Signs and Manual Communication Systems: Selection, Standardization, and Development

Volume 142, N o. 3, 1997 Signs and Manual Communication Systems Selection, Standardization, and Development Frank Caccamise1 Robert Ayers Karen Finch Marilyn Mitchell National Technical Institute for the Deaf, Rochester. Institute of Technology Communicating in ASL. Gallaudet University, Publications and Production. The trend toward the inclusion of manual communication as part of a 'Total" approach to the education of hearing impaired persons has been documented by Jordan, Gustason, and Rosen (1976). These authors sent a survey form to all 970 educational programs for the hearing impaired on the Office of Demographic Studies mailing list. The total number of responses was 796 (82%). Table 1 gives 1 Frank Caccamise, Ph.D., is a Research Associate in the Manual/Simultaneous Communication Department, National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID). NTID is one of the nine colleges of the Rochester Institute of Technology the number of programs and classes reporting the use of manual communication as part of their Total Communication Approach,2 and shows that over 50% of all classes at all educational levels are using manual communication. Further data reported by Jordan et al. showed that of 343 programs reporting a recent change in communication modes used, 333 of these reported a change to include the use of manual communication. When major decisions such as this are made, more often than not new major decisions need to be confronted. In this case, the decision to (RIT), Rochester, New York, 14623. Robert Ayers is a full-time professional interpreter in the College of Engineering and Institute College, RIT. Karen Finch is Interpreter Trainer for the Department of Social Services, NTID, RIT. Marilyn Mitchell is an instructor in the Manual/Simultaneous Communication Department, NTID, RIT. This paper is based on a presentation made by the first three authors at the Gallaudet/NTID Manual/Simultaneous Communication Workshop , Kansas Citv, Missouri. November 6-10, 1977. 2 Total Communication (TC) and simultaneous communication (SC) are often equated. However . SC is only one method of communication that may be used in a TC program. Holcomb (Reference Note 1) has emphasized the difference between TC and SC. He stated that the goal of TC is full communication for all, and since many deaf people do not know manual communication nor can speechread, SC would be little or no communication at all for these people. A more in-depth discussion of the difference between TC and SC is presented in Caccamise and Drury (1976) and Cokely (Reference Note 2). Reprinted from Caccamise, F., Ayers, R., Finch, K., & Mitchell, M. (1918). American Annals of the Deaf, 123(1), 811-902. This article is based on a presentation by Caccamise, Ayers, and Finch at the Gallaudet/NTID Manual/Simultaneous Communication Workshop, Kansas City, Missouri, November 6-10, 1971. Volume 142, No. 3, 1997 American Annals of the Deaf include the use of manual communication in the education of hearing impaired children has led to discussions, and sometimes confrontations, relative to the question, "How should we sign or manually communicate?" The purpose of this paper is to provide information that should assist the reader in responding to this question. In practice, the above question has become two questions: 1) Which signs should be used?, and 2) Which manual communication system(s) (or languages ) should be used? The first question involves the selection of individual lexical units, that is, the selection of signs. (The lexicon of a language consists of all the signs, or words, that the language employs. A single member of a lexicon is a lexical term, i.e., a single sign or a single word.) Most books and standardization projects have addressed this question. The second question involves selection of an entire language, including how the lexical units (signs) selected are to be combined into phrases and sentences. In this paper, sign selection will first be discussed, and then selection of manual communication systems. The general goal of this paper is to provide a rational, objective basis for the process used in selection, standardization, and development of signs and manual communication systems. It is hoped that this base will assist others in establishing policies on usage of signs and manual communication systems on an equally objective basis, rather than depending...