? They’ve never been able to hear, they’ve grown up not hearing. To change someone from not hearing to hearing would be like re-teaching them everything that they’ve learned since being a child. The cochlear implant controversy is a very big one because it affects so many people's lives. The cochlear implant typically separates people into two different categories. Those who believe that if given the opportunity they should “repair” a child’s hearing, and those who think that they should emphasize a child’s natural condition. Those who are for the cochlear implant feel that it is important to make a child feel normal. However, that statement implies that a child without the ability to hear, is not “normal”. That’s the problem many deaf people see with society. A lot of society see being deaf as a disability; the deaf community see it as part as their cultural identity. It is like how some kids have blue eyes and other have brown, it is just a part of who they are. Telling a child that being deaf is a disability and is not normal is putting it into the child’s head that there is something wrong with them and there is not. (Corbett) Those who support the procedure feel that it is as simple as buying contacts or glasses for someone who doesn’t see well, the ones who do support the procedure are not usually the ones having to go through the procedure and those for it, tend to be parents of deaf children. (University of Pennsylvania) Parents need to realize that being deaf isn’t a disability in the eye of the beholder. A deaf person doesn’t think to themselves “why am I not normal”, because that thought doesn’t even cross their mind until someone tells them that they are not. Corbett felt that society should embrace the deaf community, not try to get rid of it by implanting something into their head. Those against the implant believes that supporters the implant are so caught up on what could happen that they don’t think about the possible risks of the surgery. In the surgery, doctors cut open a patients mastoid bone and glue the implant onto the bone. The surgery isn’t a simple one, in fact its a very serious surgery that offers no absolute guarantees. So even if patients have the surgery done there is a chance that it will not even work. A child who is always told that she needs “fixed”, that there is something wrong with her, will always feel that way. A lot of it comes from parents feeling that it is their fault their child was born deaf, that being deaf is not normal, and that they need to find some kind of miracle to fix their child as well as their feeling of denial, guilt and the need to blame someone.(Drury University) A study found that children who do receive the surgery tend to have a higher risk of low self esteem, as oppose to children who are a part of the deaf community. (Drury University) Deaf individuals have a strong sense of family with the deaf community. They don’t see their inability to hear as a negative aspect, they tend to really love their culture. Saul Kessler, a deaf man wrote the following poem about his love for his culture and his identity: They say I’m deaf, They say I’m deaf, These folks who call me friend. They do not comprehend. They say I’m deaf, And look on me as queer, because I cannot hear. They say I’m deaf I, who hear all day My throbbing hear at play. The song of sunset sings The joy of pretty things The smiles that greet my eye, Two lovers passing by, a brook, a tree, a bird; Who says I have not hear? Aye, tho’ it must seem odd At night I oft hear God. So many kinds, I get, of happy songs, and yet They say I’m deaf. (MacMurry College)

This poem describes a deaf persons feelings towards the hearing, society that views them as not being able to hear. However, to them they do hear. They can hear God talking to them, or even a bird flying by. They just don’t hear it quite the same way that everyone else does. The author actually implies that it's other people who look at him as being deaf,. They are the ones that are telling him he cant hear. According to Corbett, the majority of the deaf are proud of it, not remorseful. Society as a whole needs to look at the deaf community as just another culture in the mixing pot, much like African Americans or Mexicans. There is nothing wrong with someone who is deaf. We have to stop thinking in a way that views deaf culture as not “normal”, because to them, hearing is not normal. We are the ones with a disability. Not them.

Works Cited “American Sign Language”. NIDCD. (9 Nov 2009) . “Cochlear Implants.” Food and Drug Administration. (30 April 2009) . “Cochlear Implants: The Great Debate.” University of Pennsylvania.( April 2005) . Cokely, Dennis. __American Sign Language.__ Silver City: Gallaudett University Press, 1991. Corbett, Todd. Personal Interview. 13 Nov 2009. Neisser, Arden. __The Other Side of Silence__. Washington D.C3.: Gaulladett University Press, 1990. Stewart, Elizabeth. __American Sign Language. The Easy Way.__ New York: Barrons Inc., 1992.