Second verse, same as the first: On the use of signing systems in modern interventions for deaf and hard of hearing children in the USA

Scott, Jessica; Henner, Jonathan

doi:10.1080/14643154.2020.1792071

Cited by 33 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The failure of oralism in educating most deaf children gradually led to the increased use of systems that involved signing and speaking at the same time, the idea being to model the spoken language on the hands while talking, often resulting in language use that is unnatural and inaccessible for deaf people (Scott & Henner, 2020). The gradual increase of mainstreaming of deaf students with their hearing peers in public schools from the early 1970s led to their being isolated from other deaf children and is therefore associated with alternative (often interrupted) pathways of sign language learning and maintenance (Weber, 2020).…”

Section: Oralism and Deficit Perspectives On Deafnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergence and evolutions: Introducing sign language sociolinguistics

Kusters

Lucas

2022

Journal of Sociolinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sociolinguistics of sign languages parallels as well as complements the sociolinguistics of spoken languages. All of the key areas of sociolinguistics, such as multilingualism, language contact, variation, and language attitudes-are of immediate relevance to sign languages. At the same time, sign language researchers using a range of data sources and methods (e.g., sign language corpora, linguistic elicitation, and linguistic ethnography) have showed that the unique natures and features of sign languages allow us to look at all these areas from a different vantage point. First, deficit perspectives on deafness serve to sharply distinguish the reality of sign languages from that of spoken languages. The linguistic status of sign languages has been long contested, and certain forms of signing are still labeled "nonlanguage." The delineation and differentiation of sign languages, and of sign languages from other signing practices (e.g., gesturing, home sign) has therefore been a key issue. Second, sign languages are used by both deaf and hearing people, in contexts where spoken/written languages, and increasingly also other sign languages are in use, leading to complex multimodal forms of signspoken, sign-written, and sign-sign language contact, and to hierarchical constellations of language attitudes and This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Section: Oralism and Deficit Perspectives On Deafnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergence and evolutions: Introducing sign language sociolinguistics

Kusters

Lucas

2022

Journal of Sociolinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It should not be used to argue that deaf people should not have access to natural signed languages, for example because they can build a communicative repertoire using systems, cues, and incomplete access to spoken language. Part of this is because non deaf children automatically have access to natural languages whereas for most deaf children (approximately 95%) this choice must be made, and the reasons for these choices are often rooted in ableist, anti-signed language rhetoric (Scott & Henner 2020). Crip linguistics frames language as a form of care work where we work collectively to provide access and co-construct meaning.…”

Section: Coming To Claim Crip Linguisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unsettling Languages, Unruly Bodyminds: Imaging a Crip Linguistics

Henner¹,

Robinson²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People use languages in different ways. Some people use language to help find other people like them. Many people use language in specific ways because of how their body and mind work. Sometimes a person’s environment and material conditions forces them to use language in a certain way. However, when someone languages outside of what people think is normal, others can think that they are bad with language or are not as smart or are broken. We are trying to point out that no one is actually ‘bad with language.’ Our goal with this paper is to help people understand that no language is bad. It is okay to want to change your own language use if it will make you feel better. But no one should make you feel bad about your language. We need a bigger and more flexible understanding of what language is and what it communicates about a bodymind’s capacity.

show abstract

“…Parsons, a deaf professor of art history from Gallaudet University who became a US Peace Corps consultant, was a proponent of Total Communication as a system of sign-supported speech. In the 1970s and 1980s, she visited countries in South America, the Asia-Pacific region, and Africa to promote the use of Total Communication as a sign system related to ASL (Moriarty, 2020;Scott & Henner, 2021). The ongoing impact of Parson's efforts in these contexts, where an ASL-based sign system sometimes displaces the use of Indigenous national sign languages in classrooms with deaf children, is illustrative of the risks inherent to intervening in signing communities outside of the global North (Braithwaite, 2020).…”

Section: Guest Editorialmentioning

confidence: 99%