Signing Exact English (SEE, sometimes Signed Exact English or Signed English) is a system of manual communication that strives to be an exact representation of English vocabulary and grammar. It is one of a number of such systems in use in English-speaking countries, which are known collectively as Manually Coded English.
Contents |
SEE is an artificial system that was devised in 1972. It takes much of its vocabulary of signs from American Sign Language (ASL). However, it often modifies ASL handshapes to incorporate the handshape used for the first letter of the English word that the SEE sign represents. Many new signs were invented, however, especially signs for grammatical concepts. SEE can be thought of as a code for visually representing spoken English, developed primarily for use in deaf education.
These systems for visually representing the English language are used most often with deaf children in educational settings. They often find use in the home too, however, as they are often welcomed as an alternative to natural sign languages by hearing parents of deaf children because they do not require them to learn a new grammar or syntax. Therefore, SEE and its variants are easy to quickly learn for people who have already internalized English. It is not often used by adult deaf people except to communicate with hearing people who know some sign but who are not fluent users of sign language. Other advantages are:
The use of Signed English is controversial. Many deaf people complain that it is awkward and difficult to sign, that it is an attempt to replace their native sign languages, and that it separates deaf children from exposure to deaf culture which they claim is imperative to complete normal, healthy development. However, it is advocated by some educators as a way of providing deaf children with access to a visual form of the English language. Other disadvantages are:
The use of SEE is somewhat controversial, especially compared to the somewhat more entrenched system ASL.
Some detractors of SEE claim that teaching deaf children SEE deprives them of belonging to a culture that they can fully participate in. They also claim that SEE is harder for deaf children to master and does not result in those children being competent with English.[1] Sometimes, deaf children are instructed using SEE and receive no instruction in ASL, leading to a culture gap.
In addition, some advocates of ASL cite SEE's more intensive adherence to English grammar as leading to negative consequences in the classroom. The argument is that interpreters may drop signs or skip grammatical structures when trying to keep up with the spoken lessons. This approximation destroys the main benefit of using SEE in the first place. However, experimental evidence [2] indicates that simultaneous verbal and signed communication is possible when given adequate training.
Finally, SEE introduces confusion in ASL. Casual learners are often taught the SEE equivalent of an ASL sign, which they then believe belongs to the vocabulary of ASL when in fact those signs do not. Since deaf people are most often in the role of accommodating hearing people with whom they are communicating, the misunderstanding about which signs belong to what system is reinforced. Because ASL is culturally significant, this can lead to the impression that outsiders are attempting to dilute the language.
Supporters of SEE claim that it helps children build English language skills more effectively,[3] does not diminish students' ability to understand ASL,[4] and is as easy to learn as ASL. In addition, because SEE is easy for English-speaking hearing people to learn,[5] it facilitates rapid adoption of signing amongst the hearing, which then helps the deaf community communicate with those outside.
SEE is not considered a language in itself like ASL. Rather, it is an encoding for a language - namely, of English. Thus, there is some discrepancy for whether language credit ought to be given for learning SEE, as is commonly done now with ASL.