In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

SOME SOCIOLINGUISTIC CONSIDERATIONS OF AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE HarryMarkowicz In the mid-eighteenth century, a controversy developed over the instruction of deaf children, pitting against each other the founders of two opposed methods of instruction. In 1775, the Abb6 Charles Michel de l'Epde established the first public school for deaf children in Paris. The method of instruction consisted of the language of signs. A German contemporary, Samuel Heinicke, became known as the originator of the oral method by which deaf children are taught through speech and lipreading. The controversy between the two schools-the manual and the oral-was never resolved and is still today a central issue in the bitter debate between the proponents of each method. A search through the literature indicates that the debatersprofessionals concerned with the education and the welfare of the deaf-have only rarely looked to linguistics for support for their positions. On the other hand, it appears that until very recently, linguists have not shown any interest in the development and use of language by the deaf. Interest in the modes of communication employed by the deaf seems to have arisen following the establishment of the field of psycholinguistics. Recent studies by Blanton (1968), Lenneberg (1967), McNeill (1965) indicate a concern with the language problems of the deaf and the implications for their education. Sometimes the approach is from the point of view of advancing theoretical knowledge of linguistics, and other times from the practical aspect of helping the deaf overcome a very large handicap. Sign language constitutes the most important means of communication for the majority of the deaf in North America. At the same time the general community and some of the deaf themselves consider it inferior Sign Language Studies 10 to and more primitive than spoken languages. Linguistic studies, whose results indicate that sign language is not fundamentally different from other languages, can contribute to giving it the legitimate status which it deserves, and which may be necessary for the welfare of the community to which it belongs. Sign language, and its acquisition by deaf or hearing children, may have important implications for linguistic theory. However, this paper will not deal with them as much as with describing the status of signs as a language used by a substantial number of deaf people. Herbert Kohl (1966) writes "As adults, deaf individuals use sign language exclusively, or a combination of signs and words. ... This is true regardless of whether the individuals went to college or not, and is also independent of intelligence." While sign language does permit communication with hearing people-very few non-deaf individuals are familiar with this language and these are usually the children of deaf parents-the facts indicate that it is the preferred means of communication within the community of the deaf. Social scientists have observed the existence of a subculture of deaf people: Because most deaf persons are happier in association with other deaf persons, and because of the concentration which results, there develops a subculture of the deaf within the larger community. This subculture is a direct result of their deafness, a result of the difficulty they have in communicating with the hearing society around them as opposed to the ease with which they interact among themselves. (Boese, 1964, p. 4) A quotation of Dr. Anders S. Lunde in Stokoe (1960, p. 26) reveals the extensive use of sign language in the subculture of the deaf in the U.S.: Although oral schools emphasize speechreading and speech, the plain fact is that the deaf as a group use the sign language among themselves. According to Best, 78.2 per cent of the deaf used sign language and only 1.0 per cent used speech alone. Concerning language acquisition by the congenitally deaf, Lenneberg writes: In America it is not until the child is four or five that intensive language training is begun, and during the first year the training is merely preparatory, that is, readiness for the instruction in articulation, lip reading, and reading and writing. (1967, p. 320) Some Sociolinguistic Considerations He is referring here to deaf children whose parents are hearing people and who are naturally unfamiliar with the language of signs...

pdf

Share