1880 Milan is Destroying American Sign Language
The Deaf community knows that the 1880 Milan conference is the root of most all the problems with our Deaf education system, and that the philosophy behind it acts to destroy our chances at being able to use a natural cognitive language (ASL).
Now here is what is so ironic about this one blogger who said;
“This Milan thing is getting really tiring and getting very old with you guys always looking back. Always complaining. And never looking at the plate you have in front of you today getting filled and never looking forward to the future seeing the possibilities grow before you. Just please knock it off about the Milan thing. Stop clinging to the past so much”.
Now it seems ironic that this same person wrote a blog just recently titled:
“ASL is Destroying Indian Sign Language”
No, I did not read all of his blog but just the title, “ASL is Destroying Indian Sign Language” was enough for me and maybe you too, to know what he was attempting to do..
Does this person employ a double standard? He is telling people one thing about how they should think and behave, but then is not practicing what he preaches.
Isn’t this part of the definition of colonialism?
AGBell and AVT is destroying American Sign Language right now today and will still be continuing to do so in the future.
Doesn’t the Deaf community have the right to discuss the effects of 1880 Milan conference, whose participants acted to sabotage American Sign Language (as does this misguided blogger wrote “ASL is Destroying Indian Sign Language” in DeafRead.com)?
I think that is an insult! And shame on this blogger for telling us to “knock it off about the Milan thing”.
John F. Egbert
Paotie and Mike almost comment the same and almost match their title Culture First or Deaf First? and which comes first: Language or culture.
Which came first: Language or culture?
“Deaf culture itself consists of individuals who do not speak and use sign language as a form of communicating. During the early part of Gallaudet University’s history, many deaf students joined together to share their experiences in life and began reaching out to others like them - they created the first deaf culture. Today, a large and lively (and oft-times controversial) deaf culture exists, and many linguists and anthropologists have argued that American Sign Language (ASL) is the basis for the creation and existence of a deaf culture.”
By Paotie
http://www.helium.com/tm/524289/semantics-aside-language-first
Deafhood: A Process of Self-Repression | Paotie’s Green Couch …
“Really, if you think about it, if you embrace deafhood, then you must accept AGBell Foundation supporters. After all, a deaf person who is oral is still in the process of deafhood, like you.”
This proves that Mike and Paotie have the authority to fix comments to look like more powerful words before they post to readers on their bloggers.
Mike and Paotie turned me off.
Comment by floridagirl — November 20, 2007 @ 7:06 pm
Mike and Paotie are real assholes.
DeafRead.com should ban them.
Comment by Late Deafened — November 20, 2007 @ 7:23 pm
about ASL destroying the ISL shows that Mike McConnell is myopic. He is not a scholar in languages or
linguistics. Not in a position to discuss ASL-ISL. If anyone wants to have a better understanding about ASL-ISL should consult GU’s Department of Linguistics –
not Mike McConnell.
Comment by Mike's blog — November 20, 2007 @ 7:40 pm
Milan Conference’s actual intention i believe was to discredit Methodical Signes which L’Eppe/Sicard invented.
(there is a bust of L’Eppe at Gallaudet’s Chapel Hall saying he is the Father of Sign Language - which we all know it is a myth because it is we all Deaf people who are doing it naturally over the time)
Methodical Signes was very cumbersome and very difficult to sim-com with because Methodical Signes required many more signs than words in a sentence because their signs represented not for words but for prefixes and suffixes…especially more so if in French
So the conference “rightfully” decided that Methodical Signes was unworkable / failure, but unfortunately they threw bath water out of window but out went with natural sign language (LSF, La Langue Des Signes Francais) as the baby also
Laurent Clerc apparently realized that Methodical Signes, even tho he was fluent in it, was unworkable with common Deaf children. He apparently supported the abridged (shortened) version of Methodical Signes, just like Old Gallaudetese, sometime known as Manual English (as part of Combined Method (old/incorrect version of bilingualism) that Gallaudet supported, during his battle with AGB
we have Methodical Signes’ influences on ASL nowadays without our knowledge:
to love = with A handshape to represent AMOUR
to search = with C handshape to represent CHERER
cat = with F handshape to represent FELINE (?)
some said over 75% of ASL vocabulary were from the Methodical Signes
Comment by patrick — November 20, 2007 @ 7:55 pm
You said “1880 Milan is destorying ASL”. You used the verb “is” which indicated that today it is destroying ASL?. I think you should’ve used the past tense verb…, not a present tense verb…
Comment by Meow — November 20, 2007 @ 8:36 pm
Meow,
Yes, I am aware of that.
But AGB had involvement with 1880 Milan and AGBell still bans sign language for deaf babies and children in school so therefore they are still doing it.
John
Comment by agbellinfo — November 20, 2007 @ 8:51 pm
Mike’s blog about ASL destroying ISL is not just about that, he did make an interesting reference to how deaf indian’s lost their native language and culture due to being immersed in deaf school and taught ASL. Sometimes the subject is not what it turns out to be but more…
Granted his views are different. That’s what is so great about blogs and vlogs, differing views producing discussions. Who says we have to agree with everything we read and who says that just because we read someone’s blog, that we must be on the same wavelength as the person who wrote it?
I feel that I need to read more about 1880 Milan in order to better understand the history behind ASL and it’s near demise before it was resurrected to what it is today.
One thing for sure, history is very important because we learn from it. The holocaust is brought up again and again to ensure that it never happens again, same goes with anything else in history..it is to teach us so that we remember. If bringing up 1880 Milan will make us remember how we almost lost ASL, then it should be brought up again and again.
What I’m seeing time and time again in some of the discussions about deaf culture is lots of misconceptions. For example, the quote by Paotie posted by Fla girl about “deaf culture consisting of people who do not speak….” Wait a min, says who? This is the most preposterous statement I’ve ever heard. That statement is obviously false and a myth.
We will always have certain deaf/hoh people with different views, but for one to twist the truth, that is just plain mean. Supporters of DBC: Just keep up with advocating what you believe in, and you shall prevail.
Comment by C — November 20, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
I am not really comparing the Deaf oppression with Jewish Holocaust. But Jews do NOT forget the horrible genocide. We should NOT forget the audist 1880 Milan.
Comment by Shawn R. — November 20, 2007 @ 10:16 pm
Those who ignore the lessons of history are bound to repeat them.
Comment by Midwest Guy — November 21, 2007 @ 7:00 am
Deaf culture DOES consist of people who do not speak.
They are called, “Deaf Mutes.”
If a deaf person speaks, they are called, “not Deaf enough” because they are not mutes.
So, the definition as it stands today regarding “Deaf culture” is a definition consisting of people who are MUTE.
If that offends your sensibilities, you’re directing your anger towards the wrong person, too. Ain’t my fault if you can’t speak, and it ain’t my fault that the definition of “Deaf culture” in academic journals consists of people who are MUTES.
*shrugs innocently and kicks a small pebble*
:o)
Paotie
Comment by Paotie — November 21, 2007 @ 8:25 am
Replacing one sign language for another is part of language assimilation. Fine. Deaf kids lose nothing as visual learners. But replacing ASL for spoken English. Deaf kids would have none to fall back on. Can’t compare the two. This is for McConnell.
Comment by anna s — November 21, 2007 @ 9:05 am
To Ann S
Exactly, this is why bilingualism(ASL/English) is so important for all deaf children in schools.
I think McConnell knows this but he has a dogmatism attitude problem…more concern about protecting his flawed egoism than deaf babies’ need to have a cognitive language starting at the age of 6 months.
Comment by agbellinfo — November 21, 2007 @ 9:40 am
paotie, you had me laughing. I’m thinking..perhaps I need to be clear and perhaps you do too. See,
deaf culture consist of all kinds of deaf people,those that speak and those that don’t. I speak very well and have been part of the deaf culture since the day I was born.
There’s so much assumptions about everything. People assume the worst as usual.
Comment by C — November 21, 2007 @ 12:39 pm
Hearing indians’ own language and culture were nearly destroyed when forced to go to school and assimilate into white man’s culture and language. The same token goes for deaf Indians who were given no choice but go to deaf schools and assimilate into their Deaf culture and language. There’s a bit of parallel there. Both actions nearly wiped out these Indians’ own culture and language (spoken and signed). That’s where I’m getting at, Anna.
Comment by mcconnell — November 21, 2007 @ 4:36 pm
Mr. McConnell,
Here you said,
“The same token goes for deaf Indians who were given no choice but go to deaf schools and assimilate into their Deaf culture and language. There’s a bit of parallel there. Both actions nearly wiped out these Indians’ own culture and language (spoken and signed). That’s where I’m getting at, Anna.”
Let’s change the wordings,
The same token goes for deaf Americans who were given no choice but go to hearing schools and assimilate into their hearing culture and language. There’s a bit of parallel there. Both actions nearly wiped out these Deaf Americans’ own culture and language (spoken and signed). That’s where I’m getting at.
Now Mike, I understand that you have concern about what had happened to the Indians but seems that you don’t care what 1880 Milan had done to the Deaf Americans.
Now, all I am asking is to have Deaf Americans(babies and children in schools) to be bilingual, ASL and English.
Do you support that?
John
Comment by agbellinfo — November 21, 2007 @ 5:15 pm
I support the notion that all babies should have early access to visual means of communication and not necessarily ASL (i.e. baby signs). I’m thinking in terms of babies with hearing loss from mild to profound, each of them requiring different needs according to their abilities once they get older. At a certain age in time, parents may wish to opt for other means of communication and drop signing altogether and focus on aural skills. Or combine signing and aural. Or just signing alone. Or use cued speech. It’s never absolute on which ones are the right ones. Just that as long as parents make an informed decision regarding which mode of communication to use then I have no problem with that. I don’t agree that all deaf/hh babies need to be bilingual (ASL/sign language and English). It’s not so simple. Technology has been changing that. It has drastically changed the landscape for hh and deaf people. It continues to change and improve. This whole thing may be hardly moot in 10 or 15 years from now given the rapid advacements in nanotechnology and electronics.
What happened in Milan already happened. Past is past. You are already enjoying the growing use of ASL, more Deaf people, Deaf culture is expanding and adding it to Deaf history. DNAIs on the other hand are just now barely getting a foothold on reclaiming their own culture and language, including ISL. They have suffered far more damage than Milan has ever done. DNAIs suffered a double (even triple) whammy compared to the Deaf white man’s world.
Comment by mcconnell — November 21, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
McConnell,
ASL is the only cognitive language for visual means of communication and research have proven that.
But you continue to spin around to sound logic and actually do not respect ASL as a true language.
It takes a person to know ASL to understand ASL and you continue to fool people that you know ASL but reality you don’t from the perspective of your mind and the way you explain your thoughts.
Yes, Milan has already happened but the ideology is still alive today with AGBell and AVT so don’t tell me that we have to accept that ideology! They took the sign language away and made it as an inferior language…the same thoughts that you, Mike McConnell, have right now.
And by damn, we are going to get that respect back for ASL that ABG and 1880 Milan destroyed…and why you seem to be promoting that ideology?
Comment by agbellinfo — November 21, 2007 @ 7:14 pm
Mike, point taken! It is the parallel that u were trying to convey. Although it saddens me and many others that nanotechnology is changing the ASL Deaf landscape, that is inevitable and many times better for the future deaf hoh population.
But remembering Milan puts the whole communication thing re deaf babies into balance.
Comment by anna s — November 22, 2007 @ 4:04 am
There’s no spinning, John. I appreciate ASL. For one, John, learn not to attack or assume things about other people or blogs you haven’t read.
Secondly, the reality is this….technology, and it continues to improve. And behind that, biotechnology. And for that it gives hope and encouragment for people with limited vision, limited mobility or are paralyzed, hearing loss, Parkinson, Alzheimer, and the many other possible conditions that may be treated someday soon.
Thirdly, hearing loss range from mild to profound and the choice for mode of communicate differs from child to child based on what would be best the child can take advantage of by using one approach or a mix of.
Fourthly, ASL is not THE answer but only one of few possible avenues to use as tool for communicating. It could be seen as the best answer to have for many while for others it wouldn’t.
And lastly, as long as parents make an informed decision they have that right to decide what would be best for their deaf/hh child. Not you, John. Not by other Deaf people or Deaf educators. They do however can provide useful information and offer invaluable insight and experiences. Still, it’s the parents decision.
Comment by mcconnell — November 23, 2007 @ 7:48 am
The problem with John is that he takes an extreme emotional reaction to anyone and anything that might challenge his little ideal of ASL and a Deaf culture of people predominately ASL who MIGHT happen to have SOME English skills. This is why he continually harks about AG Bell and adds his pseudo claims of “bilingualism.”
Sadly, John is about to become irrelevant as his extreme “advocacy” will only go so far. The future has already arrived, and I seek to preserve Deaf Culture so that future generations of people - deaf or not - can appreciate the struggles and achievements by people with hearing loss, whether HOH, deaf or Deaf.
By continually drawing comparisons between AG Bell and those who disagree with John only illuminates the extreme radicalism that is John’s “advocacy.” Sadly, some Deaf people in Deaf culture are more afraid of opinions than of bullets, which says lots.
John promotes a cult.
I prefer to preserve a culture - not a cult.
:o)
Paotie
Comment by Paotie — November 23, 2007 @ 9:36 am
Paotie,
LOL,
Good try to brainwash people that I promote cult.
John
Comment by agbellinfo — November 23, 2007 @ 12:26 pm
Mike McConnell,
Let’s go over with your comment:
“the reality is this….technology, and it continues to improve. And behind that, biotechnology. And for that it gives hope and encouragment for people with limited vision, limited mobility or are paralyzed, hearing loss, Parkinson, Alzheimer, and the many other possible conditions that may be treated someday soon.”
I agree that technology continues to improve and we are not there yet but why disregard ASL which has a huge percentage of success for communication for hearing or Deaf people.
Deaf people and hearing people are like similar to Mac computers and IBM computers. Read this below;
We all, Hearing and Deaf people are human bionic-computers. Before I go any further explaining more about what I will write on this post, you might ask this question, what is a bionic-computer?
Bionic-computer is a human being that its brain can compute to do things such as like calculating the coordination while walking or picking things up, etc. Your brain is always computing like a calculator doing the adding, subtracting, etc while controlling your balance, reaching for something, jumping or hopping over something, etc.
No one was born as a full functioning bionic-computer human being. Keep in mind that we all had to learn to crawl, walk, talk, sign, run, respond, think, etc since the day we were born. Our parents were the main educators, motivators, etc in the beginning of our lives. Then teachers, your peers, people, media, TV, etc became additional educators, motivators, etc. This process is the education of our bionic-computer body(mind) that goes on until the day we die.
One more thing that I want to say about the terminology of the two words;
Software and Hardware.
The computer that you are using right now while reading this post is call hardware.
The disc that you put in the computer contains data so you can watch movies or video game or Microsoft Word is call software.
The Human Bionic-Computer is the hardware of the human anatomy. This would include the brain, internal organs, and other human organ systems such as Cardiovascular, Endocrine, Immune, Muscular, nervous, Reproductive, Respiratory, Skeletal and Urinary systems.
Your bionic-computer has stored program properties and self- metaprogramming properties, with limits determinable and to be determined.
You might ask, what is metaprogramming?
Metaprogram is defined as a set of instructions, descriptions and means of control of sets of program.
How did we get the metaprogramming properties?
You got them since the day you were born, from your parents, teachers, etc. It is the software education that you have and it is stored in your brain.
Now, let’s go back a little about what I wrote above;
The bionic-computer has stored program properties and self- metaprogramming properties, with limits determinable and to be determined.
You might ask, what you mean by with limits determinable and to be determined.
It means that it depends on how you have been educated, how much data flow you have gotten or able to receive from your parents or teachers in early childhood, etc.
It could also means that it depends on if you are deaf or hearing. In this society now days, a deaf person will have a good chance to get into the phrase of with limits determinable and to be determined.
This is very, very important to keep this in mind as you read on in my post.
The title of this post is
Differences between Deaf and Hearing Bionic-Computer
This is the same as if I had said,
Differences between Macintosh and IBM Computer
What is really the different between a Mac and IBM computer?
They both look alike, same hardware, functions the same. They both have low level, average level and high level performance.
Just like in the society, we have low level, average level and high level minded human beings. You might ask, why do we have three levels.
With the computers (Mac/IBM), it depends on the speed of calculating, the amount of ram memory and the software program.
With human being (bionic-computer), it depends on the early childhood of language foundation, how much you’ve learned the software program.
You might ask, what was our human software program?
Well, for a hearing person, it was the data flow of informations that enter through the ears.
And for the deaf person, it was the data flow of informations that enter through the eyes.
This means that the hearing person and the deaf person, both have different type of software input for eyes or ears.
The software makes our bionic-computer to function and the more data flow of informations that each receives through its eyes or ears, will categorize each of us accordingly as low level, average level or high level minded person.
Macintosh are the Deaf people.
IBM are the Hearing people.
Hearing and Deaf people, both require different software to be able function for its highest potential capability to learn and the earlier, the better.
This is why Deaf people must have bilingual education- ASL/English(reading and writing) to be able learn to achieve the level at its highest potential capability.
These Eye software input bilingual education program are for people that don’t have the Ear software input capability.
Over the years, we, the deaf people, or should I say, the Mac computers have been using the IBM eye software indoctrinated by the so-call-experts ( i.e. AGBell ) thinking that we deaf (Mac) people could hear and speak 100% like hearing (IBM) people.
Parents of Deaf children need to grasp this simple concept.
XXXXXXXXXXXX
“Your Thirdly, hearing loss range from mild to profound and the choice for mode of communicate differs from child to child based on what would be best the child can take advantage of by using one approach or a mix of.”
Mike, you intent to focus on mild to profound hearing loss. That is another slick misleading statement. I am talking about the millions of Deaf people that can’t have “your” choice for mode of commumication.
Nonetheless, ASL, mode of communication can be achieved to learn successfully at any degree of hearing loss or even hearing people, like interpreters and students. ASL is the most versatile language to learn for deaf and hearing people and we have thousands if not millions of hearing people learning ASL at public schools, colleges and universities across the country right now.
Mike, I think that every deaf children should have the opportunity to learn ASL while you seems to want to focus on certain group of people that have mild to profound hearing loss to learn certain mode of communication such as oral method. I am for bilingual for every deaf child and what harm is that?????
“Fourthly, ASL is not THE answer but only one of few possible avenues to use as tool for communicating. It could be seen as the best answer to have for many while for others it wouldn’t.”
I think that it doesn’t hurt to have a deaf children to be bilingual and once the child has the ability to learn speech, I am all for it. Bilingual is the answer and your ideology is to discriminate certain modes of communication.
“And lastly, as long as parents make an informed decision they have that right to decide what would be best for their deaf/hh child. Not you, John. Not by other Deaf people or Deaf educators. They do however can provide useful information and offer invaluable insight and experiences. Still, it’s the parents decision.”
Exactly, I think that parents should be provide useful information and offer invaluable insight and experiences.
But here is the big problem, AGBell and AVT gets their foot in the door of the parents of newly deaf babies and give bias facts about deafness and now AVT are having parents to sign forms to agree not to teach sign language.
Mike, I think that parents, which many of them have regretted to adopt the AGBell and AVT ideology and realize that their deaf child is beyond the stage to receive a cognitive language after the age of three. And those parents should sue for MALPRACTICE!
Mike McConnell, try to have some diversion in your thinking.
John Egbert
Comment by agbellinfo — November 23, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
Mike McConnell
I wrote similar statement below a few days ago and sent to your blog but it appeared that you did not post it. I decided to write again.
ASL does not destroy IASL. English Language and Hearing society have destroyed IASL. Deaf American Indians were forced to be put in Deaf insitutions by english speaking hearing authorities. In my opinion, your comment is attempting to make ASL scapegoat and a target for any unnecessary attack. Frankly your arguement is irrelevant and irresponsible.
Mike, you said that ASL is not the answer. In fact, ASL is the answer for all deaf born children and children who become deaf later. Strict AVT and oralism are not the answer. AVT and oralism have failed many deaf people. Many of them just learn ASL quite late after they could not do AVT/oralism very well. Now they have struggled to master ASL fluently. It is the main reason why their language developments have been damaged badly. Some parents have decided to have their children learned ASL and AVT/oralism rather than strict AVT/oralism.
Deafchip
Comment by deafchipmunk — November 23, 2007 @ 1:13 pm
John, I haven’t said I disregard ASL. Again, you keep putting words into my mouth. I am saying that the choice is up to the parents to decide as long as it’s an informed one. Then I have no problem. I don’t discriminate but rather I defer to parents’ decision and their right to make a decision, as long as their decision is an informed one. Realize the difference I’m saying, John.
Again, the reality is the wide ranging amount of hearing loss and type that exist. ASL is NOT a one shoe size fits all for all children with hearing loss. Each child is different. Successes vary from one child to the next over what’s preferable to those that are advantageous. That’s the reality, John. And that reality would change even more into the future when technology and biotechnology improves. It would be conceivable, say in 25 years from now, babies born with certain kind of hearing loss are able to be treated and have hearing restored completely. Even technology could do that. It’ll be interesting to see how this is done.
Lastly, babies are not born “hardwired” or already learned (as you have implied) but rather born with brain with what you call “plasticity.” What’s important is to understand that the limiting uses during this “plasticity” period for many sensory and motor functions have a critical period of window of usually 4 or 5 years.
The DNA information born with babies come from both the father and mother and nothing to do with teachers and such. What you have talked about computers and such is called a “non sequitur.”
Now, you may think it doesn’t hurt to have ASL. And that’s fine. But ultimately, the decision boils down to the parents. And not you. That’s the cold hard reality, John.
Deafchip, I did not say ASL is not the answer. Reread what I wrote and my response here to John.
Comment by mcconnell — November 23, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
Deafchip,
Mike McConnell did say that ASL is not THE answer, see what he wrote;
“ASL is not THE answer but only one of few possible avenues to use as tool for communicating. It could be seen as the best answer to have for many while for others it wouldn’t.”
Deafchip, when Mike capitalized the word “THE”. You got the right conclusion of who and how Mike McConnell thinks.
We all know ASL can be used as a communication method for anybody, hearing or deaf. But he chose not to have any diversity perspective and Mike McConnell obviously regard ASL as an inferior language.
Comment by agbellinfo — November 23, 2007 @ 4:52 pm
Hi AGBELLINFO,
Yes I know he did write ASL is not THE answer even though he denied he wrote it. Perhaps he does not understand the concept of language developments that are essential for all children including Deaf and Hard of Hearing children. Learning limited language or code (such as AVT/oralism/Signed English, SEE, etc) is a very serious threat to Deaf and hard of hearing children. All of Deaf and hard of hearing children deserve to learn whole language with no limited (That is ASL) and its foundation helps them learn many more languages. People who disagree with that, they are a disease that we have fought against. They are obsessing human perfection. I find that a very dangerous avenue. If we are perfection, then what is purpose of life? If there is a perfection, there will be NOTHINGNESS.
Comment by deafchipmunk — November 26, 2007 @ 10:17 am