I hear a lot of negative comments about Cued Speech or Cued English mainly from signing deaf people. I especially hear about how awful Cued Speech is from the big capital 'D' Deaf people. I read somewhere on DeafRead about how they found an article about some school using Cued Speech, in addition to ASL, 'disgusting'. First, thank you for pointing out the article. But, please, explain to me. How is it disgusting?
I understand why many people are against Cued Speech. It seems to threaten sign language. Perhaps a lot of them fear that people would prefer to use cueing over signing. Perhaps they see it as something that could interfere with sign language and communication; causing problems with the ability to communicate in sign language.
A lot of people think it is a language. It is not. It is far from a language. Cued Speech can never take the place of ASL and other signed languages.
Or perhaps some deaf people were taught Cued Speech and they absolutely detest it. Fine. If you don't like it, don't use it.
But, to those who have never tried Cued Speech, don't knock it until you've tried it. Take a class and learn how to cue, then come back here and gripe about it some more. It would be more credible. At least I can say, "Oh, well this person has tried it and used it, she knows what she is talking about."
Keep in mind, Cued Speech, in my opinion, is more appropriate for younger people who want to learn how to read and understand English, and for those who have super dedicated parents who are willing to learn and use Cued Speech consistently starting at infancy. Consistently. Not every other day. Not when you feel like it is necessary. But everyday, 24/7. (*A commenter asked a good question, how can parents be expected to use cued speech 24/7 while using sign language? Sorry, the '24/7' was an exaggeration, I did not mean for it that they need to use it 24/7--but close to it--if and big IF the parents decide that Cued Speech and oral methods will be the primary way they wish to educate and communicate with their child. Otherwise, I don't know how parents would use both ASL and Cued Speech together in the very beginning stages of a child's life. One would have to be used more than the other, I suppose. Parents would have to make that decision.)
I took a course in Cued Speech. It was very interesting and I learned how useful Cued Speech can be. It can be useful for those who use primarily sign language.
When I get the time, I will write more about my experiences with Cued Speech, both positive and negative.
I am tired of hearing mainly negative comments about it from people who never tried it or have taken the time to learn more about it.
(e
I understand why many people are against Cued Speech. It seems to threaten sign language. Perhaps a lot of them fear that people would prefer to use cueing over signing. Perhaps they see it as something that could interfere with sign language and communication; causing problems with the ability to communicate in sign language.
A lot of people think it is a language. It is not. It is far from a language. Cued Speech can never take the place of ASL and other signed languages.
Or perhaps some deaf people were taught Cued Speech and they absolutely detest it. Fine. If you don't like it, don't use it.
But, to those who have never tried Cued Speech, don't knock it until you've tried it. Take a class and learn how to cue, then come back here and gripe about it some more. It would be more credible. At least I can say, "Oh, well this person has tried it and used it, she knows what she is talking about."
Keep in mind, Cued Speech, in my opinion, is more appropriate for younger people who want to learn how to read and understand English, and for those who have super dedicated parents who are willing to learn and use Cued Speech consistently starting at infancy. Consistently. Not every other day. Not when you feel like it is necessary. But everyday, 24/7. (*A commenter asked a good question, how can parents be expected to use cued speech 24/7 while using sign language? Sorry, the '24/7' was an exaggeration, I did not mean for it that they need to use it 24/7--but close to it--if and big IF the parents decide that Cued Speech and oral methods will be the primary way they wish to educate and communicate with their child. Otherwise, I don't know how parents would use both ASL and Cued Speech together in the very beginning stages of a child's life. One would have to be used more than the other, I suppose. Parents would have to make that decision.)
I took a course in Cued Speech. It was very interesting and I learned how useful Cued Speech can be. It can be useful for those who use primarily sign language.
When I get the time, I will write more about my experiences with Cued Speech, both positive and negative.
I am tired of hearing mainly negative comments about it from people who never tried it or have taken the time to learn more about it.
(e
I've tried it, and it is just as hard as spoken and written language. if I'm unsure how to pronounce a word, I am just as unsure which cue to use. If I Knew how to pronounce a word properly, I would know which cue to use. oral-only deaf (since birth) like myself who struggle with speech and writing due to their hearing loss may not get Cued speech and may have a very hard time joining the "cuing community" late in life. They may not even be able to their English order correctly(hence the "4th grade writing skills" -- yes this apply to oral-only deaf too) Cued speech is just another manually-coded- English as SEE,Rochester method, PSE/CASE, braille, Morse code, etc. You have heard of oral deaf joining the ASL community late in life because it is accessible to them, it allow them to use their eyes.
ReplyDeleteCuing is probably useful if you start with children and have a teacher who is hearing (or deaf who is really good at cuing) and can show them the appropriate cue for each word so they can imitate it.I think access to sounds like hearing aids or CI is required because many cued speech websites and articles mentioned many times that it aids speechreading and how sounds sound alike and cued speech suppose to help deaf to see the difference. But I don't know how well it work for unaided deaf person. If it is helpful for them, it can used for reading... but you'll have to use it when they are young if they have no access to sounds and their first language is ASL. Cued speech probably would not make sense if you start later and jump right into it. I can see why people prefer SEE or PSE to teach English. They want to borrow the language that these children know to teach them English.
Cued speech is easy for *hearing* to learn unaided, not so much for deaf. For a deaf person you'd have to learn it from a hearing person, not by yourself.
Deletebtw, why does it have to be 24/7, if that's the case then using cued speech for ASL children is not a good idea.
ReplyDeleteCued speech may have its uses in a limited fashion, like in speech training classes. As a communication tool, it has weaknesses--the main one being slowing the delivery of information.
ReplyDeleteInformation is interfered with by breaking it down into syllables and sounds and the child focuses more on the mechanics than the information. In contrast, ASL blows it right out of the water.
If you think of it as taking your English language and substituting a new form of speech such as Newspeak (in the novel 1984) or Nadsat (from Clockwork Orange.) Suppose your children were to be schooled entirely in that substitute language. What would the effect be on the community language? Yes, it would be divisive in many ways.
It's not as simple as "just don't use it if you don't like it." It's hard to ignore once it gets into the community and separates its users from the others. It subtly changes the cadence and style of communication that is hard to change later on, like trying to get rid of an accent.
Keep it in the speech classroom as a pronunciation aid. Just don't substitute it for the community language.
I find it interesting you're commenting on cued speech since my class is reading about it for educational purposes.
ReplyDeleteFor myself, I think it's a handy tool for learning reading and writing, but I also think the negativity persists because parents believe cued speech is a language rather than just a communication system.
btw, visual phonetic is similiar to cued speech. But we don't want people use it as part of their "language" instead of English.
ReplyDeleteI mean , visual phonics
ReplyDeleteI don't think Cued Speech is disgusting.
ReplyDeleteASL is the community language and in my opinion that is first...but sometimes it is okay to do what communication works for you.
We shouldn't put people down for wanting to learn.
If you read the article, it described Cued Speech as a "form of sign language". Cued Speech is NOT sign language, in ANY form. Nor is it a LANGUAGE in any form. It is simply a code for the phonetic elements of spoken language, just as writing is. So that was a major problem with the article.
ReplyDeleteAnother problem is that the article was suggesting Cued Speech might replace ASL. As Dianrez said, CS has its limitations as a communication method. I do agree with her that it MIGHT have a limited use as a tool for speech therapy (and speech therapy classes alone). However, I feel that requiring Deaf students to learn the Cued Speech handshapes is unnecessary, since fingerspelling could easily show which sound you want to emphasize, and it is something Deaf people already know and use.
(e
ReplyDeleteIt is correct that it is a form of a language but the writer worded it poorly. It provides visual language support for the spoken English language. Here below is an excerpt of my blog on that subject I did back in 2006.
CUED speech or more appropriately CUED English is now believed to be the best source of visual language support for the spoken English language and it’s ability to identify idiomatic expressions and nuances. The main purpose of Cued Speech is not for speech purposes but for literacy.
Read the rest at: http://kokonutpundits.blogspot.com/2006/09/asl-versus-cued-speech-social-versus.html
Also, watch this YouTube videos of a native cuer who is also an ASL signer. I have four videos in a blog I did back in 2008 and be sure to watch the fourth video at the bottom.
http://kokonutpundits.blogspot.com/2008/03/value-of-cued-speech.html
I meant to say it is not quite correct that it is a form of a language.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I dislike cued speech because of the dynamics it establishes between the deaf child and the hearing person. Often, the child and their opinions are relegated to a lesser role. Children's opinions and thoughts aren't solicited, nor are their reflections valued. This is common for most types of speech therapy, however - I've met several Deaf adults who grow up with inferiority complexes because they've been trained so hard to watch the lips and look for meaning that they forget how to make it themselves. It's a danger many hearing instructors aren't aware of - and probably wouldn't change if they could.
ReplyDeleteI find it very interesting that those who are most critical of Cued Speech are the ones that do not know it and have never seen it being successfully used. Instead, those people get on their high horse about how only ASL is a language. Big hairy deal! I too used to be one of those who mocked Cued Speech. I mean, on the surface, it looks ridiculous. My colleagues and I used to slap our faces around the mouth area instead of using the proper sign for Cued Speech. It took a while but I finally started to listen to DEAF people who had good experiences with it. I think anything that works for SOME deaf people should be taken seriously. In fact, I'm dying to take a Cued Speech class myself. Visual Phonics, too. I see so many deaf students who are being exposed to ASL immersion and enrichment, critical mass of deaf peers, yadda yadda, and still not becoming proficient in English. ASL isn't the magic bullet, far from it. if ASL works, shouldn't something different be tried?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 456
darn it, I meant to say: if ASL doesn't work, shouldn't something different be tried?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 456
Without lip-reading where would many of us be ? Unless I live in Gallaudet there is scant opportunity to use sign language. Success rates are about 29% in the UK (i.e. pass level). but 29% of something is far more useful to me than 95% of none with sign language, the people just do not exist on my street to interact with sign wise. It's a matter of practicality. I cannot understand those deaf who insist on NOT learning something of use to them, under some misguided ideal culture will suffer... you can do BOTH. I do. The main problem is communication lessons, I'd advocate the demise of sign classes AND lip-reading ones taught in isolation, and a more comprehensive system of teaching the deaf without the silly bias.
ReplyDeleteI did not see anywhere in the very very brief article where it suggests that they are planning on replacing ASL with Cued Speech. Also it did not state that Cued Speech is a form of language.
ReplyDeleteThe author stated: "It's similar to sign language, in that it uses hand gestures for communication."
I suppose it can be read the wrong way by many unfamiliar with Cued Speech. But, how I read it is that it is like sign language in that it uses hand gestures for communication purposes.
(e
Thank you all for your thoughts on this. I especially appreciate hearing from those who personally have experienced Cued Speech, whether they were good experiences or not. You have given me a lot to think about and to consider.
ReplyDelete(e
Deaf anti cue speech think they better more super over cue speech mean they self show deafism.
ReplyDeleteNo wrong cue speech, same none wrong total commication, pigdin sign english, sign excat english, oral talk
We no more mind close. We show mind open. No jugdement. Finsh enough pick pick.
(e - I am a deaf adult cuer who's been cueing since I was a baby. I really appreciate your openness in learning more about Cued Speech and blogging about it. I am curious to read about your positive and negative Cued Speech learning experiences. It's always good to learn from other people and see how we can improve the process.
ReplyDeleteI, too, am tired of the criticism but I can only keep trucking along and continue to educate people. I am fully aware that sign language is the chosen community language and as we keep saying, Cued Speech will never replace sign language as that is not the purpose. I learned how to sign over 10 years ago and use it to communicate with my non-cueing deaf friends. The more I know/learn, the better communicator I can be.
We are a community with a tool box filled with different tools such as sign language, oralism, Cued Speech, etc... People should be able to choose what they want in their or their child's life in a way where they won't be criticized for their choice(s).
Signing Exact English (SEE) is a language and one that is VERY close to written English, and to the English spoken by English "speakers" -- those without oral or aural difficulties. American Sign Language is similar to oral English, but nearly as exactly as SEE because of omitted words (articles, prepositions, etc.) and grammar that differs from the standard English that everyone reads and writes.
ReplyDeleteThink of Cued Speech as "assisted lip reading." Or "speaking in a way that makes lip reading possible." It is closer to oral English than any other method.
HUGE bonus: people that speak oral English well can learn Cued Speech VERY RAPIDLY as there are no new "words" to learn, only a handful of gestures that align with the sounds that are already being made. All of those signs can be memorized in about as much time as learning the finger-spelling alphabet, and from there, it is just a question of getting faster with practice.
For a conversation between one "English speaking" signer and another, ASL can be very fast. Learning ASL from scratch when you already know English still takes several years. It is equivalent to mastering any other foreign language.
Quite simply, if deaf persons want to talk to hearing persons, they can wait until the hearing decide to learn to spend years learning to sign, or both groups can come together and learn Cued Speech. It WILL be easier for the hearing people to learn than the non-hearing because it is about SOUNDS.
Btw, the vast majority of people that will be hearing impaired at some point in their lifetimes will have had excellent hearing at some point. Advancing age attenuated the hearing of most people. Learning Cued speech at an early age can be seen as a commitment to learning to speak with "old people and others that can't hear well."
It will also be great for telling the guy in the car next to you that he was a jerk for cutting you off in traffic.
Actually SEE isn't a language. It's taking vocabulary mostly from one language and grammar from another language. It would be like taking Japanese vocabulary with English grammar (and a few made up words for grammatical functions that Japanese doesn't have) and calling that a language.
DeleteI think Cued English would also be great for signer-to-signer communication from people that live in different English speaking areas.
ReplyDeleteASL would not be as easily understood by someone from England, where they speak BSL, or someone in Ireland or Australia (Auslan) or New Zealand all of which speak different languages or dialects.
Since the hand signs are fixed (8 signs and 4 positions) even regional accents would not affect comprehension.
People that speak Cued English will be able to understand each other well even in situations where two oral English speakers would have a difficult time. For example tens of millions of people in China speak oral English, but are very difficult for Americans to understand.
Since people will need learn written English anyway, why not embrace some form of English for the deaf? ASL is a 2nd language. To paraphrase Steve Martin "it has a different word for EVERYTHING."
Since Cued English has demonstrated that it yields greater written English comprehension, why not teach it to all children?
A world where ASL-only speakers can only talk to other deaf Americans does not seem very inclusive. For the even smaller groups of British Sign Language speakers and others, it must be even worse.
When we speak of "mainstreaming" differently-abled kids in with the rest of the world, it seems that Cued Speech can only help.
As I read comments from native signers, I become more and more convinced that Cued Speech can do wonderful things for deaf individuals with hearing loss. Reading comprehension and written language skills can be quite a challenge when you are unable to hear the language you are trying to read and write. Cued Speech provides the necessary clarification and can help the deaf individual learn that language naturally, with or without sound. Those individuals fluent in both Cued Speech and ASL who are deaf use both. They code switch back and forth,using ASL then switching with ease into Cued Speech. Sometimes one for vocabulary heavy or detailed content and sometimes the other for less formal conversations. It is amazing to watch and it reminds me of what speakers of any language do, we change our vocabulary, tone, and style of speech for the nature of the conversation at hand.
ReplyDelete