To Deaf or not to deaf: That is the Question

Pudans-Smith, Kimberly K.; Cue, Katrina R.; Wolsey, Ju-Lee A.; Clark, M. Diane

doi:10.4236/psych.2019.1015135

Cited by 26 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While it has gotten a lot of interest from people who want to learn ASL, there are many comments from fluent ASL users who have provided information that turned out to be useful to our the ASL Signbank (a kind of crowdsourcing of sorts)-usage information (regional or other kind of demographic information on where a sign is used), describing variants of existing signs, and even engaging in Notes 1. The use of d/D in "deaf" is controversial (e.g., Kusters, De Meulder, and O'Brien 2017;Pudans-Smith et al 2019). While I'm still undecided on this issue, here I follow the practice of not capitalizing "deaf" unless the status has already been identified in previous literature.…”

Section: Thoughts About Open Datamentioning

confidence: 95%

Managing Sign Language Acquisition Video Data: A Personal Journey in the Organization and Representation of Signed Data

Hochgesang¹

2022

The Open Handbook of Linguistic Data Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

aspect of language research. The representational system itself encodes aspects about what you are sharing.Signed languages do not have any widespread conventionalized written systems of their own. But for signed languages to be useful to researchers who like to count, sort, and organize instances in the data, signed forms need to be represented in machine-readable text.To that end, a signed language is usually represented through the written system of an ambient spoken language (glossing), during which signs or parts of signs are shoehorned into the nearest equivalents in the written language. The chosen written gloss then brings all of the associations from the original word to what is actually being represented. For example, in ASL to refer to people or things, we can point 👉. Because 👉 2 can refer to so many things, it's especially tricky to textually label. When we use English, we then think about how 👉 would be represented in English. We start using words such as I, me, you, he, she, it, and they, which then backfires because with those English words, we understand that other grammatical senses are represented-person (first person in I or me and second person you), number (singular in I and plural in we), grammatical case (the nominative I vs. the accusative me). All of these senses in the English words can then bleed back into our understanding of the form (👉 in ASL), which doesn't have any of those senses other than number. Rather, this ASL sign 👉 points and ASL signers use their understanding of the language, the discourse events, and the physical surroundings to figure out the intended references. But the side effect of glossing, especially as the main choice of textual representation, is that it obscures the original form. This is just one example of many.The problems with representing signed language data using written glosses are widely acknowledged (e.g.,

show abstract

Section: Thoughts About Open Datamentioning

confidence: 95%

Managing Sign Language Acquisition Video Data: A Personal Journey in the Organization and Representation of Signed Data

Hochgesang¹

2022

The Open Handbook of Linguistic Data Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Kusters et al (2017:3) position the very notions of Deaf identity and Deaf culture as founding concepts to the field of Deaf studies, but that these concepts “often are still treated as a monolithic and static theoretical apparatus.” Such critiques point out that the term “Deaf culture” is too static and the binary between d/Deaf and the binary of Deaf culture and hearing world deserve further investigation (Kusters et al 2017). Furthermore, recent work by Pudans‐Smith et al (2019) show there is no consensus on these naming practices. Sociologists have certainly discussed Deaf culture (explicitly discussing capital‐D deaf individuals and communities) in the United States as a minority group before within social problems and social movements literature (e.g., Berbrier 2002; Christiansen and Barnartt 2003; DeVault et al 2011; Higgins 1980).…”

Section: Deafness Disability and The Capital “D” Distinctionmentioning

confidence: 99%

They Told Me My Name: Developing a Deaf Identity

Mauldin¹,

Fannon

2020

Symbolic Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the process of deaf people coming to identify as culturally Deaf-a distinction typically made in the literature as an identity belonging to those who use sign language to communicate-and how this identity process co-occurs with other social identities, namely sexuality and race. Through pairing Goffman's work with perspectives from Feminist Disability Studies, we extend the sociological literature on both identity and disability. To do so, we analyze qualitative data collected through narrative interviews with five Deaf, gay and lesbian individuals with different racial backgrounds. Our analysis surfaces deaf people's encounters with one another and how, relatedly, becoming Deaf is shaped by Goffman's concepts of affiliation and obtrusiveness. For example, we show how shifting affiliations occur when transitioning into a minority (e.g., Deaf) culture, through interactions that demand managing the obtrusiveness of multiple intersecting, potentially discrediting, statuses. Our article also reveals a bidirectional relationship between affiliation and obtrusiveness.

show abstract

“…ToM development in children who are d/Deaf 26 . (Note that the capitalized word "Deaf" refers to the cultural and linguistic minority group, and the lower-case "deaf" refers to the audiological status 27 . We use "deaf" because we were often unable to distinguish between the two (e.g., in young children)).…”

Section: The Role Of Language In Facilitating Tom Development Is Espementioning

confidence: 99%

Reduced Neural Selectivity for Mental States in Deaf Children with Delayed Exposure to Sign Language

Richardson¹,

Koster-Hale²,

Caselli³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language provides a rich source of information about other people’s thoughts and feelings. Consequently, delayed access to language may influence conceptual development in Theory of Mind (ToM). We used functional magnetic resonance imaging and behavioral tasks to study ToM development in child (n=33, 4-12 years old) and adult (n=36) fluent signers of American Sign Language (ASL), and provide the first characterization of neural ToM responses during an ASL task. Participants included deaf children whose first exposure to ASL was delayed up to 7 years (n=12). Neural responses to ToM stories (specifically, selectivity of the right temporo-parietal junction) in these children resembled responses previously observed in young children, who have the same amount of linguistic experience, rather than those in age-matched native-signing children, who have the same amount of biological maturation. These results suggest that early linguistic experience facilitates ToM development, via the development of a selective brain region for ToM.

show abstract

To Deaf or not to deaf: That is the Question

Cited by 26 publications

References 16 publications

Managing Sign Language Acquisition Video Data: A Personal Journey in the Organization and Representation of Signed Data

Managing Sign Language Acquisition Video Data: A Personal Journey in the Organization and Representation of Signed Data

They Told Me My Name: Developing a Deaf Identity

Reduced Neural Selectivity for Mental States in Deaf Children with Delayed Exposure to Sign Language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About