History of the first official signed language Though Sign had existed for many years, a chain of events beginning with the suppression of the deaf and Sign, the birth of a very influential teacher of the deaf (the abbé de l’Epée) the Romantic/Renaissance era, the fight between the Oralists and Manualists, and other events of the times, Sign eventually reached the state of being an official language. This official state was reacted to both positively and negatively, but through the persecution and opposition, Sign endured. Prior to the eighteenth century, deaf people did not constitute a category for social intervention by the state and were grouped into a medicalized category. Consequently, deaf people today are considered to be suffering from a disease called deafness. During the French Revolution, the state undertook the regeneration of these unfortunates, along with other such diseased sections of the public. At first, such regeneration was thought to have come from the methodical sign language devised by the abbé Charles-Michael de l’ Epée (an influential instructor of the deaf in the 1770s who will be discussed later in the paper), but when it later became clear that not only was deafness not disappearing, but that its extent had been greatly underestimated, governments turned their hopes to medicine and speech training ( Mirzoeff 6). With these new ideas for treating deafness came dissensions among the Manualists, those who thought the language taught should be a signed language, such as abbé de l’Epée, arguing that signed language is the natural language of the deaf and that their education should be primarily in their own language. Others, on the other hand, argued that the deaf must be able to speak in order to communicate with the hearing--the Oralists. Manualist teachers were often evangelical Protestants attracted to sign language as a means of bringing those souls who were previously cut off from the gospel, closer to God. They believed that Sign was a gift from God to the deaf people. They also happened to be products of a Romantic era in philosophy, art, and literature and saw this language as the original language of mankind (Baynton 8). Those who argued that the deaf should learn to speak, the Oralists, on the other hand, were part of a group of people who were frightened by growing cultural and linguistic diversity. They thought in terms of scientific naturalism and thus placed the deaf as inferior races or lower animals (Baynton 8). Oralists, it has been argued, were in many cases completely ignorant of deafness. Their belief seemed to be based more on wishful thinking that all deaf people could lead a normal hearing and speaking person’s life (Baynton 6). I believe that perhaps the Oralists didn’t realize the importance of Signing to lead a type of normal life that they so often talked of. Perhaps their intentions were even truly admirable — trying to make those who were deaf normal by having them do things that hearing people do. At the root of this method (the Oralist method) and these ideas, however, was the fear of diversity which can lead majorities to suppress minorities. Each side accused the other of all manner of error, but in the end the majority of the protesters, being hearing, were able to force their form of communication on the deaf. Groups of people, however, practiced the use of Sign and there it flourished and was preserved in the hands and minds of those who used it, later spreading to those who originally had used oral communication (Mirzoeff 5). Though some were able to use Sign and continue its practice, the situation of the prelingually deaf, prior to 1750, was horrible: Those born deaf were unable to acquire speech, hence dumb or mute; unable to enjoy free communication with even their parents and families; confined to a few rudimentary signs and gestures; cut off, except in large cities, even from the community of their own kind; deprived of literacy and education, all knowledge of the world; forced to do the most menial work; living alone, often close to destitution; treated by the law and society as little better than imbeciles--the lot of the deaf was manifestly dreadful (Sacks 14). The Abbé Sicard, student of abbé de l’Epée and teacher of the deaf, questioned why the deaf person was isolated in nature and unable to communicate with other men. He asked does he not have everything he needs for having sensations, acquiring ideas, and combining them to do everything we do? (Sacks 14). Sicard’s answer to this question was that a deaf person has no symbols for fixing and combining ideas. It is because of this that there is a communication gap between him and others. According to Sacks, the hostility and misunderstanding of the deaf could be in part linked back to the Mosaic code, and was reinforced by the biblical exaltation of the voice and ear as the one and true way in which man and God could speak-- In the beginning there was the Word. (John 1:1). Some voices were heard above these codes that proclaimed that this not need be so. Socrates made the remark: if we had neither voice nor tongue, and yet wished to manifest things to one another, should we not, like those which are at present mute, endeavor to signify our meaning by the hands, head, and other parts of the body? (15). Eventually the mind of a philosopher and an ordinary person came together to change history for the deaf. De l’Epée was first inspired to begin the teaching of the deaf because of his profession as a priest. He could not bear to think of the souls of the deaf-mute living and dying without knowledge of the Scriptures, the Word of God, and other religious necessities. It is said that because of his humility he truly listened to the deaf and thus approached sign language not with contempt, but with awe. De l’Epée acquired the language of the deaf, then used a system of methodical signs — a combination of their own sign and signed French grammar — which enabled deaf students to write down what was said to them through a signing interpreter. This method became the first official sign language that enabled the deaf to read and write, thus being able to acquire an education. De l’Epée founded the first school for the deaf, funded by public support, in 1755. He trained many teachers for the deaf, who, by the time of his death in 1789, had established twenty-one schools in France and Europe (Sacks 17). The breakthrough of a signed language being developed for the deaf has great importance because the speechless person (in the largest sense of the word speech) can not only tell others what he thinks, but also what he himself thinks. Speech is a part of thought. Not having a stunted. The development of sign became a method of opening up the doors of intelligence for the first time (Sacks 19). Reference: History of Sign Language. feist/~randys/history.htm. Mirzoeff, Nicholas. Silent Poetry. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1995. Sacks, Oliver. Seeing Voices--A Journey Into The World Of The Deaf. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1990. Samarin, William J. Demythologizing Plains Indian Sign Language History. International Journal of American Linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Jan. 1987. Schein, Jerome D. Speaking the Language of Sign. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1984.
Posted on: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 12:30:14 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015