I should note that Shannon at one point says there are “14,000” languages in the world, because people when saying there are “7,000” languages in the world are forgetting that sign languages exist — however it is a bit presumptive to assume that there is a roughly equal number of signed languages as spoken languages.

Still, I think this is an intriguing perspective that makes me want to know more about the language dynamics and language politics of Deaf people around the world.

  • bufalo1973
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    The worst part is that there is no standard between languages. After all, you can call an apple “apple”, " manzana", “pome”, " poma", … and it’s always the same thing. So the sign should be the same, right?

    • Erika3sis [she/her, xe/xem]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sorry, are you implying that sign languages are just engineered representations of spoken languages? Because if you are, those are called MCLs (manually coded languages), and are completely different from sign languages.

      • bufalo1973
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’ve always heard that different sign language have different signs for the same significant.

            • Erika3sis [she/her, xe/xem]@hexbear.netOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              If you were to force all the Deaf people of the world to use the same language, Deaf people would still communicate with their local communities far more often than communities in other countries, which means that neologisms and accents and so forth would gradually develop and accumulate, until there would eventually once again be hundreds of different regional sign languages — unless you were also continually suppressing Deaf people’s attempts to control their own languages, which is both a terrible thing to do and also not particularly sustainable in the long run.

              …So by imposing a “Universal Sign Language”, you would’ve really just eradicated an enormous source of understudied language diversity and global cultural heritage, in order to not-solve a non-issue. Deaf people already have ways to communicate across language boundaries that they’re perfectly satisfied with, including, among others, the international auxiliary pidgin language used in the above video.

              • bufalo1973
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                If I put here a 🙂 you understand that’s a smile, ever if I call it “sonrisa” or “somriure”. What I mean is “normalize” the common things between languages. Not erasing localisms. After all every language has synonyms. This could be a “common synonym”.

                • Erika3sis [she/her, xe/xem]@hexbear.netOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  So you’re saying you’re in favor of Deaf people having a set of common signs to use when communicating with people from different countries, but you don’t want this to replace the local sign languages? Because if that’s what you’re getting at, then that’s just International Sign, isn’t it? That already exists and is widely used at international Deaf events.

                  • bufalo1973
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    GREAT! I was mistaken by some comments and I though it didn’t exist. I [wrongly] understood that every sign language was “tied” to the local language to the degree of not being understood in other countries.

                    Thank you for correcting my (flawed) knowledge 🙂

      • bufalo1973
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I mean that the significant is the same. A flower is a flower, regardless of the name you give it.