Those Oh-So-Cool Signing Gloves

You know a video’s going viral when at least three people ask or tell me about it in as many days. 

On one hand*, COOL. And surely a good starting foundation for more advanced technology. On the other hand*, you know there’s a but coming…

  1. It doesn’t seem to address facial expression or body language, which are two essential components of sign language. Those two don’t just add flavor; they add meaning. Not sure how you can track these things just yet.
  2. “Pure” sign languages (i.e., ones that haven’t been adapted for speech) also tend to be more spatial than linear, plus the grammar is typically wildly different from spoken language. Even sign systems designed to transliterate speech generally don’t catch all components of spoken language, so I’d expect the voicing to be piecemeal at best.
  3. There’s no reverse translation; it’s sign-to-voice only, so it doesn’t make spoken language visually accessible for d/hh people.
  4.  The translation would probably be akin to running something through Google Translate– if not worse.

More than that, not all d/hh people know, use, or even prefer sign language. Even among signers, quite a few prefer to use transliteration rather than interpretation. Anecdotally, I’ve heard of captioning gaining far more popularity in colleges than sign language interpreting. Personally, while I have no qualms about using sign language to converse directly with other signers, I’ve had way too many interpreting mishaps to trust it for anything beyond basic conversation with English speakers. It’s far too much reliance on a third party’s understanding and expertise for my liking. I’m not that much more optimistic about a machine.

On the other other hand*, I could see these gloves working better for straight fingerspelling or Cued Speech, especially if they were combined with an automated transcription software. Unlike sign languages, cued speech has a finite set of eight handshapes that can be matched with a similarly finite selection of phonemes to produce words. I expect it’d sound incredibly robotic– which would certainly add an extra twist to the blog name, A Croaking Dalek— but there would likely be less potential for word jumble like what you’d get with ASL or Signed English. 


 * I promise these puns are completely unintentional.

If People Treated Vision Loss Like They Do Hearing Loss

“You need to be able to see in order to succeed.”

“Stare harder at this page. Stare harder.”

“Well, what if we just turned up the light a bit? Would that help? Yes, I know you said you can’t see at all, but what if…”

“Here!” *grabs arm* “Let me do everything for you. Just sit down over there. No, no, it’s fine. Obviously your eyesight is inextricably linked to the function of your arms and legs.”

*waves* “Can you see this?” *waves even more furiously* “What about THIS?” *transforms into human windmill* “How about THIIIS?!”

via GIPHY

“Have you thought about getting [insert expensive medical option that inevitably requires surgery and upkeep]?”

“I know Braille!” *punches random holes in piece of paper*

“But how could you possibly live without seeing the works of Michelangelo or Picasso?”

“It’s not our fault you crashed into that table even though we switched everything around the other day without telling you. You need to pay more attention.”


And now I’m going to bet within the week (nay, the day), someone’s going to leave a comment telling me that blind people do get these comments.

What’s the Bigger Picture That AGBell’s Missing With Nyle DiMarco?

The Deaf community’s in a furor over AGBell’s post on Nyle DiMarco (who was the winner of the last America’s Next Top Model season, and also Deaf, and also an astonishingly pretty man).

That post, in turn, was prompted by a Washington Post article, also on Nyle DiMarco, in which he advocates for ASL for d/hh children, calling it “their own language.” Matter of fact, the AGBell article identifies him as a political activist, pointing out that he’s started a foundation dedicated to promoting deaf infants’ access to American Sign Language.

So now that we are all caught up on the drama, here are the snippets that caused the kerfuffle. DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to be an anti-endorsement of AGBell, as I’ve actually found many of their proponents to be quite open-minded. Heck, I attended a Montessori school with their namesake, and there’s been a long-standing partnership between several AGBellers and Cued Speech. On this one, though, AGBell missed the mark.

1. Lip service to viable alternatives.

“The Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (AG Bell), applauds DiMarco’s achievements and recognizes that ASL exists as a communication option for deaf children. However…”

Wince. As a native cuer, this opening strikes a bit too close to the pandering I’ve seen in regards to Cued Speech. “Oh, well, of course Cued Speech is an option, but… [insert spiel about how Our One True Way is so much better].” (D/HH educators, please do take note, and please don’t do this. After the parent/student/child has been around the block a few times, it gets old.)

2. Couched, cagey language. 

“While bilingualism (use of ASL along with spoken language) may be helpful to deaf children who are unable to fully achieve spoken language, a young child whose family desires spoken language often achieves their desired outcome better through a full immersion in spoken language.”

“may be helpful”? “often”? This doesn’t really do wonders for winning credibility among people that you’re purporting to advocate for. Of course a visual language/mode is going to help d/hh children “who are unable to fully achieve spoken language.” Children learn to speak/sign/cue largely through mimicry. It is exceedingly difficult to copy what you can’t clearly access to begin with. Not impossible, but… difficult.

3. Lack of data.

“Deaf children frequently communicate quite well with listening and spoken language alone, and the number of children who have a need for ASL has decreased dramatically.”

Well, hold on. Where are the cites for this? Earlier in the article, AGBell states that 90% of hearing families with d/hh children are opting for listening and spoken language, citing BEGINNINGS for Parents of Children who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing in North Carolina. So, my next questions: where and how was this data collected? And could you pretty please link to it?

4. Lack of empathy.

Come to think of it, in writing point 2, I realized that part of the Deaf resistance to AGBell’s stance stems from this seeming lack of acknowledgement for just. how. much. work. goes into a spoken-language-only approach, at least for the folks I know.

Heck, even one of the students that AGBell highlights goes into a lengthy description of the prep work he undergoes for high school and college classes. Which– hey– is life. No right or wrong about it: if that’s what it takes to get him where he wants to be, more power to him. (That said, I do worry a bit about burnout, having been there and done that in my senior year.) But come on, AGBell, don’t you realize that amount of extra work isn’t exactly normal? Maybe not even ideal? At what point do you hit diminishing returns?

5. Sound is put on this odd pedestal. 

“In videos available on AG Bell’s YouTube channel, families share the remarkable abilities of deaf children today—making music, singing songs, and participating fully in sports, theater and more, with wonderful speech and remarkable hearing.”

Look, I enjoy music– heck, I taught myself a few basic piano songs in elementary school– but this is giving off a weird “if you don’t engage in this specific interest, you’re irredeemably missing out” vibe. Plenty of signing d/hh people love music, with or without aids, and plenty of hearing people don’t listen to music regularly, if at all, so I’m pretty sure this is a variation in people-being-people and not so much level of hearing.

Furthermore: as numerous residential school programs and d/hh athletes/performers indicate, sound is not a requirement for being fully involved into extracurricular activities. Yes, when you’ve got a d/hh child in a hearing group, it helps massively– but you know what? So do visual accommodations and learning some kind of visual communication method, even if they’re just made-up signals. Come on, let’s see some middle ground here.

Let’s rephrase this: “In videos available on AG Bell’s YouTube channel, families share the remarkable abilities of blind children today–making art, drawing pictures, and participating fully in sports, theater and more…”

Are you getting why this sounds a bit odd? Am being odd? I mean, I love art, and I draw lots of pretty pictures, but I wouldn’t expect everyone to be into it, nor try to push visually impaired children into taking it up “because you need to SEEEEE.”* **

*If they want to pursue it, that’s one thing. In that case, I’mma be all let’s go find tactile paints or play-dough or whatever and figure out a way to make it work because yay art.

**Yes, I realize this isn’t a perfect analogy because deafness entails a two-pronged challenge– listening and speaking– whereas visual impairment is, well, mostly an eyesight issue, at least in the mainstream hearing world. Visual impairment in the Deaf world, sadly, carries very much the same challenges that d/hh people do in hearing settings, though.


Now, since this is primarily a Cued Speech blog… some cuers have wondered where the hell we fit into all of this. Well, we know ASL isn’t a deaf child’s “natural” language (despite Mr. DiMarco’s word choice), but we don’t neatly fit into AGBell’s box, either.

So, I close with an insightful comment from my friend Benjamin Lachman: “Everyone’s lost their damn minds. Any language can be effective provided it is accessible as early as possible. ASL is effective if there is exposure to fluent signers ASAP. English is effective if there’s auditory feedback and/or visual access (preferably both) as soon as possible. Period. That’s our [cuers] message, in my respectful opinion. Everybody else is just putting their collective feet in their collective mouths.”