Sign Language vs Spanish

[ChristusG]

My DD has shown interest in learning about both of these. I thought about letting her choose which one we do. Is there any reason I should keep this decision to myself and choose one over the other?

[Aurelia]

If you live in an area where there are lots of Spanish speakers, then I would choose Spanish over sign language since you would get more use out of it, but if there aren't, I don't there is any major advantage to choosing one over the other.

[LittleIzumi]

We're learning ASL and French together. :)

[Haiku]

The only reason I would be at all inclined to Spanish over ASL is because Spanish is also a written language, so you can read literature in Spanish (and take trips). But I think ASL would be a great choice, too. I took several classes years ago at the Pennsylvania School for the Deaf, and I loved learning it.

 

Tara

[StephanieZ]

Spanish would be more useful in lots of professionals (medical, legal, gov't, police, etc.) whereas ASL is more special purpose (as even someone who is entirely deaf can communicate effectively in a professional setting using typing/electronic communication devices). So, unless my child had a VERY strong preference for ASL or we had some family/church/etc need or use for ASL, I would go with Spanish.

[Reya]

Not only is ASL "spoken"-only, but it has a very simplistic grammar that is directly derived from American English and quite a small vocabulary compared to traditional languages.

[Kathleen in VA]

Well, one thing that comes to my mind is that Spanish is similar to French and Italian, so if she learns Spanish those other languages will come more easily. Also, if she has to figure out a French or Italian word she may be more able to do that if she has a background in Spanish. Also, many colleges do not accept ASL as a foreign language if they require one for admission.

 

I worked as a church secretary and one day a Spanish-speaking lady ran into the church office crying and screaming and trying to tell me something. I couldn't understand a word. After lots of hand motions and gesturing she led me to the parking lot where I discovered her small child was locked inside her car and the engine was running. The janitor for the church spoke Spanish and was able to help her. You just never know when it could be useful - but then, that's true about ASL as well.

[Matryoshka]

Not only is ASL "spoken"-only, but it has a very simplistic grammar that is directly derived from American English and quite a small vocabulary compared to traditional languages.

 

I'm not an expert, but I think you're thinking of Signed English. ASL has an entirely, completely different grammatical structure than English. I actually find intriguing similarities between ASL grammar and Chinese.

[newbie]

I would do both. They can both benefit her for the future.

[MomOfOneFunOne]

Not only is ASL "spoken"-only, but it has a very simplistic grammar that is directly derived from American English and quite a small vocabulary compared to traditional languages.

 

Sorry, but that isn't at all accurate.

 

ASL, American Sign Language, has a remarkably rich vocabulary. In grammatical structure, ASL is considered most comparable to "middle" Latin and, of course, the romance languages. It is a descendant of a sign language naturally occuring in the eastern part of the United States and French sign language -- some say more emphasis on the French since it was so prevalent in the U.S. schools for the deaf.

 

Could you be thinking of something like ESE, See, See II, or something like that?

 

If that is the case, those are not descended from English. They are artificially contrived manual codes for spoken/written English. Unlike ASL, none of them is a language. I think of them akin to Morse Code.

[MomOfOneFunOne]

I'm not an expert, but I think you're thinking of Signed English. ASL has an entirely, completely different grammatical structure than English. I actually find intriguing similarities between ASL grammar and Chinese.

 

I've read that about ASL and Chinese . . . I wanted to quote that to someone else but couldn't remember if it was Chinese or something like Mandarine or something.

[ChristusG]

Thanks for your replies everyone! I'll talk to her and see if she has a preference. Personally, I'd like to learn ASL with her. It interests me for some reason. My 2 year old wants to learn Spanish....I think she's in love with Diego and wants to be able to communicate with him. :D

[hscherger]

I would do both. They can both benefit her for the future.

:iagree: VERY USEFUL SKILLS

[Jennefer@SSA]

My vote would be for Spanish. It would open lots of doors as your dc get older and allow for learning other languages to come more easily as well. I minored in Spanish in college and remember hearing that this generation of children will need to be bilingual to really be marketable when they get older (much like our grandparents were told that a high school degree was a necessity and now so many find that a masters' degree is now required in lots of fields to give an edge). Yes ASL would allow somewhat of a bilingual edge but not as much - in most fields anyway.

[Guest nelson]

I often use resources from this website :- LangLearner

 

All the resources on there are especially for children and teenagers. You can visit and learn Spanish online.

[chiguirre]

Since they're so young, they'll be able to develop a better accent in Spanish now than they would later. I don't know if older learners are at a disadvantage in ASL.

[HollyDay]

I'm doing both. We have spent quite a bit of time in Spanish speaking areas and I know first hand the importance of that language. Also, sign language is beautiful and well as useful.

[GESTEP]

I would do both if you can. If not, go with Spanish for reasons already stated based on a practical decision. But if you are looking for fun, it sounds like you both really favor ASL.:001_smile:

[Rosie_0801]

Not only is ASL "spoken"-only, but it has a very simplistic grammar that is directly derived from American English and quite a small vocabulary compared to traditional languages.

 

Not entirely correct. I can only speak for Auslan, having very little knowledge of ASL, but would assume much of the grammar would be similar due to the mode of delivery.

 

In some ways Auslan grammar is much, much simpler than that of a spoken language, which is excellent as it means you can use it to communicate so much faster. That is a very encouraging thing for a new language learner. If you use bad grammar, you look funny, but can still be understood with a little clarification. That isn't so easy in a spoken language. Signed languages also have grammatical components that spoken languages do not have, and Deaf culture has a great story telling tradition. That trains students to pay attention to visual space, what is where, what it looks like, how it relates to other objects etc. A person practised at transposition can even read maps better ;)

 

The idea that the grammar of a native signed language is directly derived from the grammar of a spoken language is plain silly. It is a visual language, and spoken languages aren't. They must differ. You may be thinking of Signed English, which is an artificial construct based on English grammar. Don't mix that with ASL or any other native signed language. They are very different.

 

Signed languages do have a smaller vocabulary than spoken languages. Apart from needing to add new lexical items for new technologies and such, as any language does, this is not a problem. Sign languages operate differently to spoken languages and don't require the number of synonyms English has. For that matter, other spoken languages have smaller vocabularies than English too. The term "traditional language" is a funny one. Signed languages are traditional. I think you meant "spoken language." Signed languages also employ methods of delivering information that don't count as vocabulary, "visual vernacular" and "classifiers, " as two examples.

 

My suggestion to the OP would be to learn both. They have such different modes of delivery that the kids won't confuse the two. You could learn them simultaneously, or study ASL intensively for a year or two, then reduce the time spent to maintenance level and take up Spanish. The latter might be the most effective way to learn, but that isn't the only issue to consider.

 

I'm not an expert, but I think you're thinking of Signed English. ASL has an entirely, completely different grammatical structure than English. I actually find intriguing similarities between ASL grammar and Chinese.

 

Can you unpack that for me? How interesting!

 

Since they're so young, they'll be able to develop a better accent in Spanish now than they would later. I don't know if older learners are at a disadvantage in ASL.

No, the disadvantage in signed languages is being hearing. Natural code switching means Deaf people don't sign the same with hearing people. Deaf adults even sign differently to their hearing children than their deaf children. Weird huh? I studied Auslan at a weekly night class for two years, and did 18 months in a full time course. I'm not a natural storyteller, and found my sign language production hit a glass ceiling during that last semester of the full time course. In my opinion, two years intensive study of a signed language will make you as proficient as it is possible for you to get in that language.

 

Rosie

[smrtmama]

Honestly, why not do both? ASL opens up a lot of career opportunities, while Spanish has a high potential for day-to-day usefulness.

[Matryoshka]

Can you unpack that for me? How interesting!

 

 

Okay, I've had one whole ASL class maaany years ago and have dabbled a bit in beginning Chinese, so who knows if my observations really hold water past some possibly superficial similarities a dilettante has noticed. :tongue_smilie:

 

ASL, as you pointed out, is a visual language. Every word has a visual picture (sign) associated with it. But you can't, say, conjugate a verb by changing the word itself. You have to add time modifiers to the verb - separate signs- to indicate, past, future, etc. Chinese, being written in pictographs, also does not conjugate verbs. There's one pictograph per word, and you have to add time modifiers to indicate when the action takes place (at least I think that's how it's done). I guess it just struck me how the pictoral nature of Chinese writing has shaped the grammar of the language and made it in some ways a partially visual language. But maybe I'm just makin' stuff up.

 

To the poster who said ASL grammar was based on English grammar, here are some directly translated ASL sentences (from the book I used in that long-ago ASL course):

 

He stay-there 3-hour finsh come-here (with a facial adverb indicating "with ease")

 

Homework I struggle, finally understand I.

 

Car blue there, that-one his.

 

He finish cook food he.

 

I work I.

Now I work I.

Yesterday I work I.

Tomorrow I work I.

 

I find both of these languages completely fascinating. But them I am a big language geek!

[Jennefer@SSA]

Honestly, why not do both? ASL opens up a lot of career opportunities, while Spanish has a high potential for day-to-day usefulness.

 

Actually, Spanish opens up huge career possibilities as well. It is the third most commonly spoken language in the world. English is fourth. The career possibilities are endless as a majority of fields in the US are in desperate need of Spanish speakers: the medical field, service industries, retail, advertising, education...