[Foundation-l] Signal languages Wikimedia projects

Mon Nov 24 05:36:40 UTC 2008

Hoi,
Good idea Mark... " "a croaking dalek with laryngitis"
Thanks,
     GerardM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant#Efficacy

2008/11/24 Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>

> Why not read about it first?
>
> Many people interested in the continued survival of deaf culture are
> very worried about cochlear implants.
>
> Mark
>
> 2008/11/23 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
> > Hoi,
> > I wonder how effective a cochlear thingie is. I doubt that deaf people
> > equipped in this way have the same auditory experience as we have. So a
> > cochlear can be understood as a crutch. They help you to move on but it
> is
> > still painful.
> > Thanks,
> >        GerardM
> >
> > 2008/11/23 Marcus Buck <me at marcusbuck.org>
> >
> >> Gregory Maxwell hett schreven:
> >> > Only that due care is required if we don't want to end up being a tool
> >> > for isolationism and this is true for all cases where we create
> >> > distinct Wikipedia communities and is not at all limited to speakers
> >> > of sign language.
> >> If people like to be isolated, why shouldn't we allow them? It's not
> >> Wikimedia's goal to create "one world", but to provide factual knowledge
> >> to all people. Even isolated people.
> >> Why do we have a Breton Wikipedia? Cause Bretons want to isolate from
> >> French. Why do they want to isolate? Cause they are "bad people" who
> >> "hate French"? No, cause French dominance destroys Breton. But people
> >> want to stay what they are, who they are. They want to stay Breton. They
> >> want to keep their identity. Modern society makes it necessary to have a
> >> language that enables you to cope with modern society, well, that's
> >> nothing else than "to cope with life". If your language doesn't enable
> >> you to cope with life there are two ways: 1) create the means that
> >> enable you to cope with life in your language. 2) give up your language
> >> and the identity intertwined with it and assimilate and integrate into
> >> another culture.
> >> Languages like English, French, German, Chinese went path 1). Other
> >> language, like most of the indigenous languages of the Americas and of
> >> Australia went path 2).
> >>
> >> Every decision whether to grant a Wikipedia or not, is effectively a
> >> calculus, whether the language (and identity connected with it) is
> >> _worth_ the effort of being adapted to a life in modern society and
> >> whether it is feasible to adapt it to a life in modern society. By the
> >> way, when I refer to "adapting" a language, I do not mean lexical or
> >> semantical changes or additions (a "constructed standard"). but I speak
> >> of resources too. Resources like books, encyclopedias, media etc.
> >> Obviously there a few chances that a language with only five speakers
> >> wil ever be able to cope with all aspects of life. The speakers
> >> obviously have be fluent in another language too and their first
> >> language will disappear as dispensable. That's the fate of every
> >> language in a perfectly bilingual situation. Morse code doesn't deserve
> >> a Wikipedia cause nobody _needs_ it to cope with life and so nobody is
> >> interested in making it enable you to cope with life (and actually, of
> >> course, it is a script and not a language). Breton _is_ worth being
> >> adapted (in my opinion, "worth" of course is always a matter of opinion)
> >> and it is feasible too. 200-300,000 people speak it. That's the same
> >> order of magnitude as for Icelandic and Icelandic is a full-fledged
> >> language able to cope with all aspects of life.
> >>
> >> If we do the same calculus for Sater Frisian, with around 1,000 speakers
> >> it is questionable, whether it is feasible to adapt the language. It's
> >> _worth_ to be adapted (again, in my opinion), but 1,000 people is a tiny
> >> community. Iceland has several kinds of industries and it's not too hard
> >> to find a good job, where you can work without having to know a foreign
> >> language on a near-native level. But in a community of 1,000 it's quite
> >> hard to find a job like that. That means almost everyone has to know a
> >> foreign language (German in this case) to cope with his job. And as I
> >> said above, perfectly bilingual situations are highly instable.
> >>
> >> Another example: American English. It's perfectly feasible to adapt
> >> American English to cope with life (it's doing that all the time). There
> >> are millions of speakers. A Wikipedia of its own would be perfectly
> >> feasible. But it wouldn't be worth it, cause the difference to other
> >> varieties of English is very small. "Worth" again, is my opinion. There
> >> are people, who disagree and believe American English should have a
> >> Wikipedia on its own. That's showcased by a recent proposal to create an
> >> American English Wikipedia on Meta. It was made by an Englishman. He
> >> obviously fears, the American dominance will supplant British English
> >> and endanger the British identity.
> >>
> >> In the end every Wikipedia was created out of isolationism.
> >>
> >> For sign languages we should apply the same calculus. Of course the
> >> special nature of sign languages should be kept in mind while doing
> >> this. Sign languages do not form close communities. They cannot be
> >> supplanted by spoken languages. This for example means that "jobs" (as
> >> mentioned at the example Sater Frisian) does not matter. Deaf people
> >> cannot work in most "hearer" jobs. And they don't live in close
> >> territories like Bretons, Icelanders or Sater Frisians.
> >> Is it feasible? At least the bigger sign languages have enough speakers
> >> to adapt to all aspects of life. To create encyclopedias, to create
> >> media etc.
> >> Is it worth it? Those "anti cochlear" people show that there is a strong
> >> identity at least among some deaf people. The "anti cochlear" people
> >> fear, that their unique culture will have to face extinction if deafness
> >> can be healed. Others would sacrifice this culture for the higher sake
> >> of being released from their non-self-chosen isolation.
> >>
> >> _In my opinion isolationism is a normal motive for every proposed
> >> Wikipedia._
> >>
> >> Marcus Buck
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>