a very very very very short English lesson
Seth Gordon
BTW, these sign English systems are fine for learning English
spelling, but I feel the concepts are a bit screwed-up; and they are
often used as puns/jokes among interpreters. Is it correct to say,
for example:
BEAR with me. (Please be patient with me.) ?
* BEAR with me. (I have a bear with me.) ?
"Bear with me" *always* means "Please be patient with me." The verb
"to bear" means "to be patient, to suffer," etc; that's not a pun,
that's just the meaning of the word.
The *noun* "bear" means, well, you know what that means. But in the
sentence "Bear with me", "Bear" can't be a noun, because (almost) every
English sentence must have a verb.
Does that make sense to you?
--
"Hunt, pursuit, and capture are biologically programmed | SETH fnord GORDON
into male sexuality." --Camille Paglia | <sethg@silver.
"I thought the old `blue balls' defense ... went out | lcs.mit.edu>
with air raid shelters and doo wop." --Helen Cordes | standard disclaimer
CON...@msuvx2.memst.edu
>Subject: a very very very very short English lesson
(I said,)
BEAR with me. (Please be patient with me.) ?
* BEAR with me. (I have a bear with me.) ?
>"Bear with me" *always* means "Please be patient with me." The verb
>"to bear" means "to be patient, to suffer," etc; that's not a pun,
>that's just the meaning of the word.
>The *noun* "bear" means, well, you know what that means. But in the
>sentence "Bear with me", "Bear" can't be a noun, because (almost) every
>English sentence must have a verb.
>Does that make sense to you?
I see your point, Seth, but my comment was pertaining to SEE,
Signed Exact English, in particular, the spelling of English words.
English: Bear with me. (Be patient with me.) \
> Spelling of bear is
ASL: Bear with me. (I have a bear with me.) / exactly the same; but,
with two totally
different meanings.
Any better?
Steven Conlee
CON...@MEMSTVX1.MEMST.EDU
Sherman Wilcox
Bear with me. (Be patient with me.) \
> Spelling of bear is
Bear with me. (I have a bear with me.) / exactly the same; but,
with two totally
different meanings.
If (1) when speaking these sentences, the word 'bear' sounds the same
and means two different things, yet this causes hearing children
no great conceptual problem; and
(2) when writing these sentences, the word 'bear' is spelled the
same and means two different things, yet this causes literate
hearing children no great conceptual problem,
Then why do we argue that when SIGNING these sentences, if the two
words 'bear' are SIGNED the same but mean two different things, this
will cause deaf children no end of conceptual problems?
Why? Surely deaf kids are just as capable of figuring out that two
words that *look* the same really mean totally different things as
hearing kids are of figuring out that two words that *sound* the same
really mean totally different things.
In the terms used to describe C.A.S.E., is it then the case that spoken
and written English are "conceptually inaccurate" because the same
[series of sounds/series of letters] is used to mean totally different
things?
I hope this discussion bears this much attention. Maybe, with much
scrutiny, the topic will bear fruit. If not, I bear the responsibility
for bringing it up in the first place.
-- Sherman
Dawn Skwersky
Steven Conlee never said that bear with me doesn't mean
to be patient with someone. He just showed the different
ways in which it is transliterated into English when using
different SEE systems.
Dawn
Dawn Skwersky
means "bear with me" as in be patient with me, it is
very very confusing.
It is not just confusing to deaf kids. As a deaf adult,
if someone signs "bear" as in animal, I conceive an animal.
If the interpreter signs "bear" as in animal for "to be
patient with" then I stop the interpreter just to make sure
I am "seeing" the correct lecture. By doing so, I lose some
of the lecture trying to make sure I got the right word
earlier.
Dawn
CON...@msuvx2.memst.edu
>If (1) when speaking these sentences, the word 'bear' sounds the same
> and means two different things, yet this causes hearing children
> no great conceptual problem; and
> (2) when writing these sentences, the word 'bear' is spelled the
> same and means two different things, yet this causes literate
> hearing children no great conceptual problem,
>Then why do we argue that when SIGNING these sentences, if the two
>words 'bear' are SIGNED the same but mean two different things, this
>will cause deaf children no end of conceptual problems?
Good one! I love this idea you have posed. I am very
curious to know from oral deaf people who also fascilitate
their communication with sign how they view this idea.
Please, anyone want to comment? (And please, I had no
intention of stepping on anyone's toes here; did I?)
>Why? Surely deaf kids are just as capable of figuring out that two
>words that *look* the same really mean totally different things as
>hearing kids are of figuring out that two words that *sound* the same
>really mean totally different things.
Interesting... and right you are, that is, if the primary
language learned were English. (huh?) (And by primary, I mean
first-learned communication: sight or sound/deaf or hearing/
Sign or English.) What if, for example, a Frenchman wished
to converse with me; bear in mind, he is using English words
but French grammar rules; would I understand his intentions
correctly? Honestly, I couldn't say, but I don't think that
I could. For me, it would be a puzzle. Would his "English"
be considered wrong?, I think so.
>In the terms used to describe C.A.S.E., is it then the case that spoken
>and written English are "conceptually inaccurate" because the same
>[series of sounds/series of letters] is used to mean totally different
>things?
You sly fox you......(C.A.S.E.-case)! If I'm not correct
my first mistake was dealing with a linguistics expert, right?
As I said above, the languages are totally different;
A.S.L. and English.
>I hope this discussion bears this much attention. Maybe, with much
>scrutiny, the topic will bear fruit. If not, I bear the responsibility
>for bringing it up in the first place.
>-- Sherman
As I said, sly fox. (BTW, one other animal comes to mind here;
but, I'll be nice, since I don't know you personally and since you
might misinterpret my charismatic intentions, I'll drop it.)
BTW, thanks for the enlightenment. (And I thought I had a very
open mind.) (I still do, it's just been stretched a little more!)
Steven Conlee
CON...@MEMSTVX1.MEMST.EDU
Adam Skwersky
The first sentence was clearly an (grammatically correct) English
sentence. The second sentence was _not_ an (grammatically correct)
English sentence, but a prepositional phrase. Taken out of context, it
can cause a lot of confusion! The full sentences would probably read:
"(Please) BEAR with me."
"A BEAR is with me."
These can be signed in an MCE form of sign language with relatively
little confusion, as the meaning is in the context.
Now, switching to ASL, that ALSO can be clearly distinguished. The sign
Bear (animal) is different from the sign bear (to be patient with).
Anytime an interpreter or a friend signs in a confusing way, he/she was
either joking or misigning the words. In most cases arising with me (as
I'm lenient on interpreters), it is a joke, and I welcome it, as jokes
are a rare commodity these days!
Adam Skwersky
Dawn Skwersky
Do you think there might be a chance that becuz we learned
English as our first language, and native language that
the way our mind interprets sign is different than for
someone whose native language is ASL? and for
those people certain mis-signed signs mightnot be so
readily clear?
Dawn
Kevin Calkins
posting...is it on purpose, or did it just happen? It serves well
to poing out the many different ways the word bear can be used.
Such as bearing fruit. Or un BEAR able. If you think of people
having a conversation and using those words, the way they
understand is many times through non verbal enhancement or
support of what was verbally said. Unfortunately, many deaf
people, at least some of those I have met in my short time using
sign, have no real understanding of the use of emphasis in verbal
communication. Thus there are different signs for each of the
different meanings. Use of the sign GROW, for example, meaning
-to bear fruit.
--Just my two cents worth..;)
kevin
kcal...@lunatix.uucp
ps...anyone know Amy Day at Gaullaudet..d.tell her check e-mail
thanks! :^)
`
Daven Lee
and means two different things, yet this causes hearing children
no great conceptual problem; and
(2) when writing these sentences, the word 'bear' is spelled the
same and means two different things, yet this causes literate
hearing children no great conceptual problem,
Then why do we argue that when SIGNING these sentences, if the two
words 'bear' are SIGNED the same but mean two different things, this
will cause deaf children no end of conceptual problems?
Why? Surely deaf kids are just as capable of figuring out that two
words that *look* the same really mean totally different things as
hearing kids are of figuring out that two words that *sound* the same
really mean totally different things.
-so says Sherman
I habve have been following this SEE vs ASL debate fr for quite a while
and I must reply to the above "English lesson:" If I was learning French,
I mean in french one would not say "ours (the french word for the animal,bear)
avec moi." The big theme I see running thour [D opps- through this these
debates is a lack of understanding that ASL is a complete and legitimate
language *entirely different* from English. Somenone talked about the sequenc3
(sorry, my det delete is not working...) seqenc3 sequenc3 of learning
Pse to become comfortable with signed vocabulary before entering an ASL g class
and learning ASL grammar. Let's take French again. Let's think about how
French people would feel if to teach their language they first taught a class
of french vocabulary in English word order and grammar. They would go nuts!!
It seems that the idea of learning signed vocab with English word order to make
things "easier" mean means that people think that ASL is easier to learn,
not like the task of learning a normal forign language, that ASL can be
"vio- try again- "violated" by u imposing English grammar on it. Iyt It is
absurd! Isn't it?
It seems to me that if all deaf kids, regardless of their gbackround, were
taught an ASL class like we hearing kids have to go to i english class, teaching
the grammar and stur structr and how to sign stories and poems, and study
great ASL poets,etc, with that understanding of a complete signed language,
learining a English teaching English, I mean could be done using the
ASL model of grammar- thant i 9 (AHHHHHH! Why cant I delete!?!!!) than no- then
students would understand that in ASL, say with tenses, for example, in ASL,
you sign BEFORE or WILL/FUTURE to indicate past future tense, time, etc, and
that in English, verbs have to be conjugated to show the same thing. Thus,
students would have a strong foundation and home in their w own language and
understand English as a seperate foretgn lanugage.
My Maybe someone can tell me why I can't use my delete, or what I am doing
wrong.....
Daven
Seth Gordon
I see your point, Seth, but my comment was pertaining to SEE,
Signed Exact English, in particular, the spelling of English words.
English: Bear with me. (Be patient with me.) \
> Spelling of bear is
ASL: Bear with me. (I have a bear with me.) / exactly the same; but,
with two totally
different meanings.
Well, if someone signs "BEAR WITH ME" in SEE, that can only mean
the English sentence "Bear with me", using "Bear" as a verb.
BUT....
If someone were signing to me in Pidgin Signed English, or if I were
having a TTY conversation with someone who tended to write in ASL
word order, and that other person said "BEAR WITH ME", I might get
confused about the meaning.
FURTHERMORE....
Since the SEE system uses ASL signs, I can see how someone who knows
ASL and written English might still be confused by the SEE "BEAR WITH
ME."
I have some proficiency in Spanish, and I'm now taking a class in
Portugese. Portugese is *spelled* almost exactly like Spanish, but
the *pronounciation* is radically different. When reading Portugese
out loud, it's hard to keep in mind that Portugese "T" is pronounced
like Spanish "CH", and Portugese "R" is sort of like the Spanish "J",
whereas Portugese "D" is like the *English* "J", and so on.
--
"Hunt, pursuit, and capture are biologically programmed | SETH fnord GORDON
into male sexuality." --Camille Paglia | se...@gnu.ai.mit.edu
"I thought the old `blue balls' defense ... went out | standard disclaimer
Steve Williams
>The *noun* "bear" means, well, you know what that means.
BEAR .... Yeah. That's a NATO code for Russia's Tu-95 long-range, heavy
strategic bomber, having four Kuznetsov NK-12MV turboprops, each with
max rating of 14,795 hp and driving eight-blade contra-rotating
reversible-pitch Type AV-60N propellers.
Sorry, but I couldn't resist this.....
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Williams swil...@oasys.dt.navy.mil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Cynthia Clark
Seth Gordon > The *noun* "bear" means, well, you know what that means.
Steve Williams> BEAR .... Yeah. That's a NATO code for Russia's Tu-95
Steve Williams> long-range, heavy strategic bomber, having four
Steve Williams> Kuznetsov NK-12MV turboprops, each with
Steve Williams> max rating of 14,795 hp and driving eight-blade
Steve Williams> contra-rotating reversible-pitch Type AV-60N propellers.
Steve Williams> Sorry, but I couldn't resist this.....
Hey Steve,
Don't apologize. That's interesting.
By the way, I heard that "bear" also used by people with CB
on the roads as a code meaning "a police cop".
That's why I couldn't resist this, neither.
Cynthia
