From: Christoph Päper (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Jun 13 2010 - 07:38:10 CDT
> At the same time I cannot see how could it be a problem to
> just use the same spoken languages written form when communication
> takes place in printed media.
Every sign languages is a language of its own merit and not a mere form of another language. Some of them just happen to have similar or derived names. As a matter of fact English has no such single counterpart, there are ASL and BSL (and perhaps more).
The brain actually processes reading/writing and hearing/speaking more similar to each than watching/signing to either one. I assume that reading/writing a text written in Sign Writing (or one of its alternatives) would also be different in the same way, but Im not sure someone has already tested that. People born deaf therefore have a hard time becoming proficient writers and readers.
Sign Writing, by the way, is more akin to the IPA than to a traditional writing system. The difference (and reason) of course being that its mapping of dynamic graphic signs into and from static graphic signs is not as different as the usual one of dynamic acoustic signs into and from static graphic signs.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 13 2010 - 07:40:40 CDT