Should everyone learn sign language?

[AY1975]

Do you think everyone should learn sign language? Maybe it should be taught in schools, and adults should be encouraged to learn it too. I can see the benefits of it: it would make it easier for everyone to communicate with deaf and hard-of-hearing people, and in places such as public transport it would make for a quieter and more pleasant environment and reduce the spread of infections that can be passed on through droplets that are often accidentally spat out when talking.

 

[dakta]

Overall, it can take several years of regular study and practice to become fluent in sign language. It may take from three months to three years to learn sign language.

From a quick google cost to benefit ratio, also factoring in a bit of personal experience of where it would be useful I'd probably say nah.

Might seem callous, and I'm sure there probably is the occasion where you wish you'd had it but the three years study probably won't sell it. If I was in close or regular contact with people hard of hearing etc then obviously that might skew it.

 

[Amos]

Might be worth teaching it in schools (along with first aid skills).I did a short course many years ago, but found it quite difficult and I really wouldn’t remember any of it now.

 

[Simon11]

What percentage of people only sign? I honestly cant remember the last time I met someone who signed.

Unfortunately, I think there are better uses for people’s time, especially with technology making it easier. Children in schools already have so much to learn and would benefit far more from extra English/ maths lessons than this.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

What percentage of people only sign? I honestly cant remember the last time I met someone who signed.

Ignoring the propaganda from the BDA ( British Deaf Association ), which gives unrealistically high numbers, there's estimated to be around 12,000 signers in the UK. Out of a total of roughly just under ten million people who are deaf or hard of hearing ( assuming the estimates of one in seven of the population being affected are correct ).

The BDA, incidentally, is one of those organisations that blocks people on social media for disagreeing with them or challenging their numbers - a trait which straight away tells you they're worth ignoring.

For a start I'm deaf, and I don't sign. If anything, I avoid those TV shows which have a signer in the corner of the screen because I find it very distracting.

That doesn't mean sign language doesn't have a place - it does, and people do reply on it, and greater awareness would not be a bad thing.

 

[_toommm_]

I would say yes, it should be mandatory to be taught the basics in school, alongside a MFL (modern foreign language).

I may be biased here as my brother is non-verbal with learning difficulties, so relies on makaton (a simplified version of BSL) but having seen others who struggle to hear, and being someone who struggles to hear too, I believe it to be essential to help people communicate.

 

[duncanp]

Perhaps the basics should be taught in schools, but as with a spoken language such as French or German, you can lose your skills unless you have reason to use them regularly.

There are several smartphone apps that can record someone's speech and translate it into text that a deaf person can read on the screen.

And anyone who has seen Rob Burrow (a former rugby league player with MND) on TV will have seen him use a computer program to speak.

So perhaps sign language is being superseded by modern technoloigy.

Find out more about Rob Burrows’ voice

Find out more about Rob Burrow, campaigner for MND awareness and funding. Learn how Rob uses technology to speak and access social media.

thinksmartbox.com

Throughout this year Rugby League legend Rob Burrows’ voice has been heard around millions of homes in the UK and around the world. Just this month, Rob joined the list of celebrities who have read BBC Bedtime Stories. Rob is the first person using AAC to win an award as part of the BBC’s Sports Personality of the Year event.

Rob gave a speech when receiving his award using his Grid Pad, alongside ex-team mate Kevin Sinfield. Rob paid tribute to Doddie Weir, who also campaigned for awareness and funding into MND research and recently passed away after living with MND for six years. Rob also shared more of his story in a recent BBC documentary, Rob Burrow: Living with MND.

In his recent CBeebies Bedtime Stories appearance Rob read ‘Tilda Tries Again’, a book about children coping with difficult situations, using his Grid Pad communication device. Rob is able to control this powerful specialist computer using his eyes. By looking at what he would like to select on the screen of his device, a camera detects Rob’s gaze and prompts that specific area to be selected – like clicking a mouse.

The Grid Pad device Rob uses, not only creates the speech output you will have heard so many times, but can be used to post on social media, read and respond to emails, and any other function you may rely on your own technology for, all controlled using his eyes.

Rob Burrow has also kept the voice his family and fans are familiar with, created by voice banking. This technology, provided by SpeakUnique, is designed for people with disabilities which affect their ability to communicate vocally. Individuals can record segments of themselves talking, or use video clips and voice recordings, which are then turned into a synthetic voice using AI. For anyone who, like Rob Burrow, is living with MND in the UK, the MNDA will fund your voice banking.

Smartbox have also teamed up with SpeakUnique to produce a selection of 30 brand new regional voices for the UK and Ireland coming to our Grid 3 software and Grid for iPad in the new year.

Around 1 in 200 people could benefit from technology to communicate. Our solutions are used by thousands of people around the world to participate, access media and apps, and communicate.

If you would like to find out more, or trial a device, we are here to help.

 

[DelW]

As far as I know, I've never met anyone who used sign language, or who might have wanted to, so it would have been completely pointless for me.

For a start I'm deaf, and I don't sign. If anything, I avoid those TV shows which have a signer in the corner of the screen because I find it very distracting.

I agree that it's distracting (although I feel slightly mean in saying so), but also I can't see how it's better than subtitles, which are available on all (?) TV channels these days. I really hope England doesn't follow the Scottish model of signers on every government statement or broadcast, I'll simply be switching off (or catching it on the radio instead) if so. I suspect the Scottish government's motive is at least partly a "we're more disability friendly than England" subtext.

 

[jfollows]

No.

I have never - in my 61 years - had an encounter with anyone in which my ability to use sign language would have been helpful.

Learning it would have been a better use of my time than learning Latin at school, perhaps, but even though I've never had to use conversational Latin in real life, the knowledge that came from it has been used again and again.

I have used French and German, in the former case from a random encounter with a total stranger in Bath who approached me and asked me a question in French.

I have been on a week's Icelandic course, which taught me as much about the country and the people as the language itself.

But making learning sign language compulsory is several steps too far. And which version, anyway? Even for someone, like me, interested in learning languages and having varying degrees of facility in several, sign language comes too far down the list to make me want to think about it.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I agree that it's distracting (although I feel slightly mean in saying so), but also I can't see how it's better than subtitles, which are available on all (?) TV channels these days.

Subtitle availability is really a separate debate - while the big, main, channels have a high proportion of subtitled content, I am finding a lot of the "minor" channels ( the collection on Freeview such as Really, Yesterday and dozens of others with equally odd names ) are very hit and miss with only a low proportion covered. Worse - they will subtitle one series of something then not subtitle the next series of it. Even the bigger "minor" channels ( such as the Smithsonian and National Geographic ) are extremely poor in subtitle provision.

 

[jfollows]

For a start I'm deaf, and I don't sign. If anything, I avoid those TV shows which have a signer in the corner of the screen because I find it very distracting.

That doesn't mean sign language doesn't have a place - it does, and people do reply on it, and greater awareness would not be a bad thing.

I'm pretty much 100% deaf in my right ear, but that's nothing, it's sometimes useful when sitting next to someone I want to ignore and it can be useful in noisy hotel rooms at night if I sleep on my good ear, but of course it's not ideal. I just can't watch TV with signers, I have to find a version without them or I just turn it off, it's too distracting by far. Fair enough, that's my problem, and it's helpful to some people. I do use subtitles sometimes, although at home on my own the audio isn't a problem - my main problem has nothing to do with sign language and is just that I can't work out the direction from which sounds originate, so sounds like doorbells on TV adverts or, a couple of nights ago, a documentary interspersed with "mobile phone bleeps" are significantly annoying. Anyway, that's not the topic here is it?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do you think everyone should learn sign language? Maybe it should be taught in schools, and adults should be encouraged to learn it too. I can see the benefits of it: it would make it easier for everyone to communicate with deaf and hard-of-hearing people, and in places such as public transport it would make for a quieter and more pleasant environment and reduce the spread of infections that can be passed on through droplets that are often accidentally spat out when talking.

I think it would make sense to teach it in schools as another learning experience. However I don't think it would necessarily become universal just as French isn't. In the end if you need to communicate with a deaf person on occasion you can type out the message on your phone and show them.

 

[ABB125]

I think it might be beneficial to teach the basics of sign language in schools. However, I'd much, much prefer spoken foreign language provision to be vastly improved from the rubbish that it mostly is at present. And please, please, please get rid of French as a language! German is far superior, though from a practical point of view Spanish would probably be the best language to learn

 

[duncanp]

For a start I'm deaf, and I don't sign. If anything, I avoid those TV shows which have a signer in the corner of the screen because I find it very distracting.

That doesn't mean sign language doesn't have a place - it does, and people do reply on it, and greater awareness would not be a bad thing.

I'm glad it is not just me who finds TV shows with a signer in the corner of the screen distracting.

With digital TV and smart TVs it should be possible to choose whether you want a signer or not.

 

[yorkie]

Do you think everyone should learn sign language?

No

Maybe it should be taught in schools,

Which subject(s) would you take the time away from?

and adults should be encouraged to learn it too. I can see the benefits of it: it would make it easier for everyone to communicate with deaf and hard-of-hearing people, and in places such as public transport it would make for a quieter and more pleasant environment and reduce the spread of infections that can be passed on through droplets that are often accidentally spat out when talking.

You cannot be serious, surely.

 

[simonw]

Do you think everyone should learn sign language? Maybe it should be taught in schools, and adults should be encouraged to learn it too. I can see the benefits of it: it would make it easier for everyone to communicate with deaf and hard-of-hearing people, and in places such as public transport it would make for a quieter and more pleasant environment and reduce the spread of infections that can be passed on through droplets that are often accidentally spat out when talking.

I assume you mean British sign language as there are multiple sign languages.

 

[johnnychips]

I assume you mean British sign language as there are multiple sign languages.

Yes, it is amazing how many people there are who think there is a worldwide sign language. As well as Makaton (which is not primarily designed for, nor much used by deaf people) mentioned above, there are even dialects in British Sign Language (BSL).

I teach in a communication college where about 20% of the students are deaf and sign. Learning BSL has been very difficult, not helped by Covid. It is only recently that it has improved a lot by regularly teaching some deaf students and doing the odd shift in the residential block. Like many languages, the more you are immersed in it, the better you get. As it is, and I’m sure many of you who speak foreign languages to ‘tourist’ level will recognise this: I can sign things to some extent but understanding the reply is the very devil!

I see that it - just possibly - could be an option in schools; it is maybe more useful than French, but finding teachers would be a great problem. People who are interested - and it is fascinating - will find more opportunities to study at a college when they are older, though.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Aside from the point that many people have made that it's unlikely many people would actually have much use for BSL, the fundamental problem with saying, everyone should learn it, is that there's only so much time available for learning. If you decide to teach it in schools, that takes school time in which you are not teaching something else. So what other subject should be dropped in favour of BSL? That's a much harder thing to justify than simply saying, Yeah, teach it!

To make the problem even worse, I can already think of other things that I feel are much more important and not currently being adequately taught (Relationship skills, critical thinking, basic economics, and English grammar for starters). If there's any additional time to be found in the curriculum, I'd want those put in long before I even start to think about sign language.

 

[al78]

I think it might be beneficial to teach the basics of sign language in schools. However, I'd much, much prefer spoken foreign language provision to be vastly improved from the rubbish that it mostly is at present. And please, please, please get rid of French as a language! German is far superior, though from a practical point of view Spanish would probably be the best language to learn

Why?

 

[ABB125]

Why?

Personal bias. Others may disagree with me!

 

[edwin_m]

Of the foreign languages I've learned (to varying levels) I'd say Spanish was the easiest to pick up, followed in descending order by German, French and Russian. I've also never been in a situation where sign language would have been of any significant benefit - I have a relative who is deaf but lip-reads, and as someone pointed out if there is an essential need to communicate with someone that doesn't, then you can always fall back on typing on a phone or even old-fashioned pen and paper.