If you order your college papers from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on "Oralism or Manualism" The Voice of the Deaf. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality "Oralism or Manualism" The Voice of the Deaf paper right on time.
Our staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in "Oralism or Manualism" The Voice of the Deaf, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your "Oralism or Manualism" The Voice of the Deaf paper at affordable prices!
"Oralism or Manualism"
The Voice of the Deaf
What a glorious day, you're having a child. The day you couldn't wait to arrive. But then the doctor comes in and says there were some complications at birth, your baby's fine but will be deaf for the rest of their life. Something you feared but never expected to deal with. A million things are running through your head, why me? What do I do? is my child going to be a vegetable for the rest of their life? No. In fact there are options parents can take to raise their deaf child in a hearing environment but what is the best way for your child. The child can either learn the studies of Oralism or Sign Language.
Early teachers who used sign language were known as manualists. Those who, later in the century, opposed the use of sign language and wanted to limit deaf people to speech and lip-reading called themselves oralists. The terms are somewhat misleading because manualists, at least later in the century, did not oppose oral training. They incorporated speech lessons and lip-reading lessons into their schools and actually usually referred to themselves then as combinists in order to reflect this change. They combined both manualism and oral training. (Baynton)
Oralists on the other hand were not simply concerned with teaching speech and lip reading. They also were stubbornly opposed to the use of sign language in any form. Oralism functioned as an ideology that, in part, depicted sign language as primitive and repugnant. The eradication of sign language was as important to their mission as the teaching of oral communication. Oralist educators later in the century thought sign language belonged to primitive people lower on the evolutionary ladder because the American Indians used sign language and Oralist saw them as living fossils, leftovers from an earlier stage of evolution. (History). Sign language, at that time, was an undeveloped language that held deaf people back. Educators would say that it was morally wrong to leave deaf people thousands of years behind the vanguard of the human race. Learning to speak would supposedly bring them up to the level of hearing people. But was this the case?
It was in the sixteenth century that Geronimo Cardano, a physician of Padua, in northern Italy, proclaimed that deaf people could be taught to understand written combinations of symbols by associating them with the thing they represented. And the first book on teaching sign language to deaf people that contained the manual alphabet was published in 160 by Juan Pablo de Bonet. (Takushi). So the manualist approach had been around for sometime. Throughout the world, deaf people have developed a visual language. The language used by deaf people in the United States is a blend of signs brought from France early in the 1th century. Some signs were already in use in this country. With no formal sign language in existence here at that time, home, local, and French signs blended together to become the American Sign Language, now considered to be one of the most refined and complete sign systems in the world. (Baynton).
But does sign language really hold them back from the rest of the human race? Well research shows the benefits of learning Sign for not only for the deaf but hearing kids as well. In fact, the benefits are so numerous that one has to wonder if perhaps a Sign language should be the second language that hearing kids learn. Children go in and out of phases where they love to mimic, verbally and or physically. Many youngsters, before they speak any words, will even develop signs for many things like juice, milk, the desire to have diapers changed. (Sign). Almost all kids go through a phase or more where they appreciate learning Sign and are very receptive to it. Teaching children Sign or signs before they learn to speak can inspire them to learn spoken language earlier, which is a blessing for many parents. Use of signs gets many children to enjoy communication, and take it to another level, the spoken word.
We live in a world of signs if we see someone to far away to say hello we wave to them. If we see someone do a good job one might give him or her a "thumbs up" to let them know "hey good job" so sign language is nothing new and should be the way to go. But oralists believe there is the need to be able to communicate with the larger world around the deaf person. Therefore, deaf children must learn to speak and lip-read the language of the larger world. The only problem with that is the big picture. To be able to communicate at high level, one needs a well-developed language in ones head. Once one has language in ones head, it is easier for him to learn the language of the larger world and establish more meaningful communication with it. Therefore, deaf children must first learn Sign Language. Then, those of them who are capable of it may learn the language of the larger world as a first foreign language. (Zak).
Oralists feel that learning Sign Language would interfere with babys learning to process sounds or to lip-read. The culture of USA has developed such a bias against multilingual education that it is easy to feel that learning another language at a young age will interfere with learning. (Osgood). However other cultures do not have such a bias. Children, who are raised in those cultures, learn more than one language at their childhood and become multilingual without ill effects. While learning another language simultaneously may delay the process of vocabulary acquisition speech, there is no long-range harm due to this. Since each language maps to reality in somewhat different way, the child can only benefit from the ability to see the world via multiple maps (in the same way physics is enriched from being able to model reality according to Classical Physics, Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity etc. - various models which provide different approximations to the same reality). (Zak).
Oralist try to make thing's right but in many times their only making things worse. In oralist teachings they say, "We try to educate the deaf child using Oral methods. If he succeeds then fine but, If he doesnt succeed, and this happens, then we divert him to Manualistic education and let him learn Sign Language" (Zak). This is a very big and dangerous gamble. It is essential that the deaf child have a proper language in his head at early age. Oral methods are not reliable means for achieving this end. Children who fail to acquire language using Oral methods are too old to be able to properly acquire Sign Language by the time they are branded as oral failures and permitted to learn Sign Language. This policy is liable to leave them with neither spoken language nor signed language for the rest of their lives. (Zak).
Lola Kaminsky, a professional interpreter for 0 years and daughter to deaf parents believes that Manulist approach is the right way to go. She states, "With learning Sign Language all the other abilities such as lip-reading will eventually come along with it".She has see what happens to people who just can't grasp the Oralist approach and are too old now to learn the ins and outs of Sign Language "they're left in a world of confusion and frustration."
Some children have learning disabilities that hinder them from learning oralism and at what point do you say he's not able to learn. The fact is clear, the manulist approach is the right way to go. Don't let your child get held back from the rest of the world. The deaf community is growing and is stronger then ever now and the growing form of communication is Sign Language. So if one day you have a child that is born deaf be sure to give you child the correct tools to succeed in life. And even if your child is not born deaf sign language is a wonderful approach to language development.
Works Cited
Baynton, Douglas. "The Oral vs. Sign Debate" Revolution Highlights 17. EBSCOhost. Broome Community Coll. Lib., Binghamton, NY. 5 Apr. 00
http//search.epnet.com .
Osgood, Robert L. For Children Who Vary from the Normal Type. Gallaudet Univ Pr 000.
Takushi, Ruth. "Deaf Culture and Language Concerns and considerations for Mainstream Teachers" 000. The American University. 5 Apr. 00.
http//www.american.edu/tesol/Ruth_Takushi.pdf .
Zak, Omer. "Arguments in favor of Oralism are refuted by Manualists" Feb 16.
http//www.zak.co.il/deaf-info/old/oral_arguments.html .
"History of Oral Deaf Education" 00. Deaf Friend Finder. 5Apr. 00
http//www.deaffriendfinder.com/w/education.
"Sign Language The Best Second Language?" 000. Signing With Your Baby.Apr 00 http//www.signingbaby.com/second.html.Please note that this sample paper on "Oralism or Manualism" The Voice of the Deaf is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on "Oralism or Manualism" The Voice of the Deaf, we are here to assist you.Your college papers on "Oralism or Manualism" The Voice of the Deaf will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.
Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!
