#aslnotes

[end-of-reset]

i LOVE that youre using asl gloss for frisk!

I’m glad that you’re happy, but mine is still really clunky and would probably make a fluent speaker laugh very rightfully hard at me. Sentence structure KILLS me! It’s what I’ve been focusing the most on studying lately. 

Thankfully, I have the excuse of ‘frisk is 8 not my fault’ I can fall back on!! sdhfkjsad

[end-of-reset]

one of the reasons i get nervous about drawing answers to asks is because i’m not sure how much ASL i will draw for an answer, and my grammar is still fuzzy

i think i just need to get over this and accept that i will probably mess up and so will frisk because they’re 8 (they are smarter than me though. which makes this hard). i’m going to do my best to keep up with learning, but if anyone wants to correct me, never be afraid

[end-of-reset]

How long has Frisk been learning ASL?

I'll just answer myself- they started in the second semester of kindergarten and spent all of first grade learning it in school. They've been self-teaching (memorizing signs, not grammar) all of second grade.

So, their grammar is supposed to be pretty rudimentary, and they attempt to repeat spoken phrases directly into ASL sometimes, but some mistakes are just straight up on me, lmao

[learningcherryblossoms]

ASL resource

Heyyy, so I’ve kind of been ‘gone’ just because of moving and what not, but like, I was scrolling through reddit and I know some of you follow me for ASL stuff, but I’m kind of finding it tricky to continue asl on tumblr. Call it a christmas miracle but reddit has a sub for asl and I like it. so I figured yall might like it to if you don’t know about it. 

[learningcherryblossoms]

Lesson 40: Cochlear Implant and the American Sign Language (ASL)

Many members of the Deaf community are concerned that the widespread use of cochlear implants especially by young children will cause the destruction of Deaf culture and ASL.    It must be pointed out however, that a cochlear implant is not a cure.   If the person does not wear the external parts of the cochlear implant or turns off the speech processor, the person will be unable to hear.  Electronic components are easily damaged by exposure to moisture.  Therefore, while swimming, in the rain, or participating in water sports, it may not be possible to use a cochlear implant.   

 Electronic components also sometimes fail to work.  While these components are repaired or replaced, the person will be unable to hear.  Therefore, it is important to have a backup communication system for users of cochlear implants.   A sign language can be such a system especially if hearing members of the family learn to communicate through signing.  The following excerpt about the use of signing along with a cochlear implant is taken from: Nussbaum, D. (2003) Cochlear Implants Navigating a Forest of Information…One Tree at a Time. .

The Debate

Professional opinions in both medical and educational environments vary as to the reasons why sign language should or should not be used with children who have a cochlear implant. Professionals who advise against the use of manual communication for children with a cochlear implant believe that promoting total reliance on, and immersion in, the use of the auditory channel maximizes the potential the implant provides to develop useable hearing and spoken language. These professionals warn that the use of sign language significantly reduces the amount and consistency of post-implantation spoken language stimulation for the child, promoting dependency on visual communication, and causing further delay in spoken language development

Other professionals maintain that sign language and spoken language can be developed and used to complement and supplement each other. They believe that effective educational environments can be designed to facilitate and maximize a child’s language and communication skills in both sign language and spoken language, and that these approaches can work harmoniously to support a child’s overall language, cognitive, social, and academic development.

Growing Support for the Use of Sign Language

When cochlear implants first became available, the majority of families choosing this surgery appeared to be those families who were already strongly committed to oral education. As use of the technology has become more widespread, it appears that children who are obtaining implants have a broader range of education, communication, and family environments with a wider range of goals. An “auditory only” approach to communicating with implanted children is often strongly recommended by hospital implant centers and is an effective choice for many. However, communication approaches involving the development and use of both spoken and signed language for implanted children are gaining support. The choice to implant a child is no longer solely associated with the desire to seek an “oral only” education for him or her. Of 439 families of school-aged children with cochlear implants questioned in a 1997-1998 survey by the Gallaudet University Research Institute, two-thirds of the families continued to use sign language as a support for communication in the home. Amy McConkey Robbins, in volume 4, issue 2, of Loud and Clear, a publication of the Advanced Bionics Corporation, states that  “a substantial proportion of children with cochlear implants utilize sign language” and that “pediatric implantees” are about equally divided between those who use oral communication and those who use total communication. While use of solely oral communication strategies may meet the needs of one segment of the population of implanted children, it appears that sign language can have a role in the language, communication, education, and identity of children who use cochlear implants.

What Literature Reports About Sign Language and Cochlear Implants

Limited research has been done in the area of cochlear implants and the use of sign language. As the earliest group of implanted students were mostly involved in oral environments, there has not been sufficient time to evaluate longitudinal outcomes for implanted students who use sign language. Some of the literature available on the topic of sign language use for implanted children includes the following statements supporting its benefit:

“Continued use of a total communication (TC) approach might be the most effective means for facilitating language growth in a child with a cochlear implant. Nonetheless, it is essential that the child be exposed to an enriched auditory environment for as many hours a day as possible. There is a great need for a strong commitment to maximize the auditory component with a TC approach. In addition, it might be necessary for the school staff to adjust their expectations and teaching priorities, especially if manual communication is the focus of the child’s educational placement.”  (McKinley, A., & Warren, S. (2000). The effectiveness of cochlear implants for children with prelingual deafness. Journal of Early Intervention, 23.) (Instructor Note:  TC includes signing; authors are suggesting that system of communication that includes signing may be the most appropriate for young children with cochlear implants),.

“It seems that a child who is a good communicator before implantation, whether silently or vocally, is likely to have good speech discrimination ability in later years.” (Tait, M., Lutman, M. E., & Robinson, K. (2000). Preimplant measures of preverbal communicative behavior as predictors of cochlear implant outcomes in children. Ear and Hearing, 21, pp 18-24.)  (Instructor Note:  Having any language, whether signed or spoken, is an advantage for the development of speech in children with cochlear implant).

“One observation seems equally sure: Being exposed to two languages from birth, by itself, does not cause delay and confusion to the normal processes of human language acquisition.” (Petitto, L. A., Katerlos, M., Levy, B., Gauna, K., Tétrault, K., & Ferraro, V. (2001, June). Bilingual signed and spoken language acquisition from birth: implications for the mechanisms underlying bilingual language acquisition. Journal of Child Language,28, pp 453-496.)  (Instructor Note:  The simultaneous development of both signed and spoken language will not cause a delay in the development of either language; on the contrary, they may support each other).

“…it is important that guidelines be developed to identify children who are not benefiting from cochlear implants while they are still young enough to acquire language through other means…the overall cognitive and psychosocial development of children will be negatively affected if they do not have access to a shared language system with which to communicate with family members, other children, and other adults during their early years.” (Spencer, P. (2002). Language development of children with cochlear implants. In I. Leigh & J. Christiansen, Cochlear implants in children: Ethics and choices. Washington, DC: Gallaudet Press.).  (Instructor Note:   A small number of children with cochlear implant fail to acquire sufficient competence in spoken language.  These children need to be identified early on and provided with systematic exposure to signing.)

How Sign Language Serves as a Foundation for the Development of Spoken Language? (The following is from: Koch, M. (2002).  “Sign Language as a Bridge to Spoken Language,” handout disseminated at the conference, Cochlear Implants and Sign Language: Putting It All Together, held April 11-12, 2002, at Gallaudet University.)

As a supplement to early language development: Sign language can provide babies and toddlers with a system to symbolically encode the experiences of their lives—through a sensory system that is intact—that is, vision. The auditory system of a profoundly deaf child (pre-implant) will provide very limited access to the auditory based communication system of spoken language.

As a clarifier in development of listening: As a child’s auditory skills begin to develop through a cochlear implant, the world of sound can be overwhelming, especially the rapid, complex barrage of spoken language. As a child learns to associate sound with meaning, signs can be used to bridge the new experience of sound with the familiar experience of visual language.

As a cataloging system for new experience: A young child is constantly experiencing new things—people, places, things, concepts, emotions, etc. The fledgling auditory system is not capable of “capturing” and “filing” these new experiences through audition alone. New experiences can be encoded quickly through the mature system of vision, and can later be transferred—quickly and easily—to the auditory system.

[learningcherryblossoms]

Lesson 39: Deaf Identity and the Preservation of Deaf Culture

Throughout history, people with a hearing loss are referred to by many different names.    The following excerpt from the National Association of the Deaf (NAD), the organization that represents the largest number of Deaf people in the U. S.  states that they prefer to be called "Deaf" regardless of the degree of hearing loss (severe, moderate, or mild).  For those who have a hearing loss but are not members of the Deaf community, the NAD prefers the term "deaf" (if they have a severe degree of hearing loss) or "hard-of-hearing" if their hearing loss is in the mild to moderate range.

Deaf and hard of hearing people have the right to choose what they wish to be called, either as a group or on an individual basis.  Overwhelmingly, deaf and hard of hearing people prefer to be called “deaf” or “hard of hearing.”   Nearly all organizations of the deaf use the term “deaf and hard of hearing,” and the NAD is no exception.  The World Federation of the Deaf (WFD) also voted in 1991 to use “deaf and hard of hearing” as an official designation.

Yet there are many people who persist in using terms other than “deaf” and “hard of hearing.”  The alternative terms are often seen in print, heard on radio and television, and picked up in casual conversations all over.  Let’s take a look at the three most-used alternative terms.

Deaf and Dumb -- A relic from the medieval English era, this is the granddaddy of all negative labels pinned on deaf and hard of hearing people.  The Greek philosopher, Aristotle, pronounced us “deaf and dumb,” because he felt that deaf people were incapable of being taught, of learning, and of reasoned thinking.   To his way of thinking, if a person could not use his/her voice in the same way as hearing people, then there was no way that this person could develop cognitive abilities.   (Source: Deaf Heritage, by Jack Gannon, 1980)

In later years, “dumb” came to mean “silent.”  This definition still persists, because that is how people see deaf people.  The term is offensive to deaf and hard of hearing people for a number of reasons.  One, deaf and hard of hearing people are by no means “silent” at all.  They use sign language, lip-reading, vocalizations, and so on to communicate.  Communication is not reserved for hearing people alone, and using one’s voice is not the only way to communicate.   Two, “dumb” also has a second meaning:  stupid.  Deaf and hard of hearing people have encountered plenty of people who subscribe to the philosophy that if you cannot use your voice well, you don’t have much else “upstairs,” and have nothing going for you.  Obviously, this is incorrect, ill-informed, and false.   Deaf and hard of hearing people have repeatedly proven that they have much to contribute to the society at large.

Deaf-Mute – Another offensive term from the 18th-19th century, “mute” also means silent and without voice.  This label is technically inaccurate, since deaf and hard of hearing people generally have functioning vocal cords.   The challenge lies with the fact that to successfully modulate your voice, you generally need to be able to hear your own voice.  Again, because deaf and hard of hearing people use various methods of communication other than or in addition to using their voices, they are not truly mute.  True communication occurs when one’s message is understood by others, and they can respond in kind.

Hearing-impaired – This term was at one time preferred, largely because it was viewed as politically correct.  To declare oneself or another person as deaf or blind, for example, was considered somewhat bold, rude, or impolite.  At that time, it was thought better to use the word “impaired” along with “visually,” “hearing,” “mobility,” and so on.  “Hearing-impaired” was a well-meaning term that is not accepted or used by many deaf and hard of hearing people.

For many people, the words “deaf” and “hard of hearing” are not negative.  Instead, the term “hearing-impaired” is viewed as negative.   The term focuses on what people can’t do.  It establishes the standard as “hearing” and anything different as “impaired,” or substandard, hindered, or damaged.  It implies that something is not as it should be and ought to be fixed if possible.  To be fair, this is probably not what people intended to convey by the term “hearing impaired.”

Every individual is unique, but there is one thing we all have in common:  we all want to be treated with respect.  To the best of our own unique abilities, we have families, friends, communities, and lives that are just as fulfilling as anyone else.   We may be different, but we are not less.

Some Controversial Aspects of Deaf Culture

Opposition to Cochlear Implant

Deaf (the upper case "D" Deaf) people are worried that the cochlear implant will eventually result in the abolition of deafness and, with it, the Deaf culture and deaf languages such as ASL.  The National Association of the Deaf (NAD), the advocacy group for Deaf people in the U.S.initially opposed the use of cochlear implant.    They argued that deafness was not a disability but simply a difference, Deaf like being deaf and are proud of their Deafness.  "Deaf pride" is a frequently used term in the Deaf community.

Later the NAD conceded that adult deaf have the right to have cochlear implants if they so chose but opposed the use of cochlear implants for children.  They argued that the hearing parents of deaf children (most deaf children are born to hearing parents) should not decide whether their child grows up to be an oral deaf (one who uses a spoken language and considers herself/himself to be part of the hearing society) or Deaf (one uses a sign language and regards himself/herself to be part of the Deaf community).  The decision should be left to the child when she/he is old enough to make a decision.  However, the development of a language (whether signed or spoken) is age-critical; if children do not learn the language in the first few years of their lives, they will never catch up later.  Therefore, waiting until the child is 16, 18, or 21 years old to decide whether to have a cochlear implant is not practical.

Still later, under heavy criticism of its position that hearing parents should not make decisions that affect the future and wellbeing of their children, NAD has conceded that hearing parents indeed have the right and the responsibility to bring up children in ways that they consider is in the best interest of the children.  Nonetheless, NAD is generally opposed to the widespread use of cochlear implant technology.

Deaf people who have a cochlear implant are not well accepted by the Deaf community.    At Gallaudet University (a liberal arts university for the deaf located in Washington D. C.) and other predominantly sign language based deaf schools, students who have cochlear implants are pressured not to use them by other students.

Wanting Deaf Children

Some members of the Deaf community actively seek to have deaf children.  They seek the services of geneticists and use a modern reproductive technology -- preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or P.G.D., a process in which embryos are created in a test tube and their genetic makeup is analyzed before being transferred to a woman’s uterus -- to maximize the probability that they have a deaf child.  In 2002, The Washington Post Magazine reported on a deaf couple from Maryland who both attended Gallaudet University and set out to have a deaf child by intentionally soliciting a deaf sperm donor.  For them, “A hearing baby would be a blessing; A deaf baby would be a special blessing.”

[learningcherryblossoms]

hey I can't seem to find all your asl lessons in one spot. I'm having a lot of trouble to find lesson one. I might be blind and not seeing it but if you can please direct me or send me the link to them all <3

mhm. I see your problem lmao. Uhm, let me see if I can gather everything. here’s one set  yeeaaa it doesn’t help that somewhere along the line I actually stopped labeling them lmao.  here’s the page that has lesson one.  I think that might be all the lessons I have.  and I think the first two listed here aren’t ones you can find in the other links.  that should be all of them currently c=  

[learningcherryblossoms]

Innovations in Hearing Aid Technology

The behind-the-ear (BTE), also known as the over-the-ear (OTE) hearing aid, is popular with many advantages.  It is about as inconspicuous as an eyeglass aid but its case is large enough to fit the  necessary battery power and electronics to offer sufficient gain and wide frequency response.  People with a wide range of hearing loss - from mild to profound - and varied patterns of loss, such as those  with a mid or high frequency loss, can benefit from this type of aid.  

A short plastic tube wrapped around the pinna connects the receiver located in the aid to the earmold inserted into the user’s ear canal. The distance between the microphone and the earmold is sufficient to produce high gain without the fear of acoustic feedback.   In addition, a telephone and certain assistive listening devices (discussed later in this chapter) that are useful in special listening conditions may be plugged into this type of aid.  

  The switches and the battery compartments are much larger than in eyeglass aids (although not as large as in body-worn aids) for relatively easy access and operation.  Users of this ear level aid find it easier to focus on the source of sound, especially if an aid is worn in each ear, because the microphone is located right above the ear.

In-the-ear (ITE) hearing aids fit entirely within the large pit (concha) in the pinna and extend slightly back into the ear canal.  Because only a small portion of the instrument is visible, this type of hearing aid has become very popular.   Originally useful only to those with a mild loss, the recent advances in miniaturization of electronic components has made this device powerful enough to be used by those with mild to marked (moderately severe) degree of hearing loss.   The electronic components of in-the-ear aids are built into a custom earmold.   A small hole in the earmold - called a vent - helps reduce the feeling of plugged up ear and allows the ear canal to “breathe.”

In-the-canal hearing aids (ITC) are small enough to fit inside the ear canal with only a small portion protruding outside.   Miniaturized electronic components with low battery power requirements have made it possible to produce ITC aids suitable for mild to moderately severe degree of hearing loss.  In body-worn, eyeglass, and BTE hearing aids, the microphone, which picks up the sound, is located outside of the pinna. 

 For this reason, the wearers of these hearing aids may find the sound somewhat unnatural.  In ITC hearing aids, the microphone is located inside the pinna and, therefore, the natural acoustical properties of the sound are better preserved.

Completely-in-the-canal (CIC) hearing aids, the most recent development in hearing aid miniaturization, are totally invisible to the outside.   Apart from this cosmetic advantage, CIC hearing aids offer other benefits to the user.

Telephones may be used as they normally are by placing the receiver on the ear.  In other types of hearing aids, the user may need to use a device called telecoil (T-coil) to communicate effectively over the phone.

The microphones in CIC instruments, located well inside the ear canal, are shielded from wind noise, which sometimes causes problems in other types of hearing aids. Because the CIC aid is located inside the ear canal close to the eardrum, it requires less amplification than other aids.

Because of the lower level of amplification (see above), the problems of acoustic feedback are lessened in CIC aids.

Finally, when the opening into the ear canal is closed (occluded) by the earmold used in ITE and ITC aids, it causes enhanced hearing of certain frequencies to the detriment of other frequencies producing an undesirable listening experience known as the occlusion effect. The CIC aids, located deep within the canal, produce minimal to nonexistent occlusion effect.

CIC hearing aids have sufficient gain and output to benefit those with mild to moderate degree of loss.    They are not (yet) useful for those with moderately severe to profound degrees of hearing loss. ITC and CIC aids are also obviously unsuitable for those with ear discharges and frequent middle ear infections.    People prone to excessive wax build up may need to have their ITC and CIC aids cleaned frequently.    Finally, assistive listening devices (discussed below) cannot be used with these two types of hearing aids.