Writing signed languages: What for? what form? A response
IN HIS ARTICLE in an American Annals of the Deaf special issue that also includes the present article, Grushkin divides his discussion of a written sign system into three basic parts. The first presents arguments against the development of a written form of American Sign Language; the second provides a rationale for a written form of ASL; the third advances opinions of the form such a system might take. The arguments in the first part are weak and reflect the same bias that historically has been shown against ASL itself. The third section advances some ideas that should provide the basis for interesting discussions. Among these are the relationship, if any, of a written sign language to English print, the extent to which it should be alphabetic and horizontal, and its role in the current American educational system.
American Annals of the Deaf
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Moores. (2017). Writing Signed Languages: What For? What Form? A Response. American Annals of the Deaf (Washington, D.C. 1886), 161(5), 537–539. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2017.0003