You hit the nail on the head with the last paragraph:

“Critical theory shows us how language can be used to oppress, but also how language can be used to emancipate. Applications of critical theory and discourse theory will provide new vocabulary and narratives for the deaf, and hopefully change how society perceives its audistic tendencies.”

This is what I think is the key to all of this discourse. We all have subjective realities based on our upbringing, the social circles we fall in, education, etc. Critical theory assumes that when people become aware of their own situation, then they are likely to be called “into action”. Words like “institutional audism”, “dyconscious audism” need to be explained in conceptual terms that will encourage more dialogue and action. Critical theory is when discourse becomes action through the understanding of the oppression which occurs. As I may have mentioned before, Paulo Freire used specific language to help the poor people of Chile, and then Brazil to realize their own oppression and to do something about it through their discourse/action.

I think the key is to be able to have a discourse that is comfortable for all of the members of the community in which discourse is occuring. This is what is terrific about the current Deafhood courses coming from the folks in the Bay area- they seem to have been successful in breaking down the concepts in Dr. Paddy Ladd’s book into ASL and visual concepts and creating a phenomenal discussion on the topic of Deafhood. With a combination of courses, blogging, vlogging and just casual discussions on the topic, the discussions should become more rich and meaningful.

“In an environment which fosters oralism, which research will most likely be met with funding and general approval: research on bilingual education and the positive benefits of cultural dissemination, or research on phonetic cueing systems and applications for speech acquisition?”

Cued speech is really a misnomer since it doesn’t really represent speech sounds but rather linguistically revelant abstract phonemes of consonant-vowel languages. Cued Speech was termed by Dr Cornett who held a classical view that speech sounds and phonemes were the same. Now, we know it’s not the case anymore.

The consensus among the hearing cuers is that they shouldn’t be cueing what they hear but rather cue what they consider to be linguistically revelant to the meaning. For example, “latter” often sounds like “ladder” but if you’re cueing, you should never cue “ladder” but “la-tur.” It was clear that cuem has its own phonetic features separate from phonetics of speech. Additionally, the cues “e” and “t” are often ambigious to deaf cuers while “d” and “t” are very distinctive to them, but for hearing listeners, “d” and “t” are often ambigious while “e” and “t” are distinctive. Despite those ambigious phonetics, cuers and speakers are able to comprehend what’s being conveyed by using linguistic closure.

Cuem is a very powerful tool for the deaf, especially when the deaf wishes to learn English. The Deaf will only truly achieve equal access if they know cued English, a visual counterpart of spoken English. Cued English is a language using cuem and spoken English is a language using speech. Cuem is a visible modality while speech is an acoustic modality.

Knowing ASL well, I can say that there is absolutely NO WAY anyone can present English in signs. It just doesn’t work. Mouthing the words while signing is NOT the same as seeing English visually in cuem. Experiments proved signers wrong over and over no matter how deaf signers insist they see “English.” Many research papers comparing cued speech and SEE show that only cued speech has proven to give the deaf an accurate access to the phonological model of English (or any other languages). Cueing English allows the deaf to see English on a phonemic level and that is crucial for English acquisition. That is why most deaf cuers who were exposed to cued English since toddlers perform on the same level as the hearing who are exposed to spoken English.

In order to provide true Bi-Bi education, a deaf kid needs both cued English and ASL. To try to teach deaf children to read through ASL is just like trying to teach hearing children to read French by speaking English. Let the deaf acquire English through cuem and from there, the deaf would not feel frustrated with learning to read since they would have internalized the phonological model of English and recognized the relationship between cued english and written English, just like the hearing does with spoken English and written English.

Thank you for providing us with a rich source of information and an academic perspective on this matter.

I am going to read through more of your texts when I get the time. i am particularly interested in how insitutional audism has taken roots in Gallaudet University. This is one thing that fascinates me most about this protest- how insitutional audism has colored the actions both of the protesters and of the administration.

Keep up the good work!

I am he. I am amused that your mnemonic chain associates me with a rather annoying 2002 lost, but I’m finding that a lot of people recognize me through that competition. I recently came across your former coach at the Vegas ASL-TA conference. While I didn’t recognize her, she came over and mentioned that her fondest memory of me, which is apparently captured on tape, was when I was chewing out another team member for ignoring my correct answer and possibly costing us the game (Actually, Adam Stone went on to get the next answer correct, so there’s no real way that we would’ve won based on that one question alone).

$750 is a nice consolidation prize, even though I ended up owing taxes on it.

I understand your frustrations that the printed word seems anathema for many Deaf. My opinion is that many have been conditioned to avoid English because they do not want to repeat their previous failures. In that case, I can understand, but not entirely excuse, their allergies.

Stay in touch.

Jon

Anne Marie..catching up reading your thoughtful blogs.

If that’s you, man, I’m glad to see the work you are doing now!

Ah, yes it is you—I just checked the “about” link on this blog

You said:

The students; however, appear to be unable to completely articulate what they are protesting against. I feel that is because the students lack the vocabulary necessary to explain systematic audism. This is not a reflection on the intelligence of the students, but rather, the education system that denies the culpability of socially acceptable audism. There are no sound bytes because there cannot be any sound bytes. Meanwhile, hearing people who listen to the news believe that the protest is about whether or not JFK is deaf enough, because that is a socially acceptable narrative and therefore can be sound-“bit”.

I agree.

I think it’s significant to observe how ASL is still primarily a language used in person with other people. And as beautifully endowed with the capacity for using unlimited loanwords from English (through the manual alphabet), ASL is still subject to certain aspects of our loosely defined culture which tend to favor a minimal use of such “Englishing” (as one of my peers would joke).

I have been observing events at Gallaudet, especially inside HMB, engaging in dialogue with the FSSA protestors and their supporters (I am a supporter, to some extent). We collectively seem to gravitate toward signed discourse, in person and on the blogs, especially in the pursuit of information.

Indeed, to be clear, there are dedicated readers currently ensconced in HMB, prowling the nets and writing letters or dispatches under the auspices of this or that particular campus group, doing their dutiful “Englishing” but I must admit, I have yet to witness a regular stream of students (protestors and their supporters, including faculty and staff) traipsing from HMB to the Library which is practically a hop down the Green, to peruse the Deaf Stacks which have made a new and more prominent home at the base of the staircase (instead of being tucked away in the back by the Archives). I am in the Deaf Stacks often, 4-5 times a week, for both my own reading and helping others find sources for their own research. I am usually alone among the stacks. Even during this past week. How’s that for contemplation?

Anyway, I need to go right now, but before I do, I also wanted to say, your other postings look great. I just skimmed through them quickly. I only just finally came across this blog and I can’t wait to read more.

I have a pretty good collection of texts myself, here at home, and now that I know there’s a good “discourse on deafhood” out there, my books will be accquiring many more new dog ears! Depend upon it.

Sara Stallard