User:Cykresge/sandbox

Linguistic discrimination

If you look at the above article, you will notice that there is a small subsection on "Oralism" under the larger section of "Examples". Our plan is to reconstruct the page by making a new section titled "3.3.4 American Sign Language (ASL) Users" and putting that under the subsection 3.3 "In The United States" to follow section "3.3.1 Perpetuation of discriminatory practices through terminology", "3.3.2 African Americans" and "3.3.3 Hispanic Americans and linguicism". We have also discussed making some expansions on the Oralism page with the information we find in our research.

We will intend to seek out articles that explore discrimination both past and present of users of ASL through databases such as JSTOR and textbooks we have used in Deaf Studies classes in the past.

Currently, the article heavily focuses on linguistic discrimination against spoken language users. Our main goal, therefore, is to expand this page to properly represent the linguistic discrimination that sign language users face. Some of the topics we will include are those mentioned on the article's talk page under the heading "Oralism: Missing Content."

Articles to cite for additions on linguistic discrimination:

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/263001/pdf Summary: article about popularization of oralism by AG Bell and its connections to eugenics, and Bell's speeches at Gallaudet and the American Breeders Association. In his view oralism was "an attractive option to sterilization and marriage bans for promoting the eugenic goal of reducing the incidence of hereditary deafness" thinking that if they used oral communication rather than signed language, deaf people would be less likely to marry and have children with each other (page 262). He also thought that normalcy was the most important goal to pursue, and so if Deaf people could become "normal" through oralism it must be pursued (page 263).

Possible Sources:

Self-Esteem Scores Among Deaf College Students: An Examination of Gender and Parents' Hearing Status and Signing Ability -Teresa V. Crowe (http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.bu.edu/stable/pdf/42658652.pdf)

Uncommon Schools: Institutionalizing Deafness in Early-Nineteenth-Century America -Jane Berger (http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.bu.edu/stable/pdf/10.3998/mpub.8265343.11.pdf)

American Sign Language as a Foreign Language in U.S. High Schools: State of the Art -Russell S. Rosen (http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/25172990)

Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical Change in American Sign Language -Nancy Frishberg (http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/412894)


 * History: Milan Conference, Deaf Schools (oralism)
 * Medical Community's negative view of ASL/ deaf community; cochlear implants
 * Acceptance as a foreign language and how this reflects public view of ASL, Manually Coded English

The Milan Conference and Deaf Education

For centuries, users of American Sign Language (ASL) have faced discrimination based on the perceived legitimacy of signed languages in comparison to spoken languages. This attitude was explicitly expressed in the Milan Conference of 1880 which set precedence for public opinion of manual forms of communication, including ASL, creating lasting consequences for members of the Deaf community. The conference reaffirmed the use of oralism, meaning instruction conducted exclusively in spoken language, as the preferred education method for Deaf individuals. These ideas were outlined in eight resolutions, the two of which listed below having a lasting negative effect on Deaf education:

1.    The Congress, Considering the incontestable superiority by articulation over signs in restoring the deaf-mute to society and giving him a fuller knowledge of language, Declares that: The oral method should be preferred to that of signs in the education and instruction of deaf-mutes.

2.    The Congress, Considering that the simultaneous use of speech and signs has the disadvantage of injuring articulation and lip-reading and the precision of ideas, Declares that: The pure oral method should be preferred.

These resolutions were nearly unanimously accepted, considering French and Italian oralists consisted of 74% of the 164 delegates; only one of the nearly 200 delegates was a deaf individual, James Denison, accompanied by a handful of allies for manual education including Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet. One of the many consequences of the Milan Conference was the removal of Deaf individuals from their own educational institutions, leaving generations of Deaf persons to be educated single-handedly by hearing individuals.

Recognition of ASL as a Language

ASL was not recognized as its own, fully-functioning language, until recently. In the 1960s, William Stokoe proved ASL to be its own language based on its unique structure and grammar, separate from that of English. Prior to this, ASL was thought to be merely a collection of gestures used to represent English. Because of its use of visual space, people mistakenly believed its users to be of a lesser mental capacity. The misconception that ASL users are incapable of thought prevailed prior to ASL’s recognition as a language. As a result, ASL users faced overwhelming oppression for the supposedly “lesser” language that they use. They were frequently deemed ineligible from participating in civic duties. In public, they would frequently fall victim to weird stares, and most of their attempts to speak were met with condescension.

Since Stokoe, many researchers have continued to investigate the linguistics of ASL, including Clayton Valli and Cecil Lucas of Gallaudet University. This surge in linguistic research has led to increased recognition of ASL as a language in America. Its recognition as a language is crucial both for those learning ASL as a second or additional language, and for prelingually-deaf children who learn ASL as their first language. Sherman Wilcox addresses some concerns regarding schools giving foreign language credit for ASL, listing out many different arguments people have against it. However, he concludes given that it has a body of literature and international scope, to single it out as unsuitable for a foreign language curriculum is inaccurate. Russel S. Rosen also describes government and academic resistance to acknowledging ASL as a foreign language at the high school or college level, which Rosen believes often resulted from a lack of understanding about the language. He shows how this has changed somewhat as more schools have adopted ASL over the years, but shows where issues still remain.

Discrimination Against ASL in the Medical Community

In the medical community, there is immense bias against deafness and ASL. This stems from the belief that spoken languages are superior to sign languages. Because 90% of deaf babies are born to hearing parents, who are usually unaware of the existence of the Deaf Community, they often turn to the medical community for guidance. Medical and audiological professionals, who are typically biased against sign languages, encourage parents to get a cochlear implant for their deaf child in order for the child to use spoken language. Research shows, however, that deaf kids without cochlear implants acquire ASL with much greater ease than deaf kids with cochlear implants acquire spoken English. In addition, medical professionals discourage parents from teaching ASL to their deaf kid to avoid compromising their English although research shows that learning ASL does not interfere with a child's ability to learn English. In fact, the early acquisition of ASL proves to be useful to the child in learning English later on. When making a decision about cochlear implantation, parents are not properly educated about the benefits of ASL or the Deaf Community. This is seen by many members of the Deaf Community as cultural and linguistic genocide.