|
|
|
|
Two LanguagesWhile the majority of people in Europe naturally and effortlessly acquire a spoken language for all social activity, in the past, deaf people have had to struggle to achieve a single natural language. Although there were times when sign language use was seen as an indication of deaf people’s monolingualism and symptomatic of isolation, our understanding is now rather different. However, rather than return to the last century when manualism was presented as the norm for deaf education, researchers have proposed the best of both worlds - bilingualism or a bilingual approach. It is known from extensive linguistic research that two languages are better than one - not only in terms of the child’s language sensitivity, but also in terms of the cognitive growth of the child (Baker, 1993). As a result schools throughout Europe have begun to consider bilingualism and have begun to implement an education system which attempts to create bilingual competence in the child. It is proposed that if deaf children have sign language competence in early education, they have a channel for the development of spoken and written language. The potential of deaf children can be released in this positive enabling framework. An excellent analysis and commentary on this situation comes from the Americans, Johnson, Liddell and Erting (1989). In their monograph, which succeeded in bringing to the fore, a vital debate on the direction of American Deaf Education, they set out important principles for the language experiences of deaf children, under which, sign competence was considered a priority with speech and writing being secondary. In their view, deaf children like all other children should have a fluent and effective language from the earliest age. Bilingualism will follow naturally before and during schooling. From this perspective, sign language plays a vital role in the establishment of communication and cognition. A similar debate has occurred in Europe. For example, in the UK, in Holland, new initiatives are being implemented which are joining established programmes in Sweden and Denmark, all now emphasising the principles of early access to sign. It might seem that the status of sign language in European deaf education has never been higher. Moreover, it might be imagined that Tervoort’s views have been borne out such that there is a movement from oralism to supported means such as fingerspelling or cued speech, to sign supported speech and finally to sign language which can be delivered in a bilingual framework. However, he also predicted ominously that: “Use of a true sign language in educational contexts is simply impossible as long as such a language remains unidentified and its grammar and lexicon unaccounted for.” page 146, 1983 Moreover, it seems reasonable to suggest that the understanding of sign language is further dependent on a recognition of the community and culture of deaf people. Evidence to date would suggest that this latter target has not yet been achieved. |
|
The course is copyright
Back to
Social Issues Homepage |
