this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2024
141 points (98.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43912 readers
877 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I assume there must be a reason why sign language is superior but I genuinely don't know why.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes, exclamation points have existed almost as long as written language has...

You also couldn't do a literal translation of spoken word in sign language. And different people can interpret it differently because of that.

So even if exclamation points didn't exist, it would still be worth it to keep the wording as accurate as possible.

[–] DeadPand@midwest.social 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Im deaf and it’s real weird seeing you get downvoted for saying you can’t translate english to sign language verbatim, cause it’s true. Sign language is a lot more like broken english combined with body language, you don’t word for word translate english to sign, there’s too many words for starters, and lost in translation is a thing that exists.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Part of it is well intentioned people that don't know any better, and I'm sure you're aware there's significant parts of the deaf community who are isolanists and view it as their whole identity rather a small piece of what makes a person who they are. And back 50-60 years ago, that was kind of true.

Even back on Reddit, commonsense is rarely common when talking abouts ASL and especially cochlear implants.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

So my take on this comes from having a hearing friend who grew up in a anti-cochlear implant / hearing restoration family (deaf parents, grandparents, her and her sister are the only immediate family with “normal” hearing) and their preference was definitely to drive ASL which probably informs my outsider take on the matter.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Now, I'm not part of the deaf community in any real way (don't know any deaf people, and only a few who know sign, but I used to know the alphabet), but im badly near-sighted. Like, I didn't realize that everyone else could see individual leaves on trees instead of vague green blobs where the canopy was. And birds just disappeared into them. The first time I saw a Monet painting, and impressionist art in general, while I still appreciated the beauty my first thought was, "Ah, a painting of the world as seen by a near-sighted person." That said, I'm very happy to wear glasses and see a truer representation of what the rest of the world sees rather than walking through life in an impressionistic world.

So, for me, I can't see why anyone would choose to perceive less of the world than they could. If I could further augment my senses in a convenient manner, I would. If my parents had had to choose between some surgery and me being isolated from so much of the world, I'd ask for the surgery if I could.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The TV show See does a pretty good job of covering the why for this.

My understanding is that part of it is a “we’re not broken, we’re full people” along with “this is our culture” and the restoration of hearing is an erasure or something? I struggle to understand it myself and as a parent I would gladly lose my vision too if it meant restoring any healthy functioning for my son. It’s weird to me/

That said, I’m an outsider so I am only judging not understanding entirely.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes, I get the culture aspect of it, I've seen and read a fair amount on the subject, but I just can't see it as worth it. And as technology improves, it's going to be even harder. As for the not broken, I disagree with that, too. It doesn't make them less of people, just like not being able to walk or see doesn't, but there are still many things the average person can do that they can't, just like how I can't legally drive without corrective lenses and would be pretty nervous if I had to.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

That’s my take on it too, I am sure I am missing a LOT of nuance and explanation, or at least I hope I am.